In an era when everything from gas prices to campus misconduct gets routed through the same partisan reflex, a New York Times columnist has offered a striking example of the phenomenon—one that conservative outlets like American Thinker have been quick to roast.
What the Columnist Said
Appearing on ABC News on Sunday, Times columnist Michelle Cottle argued that President Donald Trump bears responsibility for the cultural conditions surrounding an alleged sexual assault at Cornell University involving seven men.
“What this is, is it’s a fundamental disrespect for women,” Cottle said, according to American Thinker. She added that young men cannot receive certain cultural messages “no matter how drunk you are as a frat boy without having some kind of misunderstanding about what women are there for and whether this is a real person you’re dealing with.”
Cottle then traced the alleged cultural roots directly to the White House. “And that, I think, starts, you know—we can go to the president for this one,” she said. “I mean, we are in a moment in this culture where the glorification of being thuggish and swaggering and mistreating women is kind of making you a cool kid.”
The remarks drew immediate backlash. American Thinker editor Mike McDaniel, writing in a blog post, called the claim absurd and pointed to a timeline problem: Joe Biden was president at the time of the alleged incident, not Trump. Trump, he noted, had not occupied the White House for roughly four years, yet Cottle’s framework treats his influence as ambient and inescapable.
The ‘Newt’ Defense
McDaniel invoked a classic Monty Python sketch to mock the logic. In the bit, a medieval villager caught in an obvious lie—claiming an accused witch turned him into a newt—sheepishly admits, “I got better,” then resumes baying for her blood.
The comparison is to what critics describe as an unverifiable claim: Trump’s cultural shadow, like a lingering curse, remains causally responsible even when he holds no office. The joke lands because it captures a style of argument that, in McDaniel’s telling, cannot be falsified and refuses to die.
McDaniel also cited CNN commentator Scott Jennings, who he says routinely dismantles Democratic arguments on air, as someone who has Cottle’s number. The implication is that the “blame Trump” reflex has become so automatic it can be triggered by events that occurred under his successor.
Facts, Evidence, and Pre-Judgment
Beneath the partisan jabs lies a more serious point about evidence. McDaniel argues that virtually nothing is known about the facts of the Cornell case. Police reports, witness statements, and the full evidentiary record are not public. Even the most ethical news organization, he writes, never reports all the evidence—and courts, not cable panels, are where facts are ultimately tested.
He notes that the officers who investigated and the prosecutor who reviewed the case apparently did not treat “Jane Doe” as a victim. Yet New York Governor Kathy Hochul assigned the case to Attorney General Letitia James, who—before knowing the evidence—declared in public that Doe had been “literally gang raped.” Both Hochul and James are running for reelection, McDaniel notes, which invites suspicion of a predetermined outcome.
McDaniel distinguishes between an objective process with defined procedures and a political one governed by whatever result maximizes power for the participants. He argues that in civil suits, blame is often shared—and that society’s allergy to judgment is itself a problem. His language is blunt: people who engage in mass sex acts should feel shame, as should the men who exploit those situations.
He also concedes there was likely some sexual contact, which may or may not meet New York’s legal definition of rape, and that only some of those present have admitted to some degree of sexual contact. That, he writes, is the extent of what is actually known.
Why It Matters
The spat captures a broader media dynamic: a high-profile commentator links a specific alleged crime to a former president’s rhetorical style, while critics counter that the facts are thin, the timeline is inconvenient, and the verdict has already been rendered in the court of opinion.
For readers, the takeaway is less about who wins the cable segment and more about how durable the “Trump did it” frame has become. When an event that occurred during a Democratic administration is still laid at Trump’s feet, the charge becomes less an empirical claim than a cultural one—unfalsifiable, endlessly renewable, and, as the Python joke suggests, impossible to disprove because its believers never stop believing.
Whether that serves the pursuit of truth in a serious criminal allegation is another question. McDaniel’s closing jab is that critics baying for the Cornell men’s blood will keep doing so regardless of what the evidence shows. Given the case’s unresolved status, that remains to be seen—but the reaction to Cottle’s remarks suggests the fight over the narrative is already well underway.
Source: www.americanthinker.com — https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/10/cornell-trump-did-it/