Homegrown by Jeffrey Toobin, opens by comparing the January 6 attack on the Capitol to McVeigh’s attack on Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City.
(Notice the small “No Trespassing” sign on the book’s cover. Perfect.)
As recounted in Homegrown, McVeigh was calm when his lawyer visited him in prison. He was certain that the attack “was more than just permissible. It was mandatory, his duty as a patriotic American.” When his lawyer asked for more explanation, McVeigh told him to read the Declaration of Independence, which he recited from memory:
“. . . whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. . . when a long train of abuses and usurpations . . . evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.” (Homegrown, p. 3)
McVeigh was also inspired by Patrick Henry’s famous speech which began with “Give me liberty or give me death” and ends with: “If we wish to be free–if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending. . . we must fight, sir, we must fight!”
McVeigh bombed the Murrah building as part of that fight. Specifically, he said he carried out the attack in direct response to the “abuses and usurpations” of the federal government, especially those at Ruby Ridge and Waco. McVeigh selected April 19 for his attack because it was the second anniversary of the Waco raid and the anniversary of “the shot heard around the world” in 1775 kicking off the American Revolution.
Similarly, “1776 Returns” was the codeword for the planned takeover of government buildings on January 6, 2021.
No surprise, McVeigh was also a member of the National Rifle Association, a regular reader of the NRA magazine The American Hunter, and a fan of Rush Limbaugh. He owned a T-shirt that he designed himself and had printed at a gun show: On the front was a drawing of Lincoln with the words “Sic semper tyrannis” (“thus always to tyrants,” which was what John Wilkes Booth yelled after he shot Lincoln). On the back was the drawing of a tree and this quotation from Thomas Jefferson: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Yes, Jefferson really did say that. Jefferson (who in my view is way too revered), also said, “I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.” Jefferson’s party, the Democratic-Republicans, became the party of the Confederacy.
In other words, there is a direct line from Thomas Jefferson to the January 6 attack:
Thomas Jefferson→Confederates→Ruby Ridge →Waco, Texas→Timothy McVeigh →Donald Trump and MAGA→ the January 6 attack.
Trump has promised to pardon “a large portion” of the insurrectionists and remains the clear favorite to win the GOP nomination and a recent poll shows that almost 40% of voters would vote for Trump for president in 2024. That’s a lot of support for a guy who led an insurrection against Congress, has been indicted on multiple charges of fraud, and was found liable for sexual assault.
On Friday, a DC Police lieutenant was charged with obstruction and lying to the FBI about his contacts with Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio. Apparently he alerted Tarrio about his first arrest, deleted his electronic correspondence with Tarrio and, among other things, told Tarrio, “Of course, I can’t say it officially, but personally I support you all and don’t want to see your group’s name or reputation dragged through the mud.”
“What the heck does any of this have to do with Rudy Guiliani and sexual abuse?” you ask.
Patience, patience. I’m getting there.
McVeigh also expressed a reactionary desire to go back to the America of 150 years ago:
“I want a country that operates like it did 150 years ago–no income taxes, no property taxes, no oppressive police, free land in the west.” (Homegrown, p 6.)
McVeigh, like Trump, embraced a reactionary vision, a desire to go back to the way things were. McVeigh wanted to make America “great” again, where “great” meant very few rules and regulations limiting the ability of men to grab what they wanted and keep what they grabbed.
McVeigh called himself a “white separatist,” he abhorred immigration, both legal and illegal and “he wanted women to return to their traditional role in the home”. . . (Homegrown, P.6, emphasis added.)
If you want to take the country back 150 years, it’s a package deal: White supremacy, hatred of the federal government, a fetish for guns, and women under the dominion of men.
Until the modern women’s movement, women were excluded from most professions. As late as the 1960s, women were not allowed to take out loans or apply for credit cards without a male co-signer. Without access to credit in their own name, women could not build their credit score to qualify for a mortgage. It wasn’t until 1974 that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) enabled women to get their own credit cards in their own name.
Susan B. Anthony explained the situation of women this way: “Women’s subsistence is in the hands of men, and most arbitrarily and unjustly does he exercise his consequent power.”
Earlier this week, this headline popped up in my RSS feed:
Today, women outnumber men in the U.S. college-educated labor force and can buy their own houses. To put the matter bluntly, women are no longer dependent on men, which means men can no longer arbitrarily exercise their power over women, which, (I maintain) explains much of the anger and frustration you see here:
Two weeks ago, I wrote a post called “Rape is a Means of Asserting Patriarchal Power” and last week I had a lot of fun gloating over Trump’s loss in the E. Jean Carroll case. This post will build on those two posts, so if you missed them, you might want to get caught up.
Now, we come to Rudy Giuliani and his accuser, Noelle Dunphy.
Noelle Dunphy Sues Rudy Giuliani for Sexual Abuse, Sexual Harassment on the Job, and Refusal to Pay Her Wages
Dunphy is demanding $3.1 million in damages. You can see the complaint here. In her words, she “seeks a measure of justice from a man who thought his power and connections rendered him untouchable.”
Dunphy’s Allegations as Recounted in her Complaint
Giuliani first tried to hire Dumphy in 2016, and then he “aggressively” tried to hire her again in 2019 “while he was at the top of his influence in the White House.” She has a tape recording of him saying that he “wanted” her from the day he interviewed her.
(In other words, “hire her” is a euphemism for what he was trying to do.)
Ms. Dunphy is a Columbia University graduate and “skilled businesswoman with 22 years of experience in business development, associate producing, and communications,” who “owned her own consulting firm, Strategic Consulting, since 2001.”
To persuade her to take a job entitled Director of Business Development, Guiliani offered an annual salary of $1 million. This was in the same general range that Giuliani and the Giuliani Companies paid to other employees when accounting for expenses and other benefits. One of her responsibilities would be generating speaking engagements which in the past brought in $10 million annually. During the interview, she made suggestions such as a podcast. (In the interview, he didn’t know what a podcast was, so she had to explain it to him.) He later adopted some of her suggestions (he now has a podcast).
He suggested that one day she write a book about him and Trump and gave permission for her to record him at any time. He never revoked that permission.
To sweeten the deal, he offered legal assistance with her ongoing claims against her former partner. Because Giuliani had served as the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, “his offer of pro bono legal representation was an important inducement of seemingly incalculable value due to his experience and recognition in New York legal circles.”
But Giuliani’s offer came with a catch: he was in the midst of an acrimonious divorce, and he told Ms. Dunphy that her pay would have to be deferred and her employment kept “secret” until the divorce proceedings finished. Giuliani promised his divorce would be resolved “any day now.”
She “reluctantly” agreed to defer her pay and not to publicize her employment because she viewed the job, the salary, and the free legal representation as being worth the wait.
Of course, “the generous offers were a sham motivated by his secret desire to pursue a sexual relationship with Ms. Dunphy.”
Soon after she started working, she thought his behavior was “strange,” but she had no idea what was to come. She was confused and “shaken” the first time he tried to kiss her. She disentangled herself and went into her home. That night he called her five times.
He abused his role as her attorney by offering her money to drop some of her claims. He also insisted that he needed salacious details about her sexual history with the partner against whom she had ongoing claims. She alleges that he didn’t need this information for her case, he was aroused by the descriptions of the abuse she suffered, and that he used this information to force her to repeat the cycle of abuse she had suffered.
On January 25, 2019, Giuliani paid to fly Ms. Dunphy to New York on a semi-private chartered plane. He then insisted that she stay in a guest suite in his Upper East Side apartment. She was surprised, but he assured her that employees often slept in his guest suite, which included a private bedroom and private bathroom. She wasn’t comfortable and tried to secure other arrangements, but he insisted that she stay in his apartment. “Since Giuliani was her boss and attorney, she felt pressured to do as he asked.”
He urged her to drink wine. Initially, she tried to decline, but he pushed, and she accepted “to be polite.” She was unaccustomed to alcohol. He then forced her to have oral sex with him.
The next day, he expected her to continue with her employment duties. He quickly made clear that “satisfying his sexual demands—which came virtually anytime, anywhere—was an absolute requirement of her employment.”
I won’t go into the things he demanded that she do other than to say that she paints a picture of a thoroughly disgusting human being. Fortunately, she included this detail so at least I could snicker at Giuliani:
“Giuliani also took Viagra constantly.”
During the course of her employment, she had access to many of his emails:
She saw highly confidential material but was never asked to sign any sort of nondisclosure agreement. In other words, the fact that Giuliani needs lots of Viagra may not be the only secret she is willing to spill.
This is from the complaint:
Meanwhile, “Giuliani kept refusing to pay” the salary she was owed and “strung her along with small cash payments.” Small meaning about $5,000. (Aside: Trump lured Stormy Daniels into his hotel room by promising her a role on The Apprentice but he never honored his promise. I’m seeing a pattern here.)
Meanwhile, by February (a month after the interview) “Giuliani repeatedly demanded assurances from Ms. Dunphy of her loyalty and began isolating her from others. He forbade her from seeing or talking on the phone with anyone without his approval.” He demanded that she be available for work or sex around the clock. When he demanded sex, he “would not take no for an answer.”
By March, he was constantly drunk and was becoming more physically and verbally abusive. The details are stomach-churning. He still hadn’t paid her any salary, so he began paying her rent.
Also, in June and July:
The story Dunphy tells is of a woman who is smart and capable, but vulnerable. Meanwhile, the Giuliani described here is such a stupid drunk that he doesn’t know how to use Google or figure out how to do a podcast without help. He is, however, a skilled liar, cheater, sexual predator, and bully.
Fast forward to December. Giuliani tells her, “You’re so easy to take advantage of.” He added that although he was “crazy” to do so, he would “always take care of” her. He also told her he was in love with other women as well.
On January 7, 2021, the day after the January 6 insurrection in Washington, D.C., she told him, “I feel scared of you, and I don’t want you trying to hurt me… Now the country has just gone through chaos, and I pray I never see something like that again.”
She claims that on January 31, 2021, he fired her in retaliation because she had “found the courage to express her fear of him.”
Bottom line: She claims she was promised a large salary and legal representation. She worked for two years, was forced to have sex to keep her job, and wasn’t even paid minimum wage.
Dunphy Asserts the following Causes of Action against Giuliani:
- Crime of Violence Motivated by Gender – New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, N.Y.C. Admin Code § 10-1101 et s
- Battery
- Assault
- Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment
- Retaliatory discharge
- Aiding and Abetting Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination
- Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment Under the New York City Human Rights Law
- Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination Against a Contractor or Consultant
- Aiding and Abetting Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment
- Sexual Harassment and Gender Discrimination Relating to Freelancers and Contractors
- Hostile Work Environment Animated by Discrimination
- Retaliatory Discharge
- Breach of Contract
- Violation of the Freelance Isn’t Free Act
- Violation of New York Labor Law – Minimum Wage
- Violation of New York Labor Law for Failure to Provide Wage Statements
- Violation of New York Labor Law – Overtime Claim
- Unjust Enrichment
- Quantum Meruit
- Breach of Fiduciary Duty
150 years ago, when—according to MAGA thinking, America was “great,”—Dunphy wouldn’t have been able to bring these claims against Giuliani
Labor and Employment Laws
The easiest violations for Dunphy to prove will be violations of labor laws, particularly the failure to provide statements, failure to pay minimum wage, and failure to pay overtime because there will be documentary evidence (or lack of documentary evidence, which itself is a violation of record-keeping laws.)
100 years ago, none of these laws existed so Dunphy would have had no recourse.
To take an example of how the courts looked at situations in which a person with power preyed on a person without power, in Adkins v. Children’s Hospital (1923) the United States Supreme Court held that minimum wage laws were unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause, which they believed contained a right of “freedom to contract.” The court reasoned that an employer and employee had a constitutional right to contract in whatever manner they pleased. Thus, according to the Supreme Court, the minimum wage law unjustly interfered with the freedom to contract.
Breach of Contract
After 1848, women were deemed competent to enter contracts in New York. The problem was that Dunphy’s contract with Guiliani was verbal, and while verbal contracts are enforceable, women were not deemed competent to testify in court. It is unlikely a nineteenth-century woman would have had any hope of proving the existence of a verbal contract.
So, under the law as it stood back then, Giuliani would have been able to skate on that one as well.
Prior to 1964, a woman would have had no hope of bringing a cause of action for sexual harassment
Sexual harassment was made illegal in the workplace under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The first sexual harassment case was brought in 1974. (Barnes v. Train)
Prior to the enactment of these laws, “Women knew that if they were the object of a sexual assault, the law would not protect them.” (Sexual assault is the forcible touching of the sexual or other intimate parts of the person for the purpose of arousing or gratifying sexual desire. In other words, rape without penetration.)
Prior to modern rape shield laws, Giuliani could have used the “she was unchaste” defense to sexual assault.
This expands on what I wrote in my recent piece “Rape is a means of asserting patriarchal power.” In fact, the story Dunphy tells is an illustration of precisely how rape is a means of asserting patriarchal power.
While I could not find a date for some of the photographs of Dunphy and Giuliani together, presumably at least one of the many photographs like this was taken during the two years of her employment:
Until very recently (basically yesterday in terms of the history of rape laws) Dunphy’s sexual history, her marital status, absence of evidence that she screamed our sought help, and in fact, that she remained in the job would have made it virtually impossible for her to prove that she didn’t consent.
Giuliani responds as if it’s 1950
Via Law and Crime, This statement was originally published on Gateway (a right-wing propaganda site):
“She was absolutely never employed. She illegally taped me and illegally went in my email.”
The statement has been “airbrushed” and now reads:
“Banned from luxury hotels” implies that she was a sex worker. Here is the statement Giuliani’s team gave to Rolling Stone:
(Yes. the ex-partner accused her of these things. He was also found liable and ordered to pay damages of $10,000.)
Also, if you’re wondering, yes, Guiliani probably defamed her with those comments.
The idea behind Guiliani’s statements is that an unchaste woman, particularly a sex worker, can’t be sexually assaulted because the goods are already damaged. Even fairly recently, the woman’s acceptance of money was construed as consent to engage in any sexually-oriented acts that followed.
Smearing Dunphy as a sex worker and bringing in her sexual history would have been an effective defense for Guiliani as recently as fifty years ago.
Even today, a great many people may believe everything Noelle alleges and still think that she got what she deserved. They will ask: “Why did she take the job with a known slimeball? Why didn’t she leave? Why didn’t she scream or try to get help?”
Even people who consider themselves progressive and sympathetic may have a hard time understanding why she felt trapped and (as one reader on Twitter said) why it would have been hard for her to find another job with Rudy Giuliani “bleating that she’s a sex worker.”
For a glimpse into the right-wing mentality, Rush Limbaugh said the following things about women, sex, and rape:
- When a woman accused Duke University lacrosse players of rape, he derided her as a “ho.”
- When a Georgetown University law student supported expanded contraceptive coverage, he dismissed her as a “slut.”
As I talked about here, not long ago, men were free to grab women–as long as they grabbed women lower than them on the hierarchy. Because the 19th-century social hierarchy put white men on top and Black women on the bottom, there was always a woman lower on the hierarchy for a man to grab. Consider the fact that the rape of an enslaved woman was not a crime, and if she resisted, the man could legally beat her.
The idea that wealthy men and powerful men should have free access to women whom society considered beneath them on the social hierarchy dates far back in human history. For people like Guiliani, Trump, the Insurrectionists, and the 40% of voters who would vote for Trump again, 🎶 those were the days 🎶.
Meanwhile, also this week . . .
Nancy Abudu was confirmed as the first Black woman on the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Abudu has “worked on a range of matters, including defending voting rights, protecting religious freedom, and advancing criminal justice reform.”
Progressives push forward. Reactionaries push back. It’s a constant push and pull. The liberal vision is a multi-racial and multi-cultural society in which all people have an equal voice. The reactionary vision is to return to the time when men had dominion over women and political power and wealth were concentrated in the hands of a few white men, who grabbed whatever they wanted.
The reactionaries have always been with us and they show no signs of giving up. The struggle therefore will not end unless we give up, in which case they will win. Because for so much of our history, we lived in the kind of world they long for, it may feel to them like the default.
When we do manage to inch forward, as with the appointment of Nancy Abudu to the Eleventh Circuit, it’s important to stop and celebrate the moment.
It does make sense that we’re down to the progressives and the regressives. I recall the ECOA taking effect. I pleaded with my mom to get herself a credit card. Because my parents had only joint bank accounts and cards in dad’s name, mom had no credit of her own. I also recall that when I left employment at DePaul University in the late 1990’s and tried to roll over my TIAA-CREF accounts tied to that employment, my husband had to sign a form that it was ok for me to do this. With MY earnings! We’re not so far removed from Draconian laws and it’s easy for them to return. It’s still a scary time to be a woman in America.
Speaking of McVeigh’s notion of “freedom,” there’s this from Jamelle Bouie.
The Four Freedoms, According to Republicans
There is the freedom to control — to restrict the bodily autonomy of women and repress the existence of anyone who does not conform to traditional gender roles.
There is the freedom to exploit — to allow the owners of business and capital to weaken labor and take advantage of workers as they see fit.
There is the freedom to censor — to suppress ideas that challenge and threaten the ideologies of the ruling class.
And there is the freedom to menace — to carry weapons wherever you please, to brandish them in public, to turn the right of self-defense into a right to threaten other people
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/19/opinion/republican-legislatures-abortion-trangender-education.html?unlocked_article_code=JRnb2IJDPDQUo6bF1gh2wRZVBHZs2kmZtx97MpSoNx4PIBCbHG1w3jO0Mep14AahOStmFudkgXO5J2Iiaz2nyj2Uorre6HnfX7a4WXsct2tgF-QKKo4Hqq7K_152lhm20hLfrl1IoK9BnruzdXZiYVEAEHLHa-G3jN67_woKkzaWMNrVWC_DyWaOWny27LCi6VWBxKQOTdOkXOj5E_1tRqC1LxsbK5AOy3WX4k8ChLJk3fGNMNAqmQfQU25H7tyDtmfEdOHcw6_bX-M6gPLzdPWB2HBkU5z0Ew3vIHWudXftCiIhDEgeX0PVWJQwK44h7AwBWP9SdnvFr7dExn20O0LoJqOAZG5–D17Tl_gQOo38oyre2HM_O-U3ACBZtw&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
I’m not usually a great fan of JJ, but damn, that is a note-perfect JJ photo, and I can’t believe I of all people am the first to say so.
> It wasn’t until 1974 that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) enabled women to get their own credit cards
I remember that! I remember being dumfounded that it was even the case. Silly me, I presumed that it had happened fairly soon after 1919. And residuals still abound.
I do think that there are decent men and not-so-decent women amongst the monsters and victims described in so much of this post and history.
If women and decent-men ARE to save this country, making it better for all of us, women, in particular, as well as the decent men, need to be more attentive and kind to the vulnerable folks – they should not have to file lawsuits to live decent lives.
Thank goodness, the laws have changed, as Teri describes so clearly this weekend. But ALL of us need to do a much better job of taking care of one another. As George Takei posted earlier this week:
First they came for the trans folks and we said, “Oh, hell no!” And we stood by our trans siblings and kids because we’ve seen this crap tried before. Not on our watch.
The attention to detail women like you include in your stories are worth so much to women like me who experienced the violence, the subjugation & the blatant discrimination pre-dating our present laws. (Except, of course, for the newer regressive ones.)
Just 1 ex: my father standing at my side ready to co-sign for ME a new vehicle, my first, but being told by the dealership’s rep that my HUSBAND’s signature was required as the car could only be put in HIS name, not mine as was required by law (I’m assuming for financing at that time, early 1970’s). Moreover, the personality I had literally for decades after so much domestic violence both as a child & later as an adult is easily described as so unlike me now that one can’t even imagine I am yet the same person. Domestic abuse truly does create a life of fear, constantly being intimidated & suspicious that whatever one does one must trust one’s self not to upset or disturb the abuser for fear of the worst. You live your life in a day to day existence, with future plans almost unreal in their dream-like state as reality is so very … hard.
I have no doubt whatsoever Ms. Dunphy suffered immeasurably at the hands of Rudy Colludy and after reading the details you provided (of which there surely must be even more) I must question wtf she was ever thinking? plus:
Why is she only suing him for such a paltry amount when it should be so many times more?
On a side note, JJ is a handsome, clever dog who deserves better than to be posed in that silly hat rife w nonsustainable ecologically damaging frills. Please, I know you know better. Love him just as he is, just as he loves you 🙂
You are joking, right? I hope so.
Get a sense of humor. If you think that the dog minded that or somehow it’s politically incorrect I really don’t know what to say.
As I read your brilliant piece, I found myself sympathetic to Guiliani and McVeigh. Guiliani, only because he’s Exhibit A for how alcohol can really bring out the monster in a person, ruin their life, and ruin the lives of those around them. I say this as somehow who had an alcoholic father, and who personally flirted with alcoholism but was able to pull back from the brink when I understood what was going on. It was an invaluable visceral experience in realizing how powerful alcohol is. This doesn’t excuse G’s behavior, but I can feel some of what he’s going thru.
Noelle Dunphy’s claim for $3.1 million in damages seems modest, given her story. Perhaps bankruptcy (I’ve read Guiliani is broke) and possible prison time (for Trump-related crimes) is what Guiliani will need to hit bottom and dry out.
McVeigh and his cohort are the losers in the economic and social changes sweeping through humankind, as machines reduced the need for male brawn, and as mental power and emotional intelligence became highly valued, with people from both sexes developing these abilities. Rather than adapt to these changes, he tried to stop them, or at least take revenge.
I’ve had to reinvent myself a number of times in life. Fortunately, my psychology is geared toward adapting to circumstances and reinvention, and I had everything I needed to succeed in the project. While I can empathize with the loss of status and power McVeigh and others find themselves in, his destructive solution is futility, like trying to stop the tide. The tragedy is that he listened to the voices around him that egged him on, also loser males but in more dominant positions, such as Rush Limbaugh.
I’ve always revered Thomas Jefferson, and his yeoman farmer vision for America. It dovetails nicely with the “small is beautiful” counter-culture ethos. Didn’t realize that it had an underside, that it feeds the reactionary desire to go backwards. Would love to read more about this, I know only the usual thumbnail set of facts about Jefferson.
Worth remembering that Jefferson’s own yeoman farmer career was an abject failure (he rarely made money and died deep in debt), and he would have failed even harder if he hadn’t had access to the full fruits of the labor of dozens of enslaved people.
He might be the most overrated person in US history.
Teri, I would recommend your audience read Come As You Are by Emily Nogotsky to get a great biology lesson on how our human bodies work and human sexuality. She dispels many myths that have been used in rape culture since time began. Women die quite literally all over the world based on myths about how our bodies function sexually. She also has some great TED talks such as The Truth about unwanted arousal, and is interviewed on the Netflix documentary Pleasure. We need to understand our bodies as well as the abuse cycle to fight back against patriarchy. Science and education are powerful tools. Thanks Teri!
Nice connection of the dots to the present. Here is an earlier connection of the dots if you have the time to listen. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/long-shadow/id1577471264
And I fear the dots maybe be leading to another Jan 6 when Willis drops the hammer in August.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hunting-at-the-fbi-with-frank-figliuzzi-sitdown-7/id1566145058?i=1000527164837
Frank Figliuzzi is usually totally on the mark. I am just not a podcast person. I need words in front of me 🙂
Retired shrink here.
To all the commenters who have questioned why Dunphy didn’t just leave: The dynamic is complicated, but Teri’s description of her as “vulnerable” is right on the mark. Men choose victims who are not in a psychological position to resist, and they have good radar for who those victims are. Even women who are as capable and intelligent as Dunphy doubt their own ability to survive. And, not paying her put Giuliani in the driver’s seat financially as well.
Consider all the women who spend their lives in suffocating religious systems, and all the women who are part of the 40% of American voters who will be Trump supporters. Their lack of resistance to oppression seems confusing until you factor in a lifetime of denigration and second-class citizenship, buttressed by their isolation from outside input.
The isolation is key to maintaining women’s vulnerability.
Thank you, Linda. To give credit where it is due, the description of her, including “vulnerable” I took from the complaint. The drafters of the complaint clearly understood how to explain what she did and why. E. Jean Carroll’s case is easier for people to understand because Trump just grabbed her. She, too, was confused and didn’t come forward but the facts are easier for people to digest.
Ms Dunphy had previously been victimized (traumatized) by an ex partner. It doesn’t take much imagination to believe her self-esteem was severely damaged, making her highly vulnerable to a polished liar.
Teri, I’m astonished that there is not a criminal case against Giuliani for some of the things Ms. Dunphy alleges he did to her. Do you have any insight into why he’s not been criminally charged? Is that something that’s likely to happen, or would Dunphy have to press charges but she’s unwilling to do that for some reason?
Employment issues like sexual harassment are best handled in a civil case. A criminal case is about punishing Giuliani and requires a higher level of proof. A civil case is about compensating Dunphy for her injuries and losses, so really a criminal case won’t help her. I think that the sexual allegations would be difficult because of the consent requirement (in a criminal case) but much easier in an employment situation.
Clarification, please. I read the Reuters piece. You write, “almost 40% of voters would vote for Trump for president in 2024.” That’s 40% of Republican voters, correct?
Thank you for all you do,
Christina E. Mitchell
Sad to say, it’s all voters. And it may be higher than 40%.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_States_presidential_election
Right. I thought I was linking to a national poll showing Trump at 38% and Biden at 44%. Another showed Trump at 40% and Biden at 47%.
While it is a lot of Americans, should the Republicans earn 40% of the vote, it would be an FDR-level landslide.
I have suspected for years now that a lot of this has been about control and hatred toward Women. You have cemented that suspicion for me. I can in a small way understand where Republican Women are coming from, they do not know any better or way,1974 was not that long ago. In many ways its still that or earlier in parts of the country. So many of these laws are about taking away freedom for women particularly. Abortion being the biggest, that truly has been our greatest freedom. Our bodies our lives. That is terrifying to men. Nothing to do with Religion or God, just control. In my mind women are going to save this country, one way or another.
It’s interesting to think that it’s Women that are taking down the worst men in this country. Keep it up ladies, we’re on a roll.
Thank you so much for your insight and allowing me to understand more.
“Thomas Jefferson→Confederates→Ruby Ridge →Waco, Texas→Timothy McVeigh →Donald Trump and MAGA→ the January 6 attack.”
Seems like a few steps are missing here and it should be more like:
Thomas Jefferson→Confederates→Nixon’s Southern Strategy→Watergate→Ford Pardoned Nixon→Reagan/Limbaugh/Gingrich→Ruby Ridge →Waco, Texas→Timothy McVeigh →G. W. Bush→Donald Trump and MAGA→ the January 6 attack.
As for the sexual assault / defamation cases, it seems like the decision against Trump has opened the floodgates for lots more against him, Giuliani, and so many others in Trump’s orbit. At least I would hope so. Just curious if those cases could succeed in more than New York though.
Does the Epstein case perhaps fit in your updated list?
I’m not sure. He was awful certainly, but I’m not sure he was really part of the direct timeline to insurrection. Additional sexual assaults and heightened misogyny though, yes.
As for insurrection, I think the Kochs fit in there. I just wasn’t sure where to put them. Sen. McCarthy and Roy Cohn too, but in their day they were fringe nutcases. The Nixon—>Pardon—>Reagan piece was where that really gained momentum.
Iran Hostage Busch – Begets -Reagan – Iran Contra – Rupert Murdoch – Fairness Doctrine
Another great article. Something about Guiliani and most older, disgusting Republicans is the fact that all they want is sex. I find it horrifying that any woman would let anyone of these creatures touch them. Why do these men with saggy balls think they’re so desirable and then force themselves on women? Love seeing JJ!
I hope I’m not mansplaining, but they think they’re desirable because the male ego is an amazing thing, capable of producing incredibly powerful delusions.
And they force themselves on women because they’re not desirable, so that’s the only way they can get sex. And/or what they really want is power, and forcing sex on someone makes them feel powerful.
“. . . whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to THEM shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. . . when a long train of abuses and usurpations . . . evinces a design to reduce THEM under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.”
I can’t possibly be the first person to consider the Declaration of Independence doesn’t say, “as to HIM shall seem most likely to effect their safety…” or “evinces a design to reduce HIM under absolute Despotism.” If it did, we couldn’t possibly have had any kind of country other than complete chaos. It wouldn’t have even gotten to the place where anyone would have considered asking Dr (Benjamin) Franklin if we have a Republic.
Thank you, Teri. You’re always informative and straightforward.
I share your opinion of TJ. 🙂
I think your posts are terrific and very enlightening, and I am exceedingly grateful for them. However, this is the first time I have disagreed with you in any way. I think Ms. Dunphy should have got the hell out of that job as soon as she was told that sexual favors were included in her work for that repulsive old man. I realize that she had been abused by a partner; nonetheless, a reasoning adult should be able to have the common sense to leave an appalling situation like that. So far as her lack of payment was concerned, of course she should sue and, one would hope, win, but she had freedom of action. She was not under duress. In other words, she was too greedy to leave a job that promised a great deal of money, though she loathed the requirements.
I think her outside options were limited. Trauma responses are hard to understand by folks who don’t have them. And a million a year? She probably thought it would work out.
Her outside options consisted of just refusing to work for him. I’m sure you’re right: $1 million a year is tempting, and if she’s willing to do all those repulsive things with a repulsive man in exchange for $1 million a year, there is that old English story of “we have established what you are, now we’re establishing what your price is.” I realize that’s unkind to say, but she wasn’t forced. If she was willing to do these things in exchange for $1 million a year, then she should be paid her salary, but she should not be rewarded for enduring a horrible situation that she had the ability to leave.
Whatever bad decisions she made, it seems to an old grandma like me that judging her for them is hubris. We know that mental/physical abuse distorts a person’s psychology, and it is well documented that many victims repeat the patterns with new abusers.
“She could just say no” doesn’t seem to apply to people with this kind of damage. I get how tempting them with money works, as money has always promised women freedom from the tyranny of men. Even broken women who stumble through bad choices and remain easy prey.
I am constantly aware that we live in a culture where many religions and institutions promote the belief that men have the god-given right to be “in charge” of women. Shaking off that indoctrination, at every level of our collective and personal lives will continue to be a hard task, made harder when we lose compassion for its victims.
That was a lovely response Celine (therapist here, and I witness those choices clients make in real time and the shame is strong, but the patterns, stronger)
To put it as politely as I can muster, you need to read about the history of women’s abuse at the hands of [many] men. Written by women.
Also, read Linda Calhoun’s comment.
Excellent analysis and synthesis. And I suspect you are right about the misogyny underlying much of the rage. The increasing independence of women will, perhaps, be a pathway through it to defeating these reactionary impulses of our countrymen and women.
I’m glad you quoted Rush Limbaugh and referred to him as a hero to Timothy McVeigh. I’ll never forget how, right after the OKC bombing, Limbaugh ranted about how “we will track you down… blah blah blah,” because he was sure it was an “Islamic terrorist.”
After they found out they were homegrown fans of his, he shut right up. I hardly heard another word about it.
(Looking back, I don’t know why I listened to anything he said, but I guess his voice was everywhere.)
I considered adding that detail (believe it or not I try to keep these short!) Very striking and really tells you everything you need know.
Thank you for this powerful, enlightening commentary, Teri. As I read the truth you have written here, I could feel myself unclenching, exhaling, taking up the space that belongs to me.
When I read this sentence: “While I could not find a date for some of the photographs of Dunphy and Giuliani together, I presumably at least one of the many photographs like this was taken during the two years of her employment,” I read the last words as “during the two years of her imprisonment.”
God Bless Teri Kanefield.
Thanks Teri for this remarkable post. I am very grateful and admire your written word.
That was great!
‘Giuliani promised his divorce would be resolved “any day now.”’
Wow. How many times have women heard THAT one?
But perhaps the most out-there moment in this post was Timothy McVeigh expecting ‘free land in the west.’ Not only the Native Americans that land was originally stolen from, but the residents of quite a few states including mine, New Mexico, might have a few things to say about that. Even among his other floridly insane delusions, that one stands out.
I think we will all see more salacious details coming out as this plays out. Alas, I am weary of the aftermath of the corrupt Trump administration’s unwinding and the constant hedonistic distractions. Unfortunately, the GOP will need to find bottom before being able to embrace any reasonable candidates. Thank you for the read. I do hope we can accept that in this case, neither side was probably in a good place trying to do good. Using the Duke Lacrosse debacle is another good example of there being clear wrongs on both sides.
Added fact, which I had to look up so it may help some other readers: Timothy McVeigh’s Oklahoma City bombing took place in 1995. When McVeigh talked of 150 years earlier, he meant 1845, before the Civil War and the legal end of slavery. Those are the times for which the white nationalists yearn.
Thank you Teri for your consistently clear, coherent and helpful writing.
Thank you for the continued insights, plainly put. And the American history lessons which are always on point, and very useful to those of us who just didn’t pay attention for so long.
Teri,
Amazing work. Brilliant. The history lesson of patriarchy with emphasis on MAGA is worth more than my subscription. RG will live to regret his actions if Ms Dunphy prevails. E Jean prevailed so it’s possible in New York. Fingers crossed it’s Rudy’s times up moment.
1. “Giuliani also took Viagra constantly.”
A side effect of viagra is cold sweats. Hummm, that’s could cause his head to drip hair dye…
2. Was she responsible for the Three Seasons fiasco? If so, it’s a remarkable nasty woman trick!
I know you mean the Four Seasons fiasco. I always saw it as a typical blunder made by a serious drunk: getting the address / phone for what he thought was The Four Season Hotel. “Landscaping” is right next to “Hotel” in the phone book.
Great post! Teri I am so grateful for your intelligence and insight.
So grateful for women like you. ❤️
Thank you so much for this amazing article.
It all goes back to Solomon’s 1300 wives and concubines. His wisdom was the wand to add any woman to his harem. Donald Trump had it almost right when he said, “When you’re a star they let you do it.” What he really meant “When you’re a star you can force them to do it”, or, more contemporaneously, “When you’re a star you still think you can force them to do it.”
(And it probably doesn’t go back to Solomon, probably it goes back to the first Pharoah who gathered all the women to his boudoir while all the men were forced to grind in the fields to feed him the energy he needed to force their wives into submission. Probably)