Which media outlets have compiled detailed timelines of the sexual‑misconduct allegations against Donald Trump, and how do they source witnesses?
Executive summary
Several mainstream outlets and specialty news sites have compiled detailed timelines or catalogs of the sexual‑misconduct allegations against Donald Trump — including The Guardian, PBS NewsHour, The 19th, Business Insider, Axios and consumer outlets such as Cosmopolitan — and those compilations rely heavily on a mix of contemporaneous interviews, later published interviews and books, court filings and testimony, audio evidence (the Access Hollywood tape), and government documents such as the Epstein file releases (The Guardian; PBS; The 19th; Business Insider; Axios; Cosmopolitan) [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8].
1. Who has built timelines and lists, and what form do they take
The Guardian has produced multiple annotated timelines and rolling lists that enumerate allegations, dates and contexts — entries that cite named accusers, contemporaneous reporting and books — in pieces published in 2016 and updated through 2024 [2][1]. PBS NewsHour produced a chronological recap of assault allegations in 2019 that collates named and unnamed complainants and flags legal actions tied to specific claims [3]. The 19th assembled a synthesis tying allegations to Trump associates and reporting from books such as All the President’s Women, emphasizing how the allegations circulated across time [4]. Business Insider and Axios offer compact lists and explainers that enumerate the dozens of named accusers and summarize the public record around each claim [5][6]. Consumer outlets such as Cosmopolitan have also published timelines that situate allegations alongside criminal and civil cases [7]. Wikipedia maintains an aggregated entry that compiles allegations, linking to source material and court outcomes, functioning as a living compilation though not primary reporting [9].
2. How these outlets source witnesses: interviews, books and original reporting
Outlets routinely rely on direct interviews with accusers when available, and they reprint or summarize interviews first published elsewhere; for example, several later accounts draw on interviews featured in books such as All the President’s Women, which the 19th and others cite [4]. Contemporary magazine and newspaper interviews (e.g., People, Washington Post) and later on‑the‑record statements to outlets are repeatedly cited across timelines [6][3]. News organizations also cite plaintiffs’ court filings, depositions and verdicts — the E. Jean Carroll litigation and related filings were central to timeline entries and were used as evidentiary anchors in reporting [10]. Where criminal or civil court records are sparse, compilers sometimes rely on investigative sources such as archived reporting, memoirs or books that first documented allegations decades ago [1][2].
3. How they source witnesses: documentary evidence and ancillary records
Beyond interviews and lawsuits, major timelines draw on documentary artifacts: the 2005 Access Hollywood tape has been used as contextual evidence across many timelines to establish pattern and public attitude [11], and released DOJ/ FBI material tied to Jeffrey Epstein is cited by outlets such as PBS when it mentions files referencing alleged incidents or transport of minors to Mar‑a‑Lago [8][3]. Settlements, nondisclosure provisions and divorce depositions also appear in timelines: reporting notes Ivana Trump’s earlier statement in a divorce deposition and the effect of settlement terms on public comment [1][2].
4. Limits, disclosure practices and competing narratives
Compilers differ in rigor and sourcing transparency: outlets like The Guardian and PBS foreground named sources and link to filings or prior reporting [1][3], while aggregators such as Wikipedia and some consumer timelines compile many items from secondary sources and news reports [9][7]. Several outlets explicitly note denials and legal pushesback — the Trump campaign’s blanket denials and legal challenges are consistently reported alongside allegations [6][9]. Timelines also note complications: anonymous plaintiffs and withdrawn cases (for example “Jane Doe” filings) complicate public verification and are flagged as such in PBS and other recaps [3].
5. Why methodology matters: pattern, corroboration and evidentiary framing
Serious compilations attempt to show corroboration across sources — multiple contemporaneous witnesses, independent books, legal filings and recorded tapes — using pattern evidence to contextualize individual claims (as discussed in legal analyses and trial reporting) [11][10]. Readers should note the editorial purpose behind a timeline — whether it’s investigative synthesis (The Guardian, The 19th), broadcast recap (PBS), quick explainers (Axios, Business Insider), or aggregated reference (Wikipedia, Cosmopolitan) — because those purposes shape which types of sourcing are emphasized and how aggressively editors treat uncorroborated or anonymous claims [1][4][3][6][5][9][7].