you didn't read the comment you're replying to. it was pointed out to you that it doesn't matter whether he did them or not. libel is about reputation. what matters here is that he is on tape bragging about being to sexually abuse women if he wants. this establishes his reputation as, at best, a misogynistic boor.

the libel laws are very clear. you must prove 1) injury to reputation by 2) someone who knew the claims were false and published them anyway.

this letter from the NY Times destroys both these points. on point 1: his reputation has already been established, by him, as someone who may or may not grab women by the pussy. again it doesn't matter whether he actually did this or not. libel is about reputation. thus when multiple women come forward with sexual abuse claims, their claims are not inconsistent with his reputation, as established by his own voice on tape.

on point 2: the NY Times did their due diligence by fact checking the claims as usual and by contacting Trump for comment, whose comment was to call the reporter "a horrible person" doing further damage to his own reputation. they clearly did not believe the claims were false.

based on these simple two points, trump has no case, and he knows it. the NY Times was merely stating this fact.