Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What did Donald Trump say about the Access Hollywood tape in October 2016?
Executive Summary
Donald Trump was recorded in 2005 making vulgar, sexual comments about women that were published by The Washington Post on October 7, 2016; he apologized in October 2016, calling them “locker room talk,” saying they did not reflect who he was and that he regretted the remarks [1] [2] [3]. His October 2016 public statement combined an apology with attempts to shift focus to Hillary and Bill Clinton, producing a mixture of contrition, deflection, and political counterattack that shaped the immediate fallout [4] [3] [1].
1. The Tape’s Content: Vulgar Bragging That Sparked Outrage
The released Access Hollywood footage captures Trump boasting about trying to seduce a married woman and claiming that “when you’re a star, they let you do it” and that he could grab women without consent, words that were widely characterized as describing sexual assault. Multiple outlets published verbatim transcripts and reported identical content, documenting that the conversation with Billy Bush included explicit acts and language that many legal analysts and commentators described as admissions or bragging about non-consensual behavior [1] [5] [6]. The immediate reporting emphasized the tape’s consistency across publications and the graphic nature of the remarks, making it a significant news event a month before the 2016 presidential election [1]. The transcript publications served as the primary record of what was said, leaving little factual dispute about the tape’s content [6].
2. Trump’s October 2016 Response: Apology Plus Redirection
In a video statement released October 8, 2016, Trump said he was sorry for the comments, described them as things he regretted, and called them “locker room banter,” asserting that the words did not reflect who he was. He apologized and pledged to be a better man while simultaneously using the opportunity to attack the Clintons, alleging past abuses by Bill Clinton and criticizing Hillary Clinton’s treatment of his accusers [2] [3] [4]. Reuters and other news organizations transcribed his video statement, noting the two-part character of his response: an apology framed as personal regret followed by political countercharges and a framing of the incident as a distraction from larger campaign issues [3]. This dual approach defined media coverage and political reactions in the days after the tape’s publication [2].
3. Political Fallout: Condemnation, Calls to Drop Out, and Endurance
The tape prompted swift condemnation across the political spectrum; many Republican leaders and media figures denounced the language, with some urging Trump to leave the race, while other conservative and evangelical backers downplayed the remarks and emphasized policy priorities [1] [2]. Coverage noted that although the backlash was intense and created calls for withdrawal, Trump publicly refused to drop out, stating he would not abandon his supporters and framing the controversy as politically motivated [1]. The episode crystallized a partisan split in responses—some saw the tape as disqualifying evidence of character, while others accepted the apology and prioritized electoral considerations—shaping how subsequent incidents involving Trump were perceived and politicized in media and legal contexts [1].
4. Legal and Cultural Aftershocks: From Lawsuits to the #MeToo Lens
Beyond immediate political consequences, the tape became part of a broader evidentiary and cultural record cited in later allegations and legal disputes, including reporting that linked the tape to patterns of behavior raised in lawsuits such as E. Jean Carroll’s defamation and sexual assault litigation [1]. Journalistic accounts and transcripts published in October 2016 placed the tape in the context of discussions about sexual assault, consent, and celebrity power, themes that gained renewed emphasis with the #MeToo movement later that year; commentators used the tape as an example of how powerful men described and normalized non-consensual acts [1] [6]. These references sustained the tape’s relevance beyond the 2016 campaign, contributing to legal arguments and public debates about credibility, accountability, and campaign fitness [1].
5. How Apologies and Deflections Were Interpreted: Competing Narratives
Analysts observed that Trump’s October 2016 apology combined personal contrition with political deflection, a dual strategy that allowed supporters to emphasize the apology while critics highlighted the redirection to the Clintons as undermining sincerity [3] [4]. News reports captured both interpretations: some outlets framed the statement as a rare admission and regret, while others stressed that the subsequent attacks on opponents suggested a tactical move to mitigate damage. The competing readings reflected broader partisan lenses—supporters prioritized policy and electoral outcomes, opponents prioritized character and legal accountability—producing entrenched narratives that persisted as the story was revisited in later legal and cultural reckonings [2] [1].