Rape allegation — with blurred face — against Trump by SUPPOSED former Epstein girl

This photo of Katie as a little pre-puberty girl which Trump-haters push online is very misleading. She was a teenager supposedly seeking a modelling career when she — supposedly — met Trump.

I asked Grok:

It replied:

The credibility of Katie Johnson, who accused Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein of aping her in 1994 when she was 13, is highly contentious and lacks definitive evidence to establish her claims as either true or false. Below, I outline the key points surrounding her allegations, the reasons they have been questioned, and the factors that make assessing her credibility challenging, based on available information.

Background of the Allegations

Lawsuits Filed: In April 2016 [when candidate Trump was running for president], a woman using the pseudonym “Katie Johnson” filed a lawsuit in California federal court, alleging that Trump and Epstein raped her at Epstein’s Manhattan residence in 1994. The case was dismissed in May 2016 by Judge Dolly Gee for failing to raise valid claims under federal law, as it cited a criminal statute not applicable to civil damages and a civil statute requiring race- or class-based animus, which was not substantiated.

A second lawsuit was filed in New York in June 2016 under the pseudonym “Jane Doe,” followed by a third in September 2016, accusing Trump of rape and sexual assault. Both were withdrawn, with the final case dropped in November 2016.

Details of Claims:

Johnson alleged she was lured to New York with promises of a modeling career, attended parties at Epstein’s home, and was subjected to sexual abuse by both men. She claimed Trump raped her, including one instance where he allegedly tied her to a bed, and that Epstein also assaulted her. Supporting affidavits from anonymous witnesses “Tiffany Doe” (a supposed procurer) and “Joan Doe” (a classmate) were included in the New York filings.

Cancellation of Press Conference: Johnson was scheduled to appear at a press conference in November 2016, organized by attorney Lisa Bloom, to reveal her identity but canceled, citing death threats that made her too afraid to proceed. The case was dropped days later.

Factors Questioning Credibility

Involvement of Norm Lubow:

The lawsuits were linked to (((Norm Lubow))), a former producer for (((“The Jerry Springer Show”))), who used the pseudonym “Al Taylor” to promote Johnson’s story. Lubow, known for staging sensational content, reportedly sought $1 million for a video of Johnson (in disguise) recounting her allegations.

In 2016, he denied being Taylor, but in 2024, he admitted to Snopes that he was Taylor and had aided the initial lawsuit’s promotion. His involvement, given his history of questionable claims (e.g., alleging O.J. Simpson bought drugs the day his wife was murdered), raises doubts about the allegations’ authenticity.

Lack of Corroborative Evidence: The court filings provided no concrete evidence beyond Johnson’s statements and anonymous affidavits. Investigations revealed inconsistencies, such as Johnson claiming to live at an address in Twentynine Palms, California [the town outside a Marine Corps desert warfare base where I was stationed in August 1978], which Radar Online reported was a foreclosed, vacant home.

Skepticism from Journalists:

In July 2016, Revelist journalist Emily Shugerman interviewed Johnson via conference call (after being promised an in-person meeting) and expressed doubts about whether Johnson existed, stating, “I don’t know if the Katie Johnson I spoke to is the same girl who Trump allegedly raped in 1994, or if that girl even exists.”

Dismissals and Withdrawals:

The repeated dismissal and withdrawal of the lawsuits, without proceeding to trial or discovery, suggest potential weaknesses in the case. The California dismissal was due to legal technicalities, but the New York withdrawals lacked clear explanations, fueling speculation about the claims’ validity.

Daily Mail Report:

In November 2016, the Daily Mail reported that Johnson’s claims were “fabricated,” citing a source who said “new information emerged that suggested she had not been telling the truth” and that “Donald Trump’s name had been inserted” into the story. However, no specific evidence was provided to support this conclusion, and the Daily Mail’s reliability on such matters can vary.

Factors Supporting Credibility

Affidavits and Consistency: The New York lawsuits included affidavits from “Tiffany Doe,” who claimed to have procured girls for Epstein’s parties, and “Joan Doe,” a supposed classmate who said Johnson told her about the assaults in 1994. Johnson’s story remained consistent across filings, and she provided detailed accounts in a Daily Mail interview (conducted anonymously with Lisa Bloom present), describing specific interactions with Trump and Epstein.

Context of Epstein’s Crimes:

Epstein’s history as a convicted sex offender who targeted underage girls lends plausibility to claims of illicit activities at his properties. Trump’s acknowledged association with Epstein (he called him a “terrific guy” in a 2002 interview) and flight logs showing at least seven trips on Epstein’s jet in the 1990s [but NOT ONE record of him flying to the “Orgy Island,” Little Saint James] provide a backdrop where such allegations could seem feasible, though no direct evidence ties Trump to Epstein’s crimes.

Threats and Fear:

Johnson’s attorney, Lisa Bloom, stated that Johnson canceled her press conference due to death threats, which could explain her withdrawal and reluctance to pursue the case publicly. This aligns with reasons victims often cite for not reporting sexual assault, such as fear of retaliation or disbelief.

Cultural Context:

Commenters on X and some reports note that victims of high-profile figures often face significant barriers to being believed, which could explain Johnson’s anonymity and eventual withdrawal. The #WhyWomenDontReport hashtag trended in 2016, highlighting reasons like fear of reprisals and low likelihood of justice.

Counterpoints and Broader Context

Trump’s Denials and Legal Response:

Trump’s legal team, including then-lawyer Alan Garten, called the allegations “categorically untrue” and a “hoax” intended to solicit media attention or politically motivated. Trump has denied all sexual misconduct allegations, including those from 17 other women, one of whom (E. Jean Carroll) won a 2023 civil case against him for sexual abuse and defamation.

Political Timing:

The lawsuits emerged during the 2016 presidential campaign, leading some to speculate they were politically motivated, possibly tied to opposition research. Posts on X, like one from @thevivafrei, claim the story was “debunked” and linked to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, though no evidence directly ties it to her team.

Lack of Follow-Up:

Johnson has not been heard from since dropping the case in November 2016, and her attorney (((Evan Goldman))) later reported her phone number was disconnected. This silence makes verifying her identity or claims difficult.

Mixed Media Coverage:

While some outlets like Vox and The Guardian covered the allegations, they noted their “dubious and uncertain” nature due to the lack of verifiable evidence and Lubow’s involvement. Others, like the Daily Mail, labeled the story fabricated, but without transparent sourcing. Mainstream media largely avoided deep coverage, possibly due to the claims’ unverified nature and the risk of defamation lawsuits.

Current Sentiment on X

Recent posts on X (as of July 2025) show polarized views:

Supporters of the allegations, like @LongTimeHistory and @RyanShead, argue that Johnson’s story is credible, citing her consistent testimony and witness affidavits, and suggest threats forced her to withdraw. They call for the release of Epstein-related files to clarify Trump’s involvement. Skeptics, like @PatriotVerity and @thevivafrei, dismiss the claims as fabricated, pointing to Lubow’s involvement, the lack of evidence, and inconsistencies like the vacant address. They argue Johnson may not exist or was a construct for political sabotage.

Conclusion

Katie Johnson’s allegations are neither conclusively proven nor definitively debunked. Factors undermining her credibility include Norm Lubow’s involvement, the lack of corroborative evidence, inconsistencies in her reported address, and the dismissal/withdrawal of her lawsuits. However, her detailed accounts, supporting affidavits, Epstein’s criminal history, and the reported threats provide some plausibility, though not enough to substantiate the claims. The political context of 2016 and the absence of follow-up from Johnson further cloud the issue. Without new evidence, such as the full release of Epstein’s files, her allegations remain unverified and highly controversial. Critical examination of the sources suggests caution, as no definitive proof connects Trump to these specific crimes, but the broader context of Epstein’s activities and Trump’s association with him keeps the allegations in public discourse. If you’d like me to analyze specific documents, X posts, or other sources further, or if you want to discuss related allegations, let me know!