The key bit comes at 5:00 of the clip below. He doesn’t say which allegations, specifically, will be disproved. The one in the NYT about Trump groping a woman on an airplane in the 1980s? The one in People magazine about him pinning a reporter to the wall and kissing her? The one about him walking in on contestants backstage at Miss Teen USA while they were changing? Hard to imagine what evidence he could produce to debunk the first of those, but he might have a friendly letter or email from the People reporter, Natasha Stoynoff, that’s dated after their alleged encounter at Mar-a-Lago. That fact, that women who claim sexual misconduct sometimes behave cordially towards the man they’re accusing after the misconduct supposedly happened, was used against some of the Fox News women who accused Roger Ailes. He might also have pageant contestants lined up who don’t remember him ever walking in on them in the dressing room (even though he, er, sort of admitted to Howard Stern that he does that). This election being what it is, though, the evidence is probably going to have something to do with the Times allegations and we’re going to end up in a national debate over whether armrests in the first-class cabin on commercial jets in the 1980s really were movable or not.

Maybe the “evidence” will be that the Mexicans are behind all of this.

Donald Trump will broaden his attack against the media to hit globalism and the Clinton Foundation by charging that Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim is part of a biased coalition working in collusion with the Clinton campaign and its supporters to generate news reports of decades-old allegations from several women…

As early as Friday, Mr. Trump is planning to claim that Mr. Slim, as a shareholder of New York Times Co. and donor to the Clinton Foundation, has an interest in helping Hillary Clinton’s campaign, according to a Trump adviser.

Attacking the Mexican billionaire would allow Mr. Trump to hit several targets. He could slam the “failing” New York Times, which he says had to be “rescued” by a “foreigner”—Mr. Slim, the adviser said.

That’d be right in line with yesterday’s New World Order rant, which lacked nothing except a foreigner in the villain role. Meanwhile, as I’m writing this, this is breaking:

One thing I’ve been thinking as regards the Times story is that, if the charges really were made up whole cloth in order to smear Trump for political reasons, they’re tamer than I would expect them to be. If you’re trying to singlehandedly blow the guy’s candidacy apart and are willing to lie to any extent to do it, claiming that he groped you for a few seconds — in public, on an airplane, no less — wouldn’t be the logical way to do it. You’d claim a sustained assault, in private, involving actual rape. (Which is not to imply that Juanita Broaddrick’s claims against Bill Clinton, which do involve that scenario, aren’t credible. Watch any interview with her and you’ll see how believable she is.) In particular, if you’re prepared to lie, you’d want to neutralize Trump’s attacks against Clinton by accusing him of the very worst things that Bill is accused of. Instead the Times story involves an unwanted kiss and the plane incident. The only reason I can think of for a liar to prefer a story of “minor” sexual assault to one involving something even more heinous is if they’re calibrating their narrative to the “Access Hollywood” tape, wanting to show that Trump really is willing to be “casually” rough with women due to his sense of entitlement. But even then — if it’s a lie, why not lie big? The tape would simply be assimilated into a new narrative that Trump wasn’t telling Billy Bush the full story of what he’s actually capable of.