There are several elements there that do suggest an actual scheme.
1. The phrase "This has to stop", reportedly in relation to Trump
2. A suggestion to scheme
3. The suggestion to scheme is immediately followed by phrase "we must do our patriotic duty again"
Honk wants us to believe that they were not suggesting an actual scheme against an elected official and were merely making plans to hang out.
See item 3. It would be incredibly odd to tell friends that it was our "patriotic duty" to hang out. This does not make sense at all under the honk narrative.
Like I said, I'm sure that they did in fact discuss Carroll coming forward with her story with the goal of politically hurting Trump. I'm just saying that the fact that one of them used the word "scheme" does not indicate that what they were up to was in fact a criminal or fraudulent scheme.
You are supposed to be arguing why it's not a red flag, not merely how you can stretch your imagination to see if you can make it work with the rape narrative with creative interpretations.
We have two people who came up with a premeditated plan to hurt Trump politically because they didn't like his politics. The friend is also an alibi who verified that she was told about the rape at the time it happened.
Jean Carroll did not scream when it happened. She did not tell the police. She did not write about it in her ongoing diary that she was keeping. The first we hear she started speaking about it is in a book she wrote shortly after plotting with her friend on a scheme to get Trump.
A jury, too, also assessed this and rejected the claim that she was raped.
All of this exists as one red flag after another, and is counter to the idea that she was raped. In the end we are supposed to believe that in a 1996 department store a 50 year old billionaire named Donald Trump, who could and did get models much younger than himself, could not resist forcing himself upon a 52 year old liberal sex advice columnist named E. Jean Carroll.