BillsFanNC Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 3 Author Share Posted February 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 🎯 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 5 Author Share Posted February 5 MAGA won’t stop crying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 5 Author Share Posted February 5 10 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 This is such a weird case to which I never paid much close attention. I looked up a few articles and I am a little confused as to why the jury awarded her anything in the first place. Anyone have any impartial resources? Like from what I read she said he raped her, but the jury only put him on the hook for sexual assault. Why? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 hour ago, Tenhigh said: This is such a weird case to which I never paid much close attention. I looked up a few articles and I am a little confused as to why the jury awarded her anything in the first place. Anyone have any impartial resources? Like from what I read she said he raped her, but the jury only put him on the hook for sexual assault. Why? Under NYS law as applicable at the trial, rape required intercourse (penis in *****). The jury found that Trump had penetrated Carroll with his fingers but was not convinced he had done so with his penis. Therefore, they could not find he had committed rape as defined by NYS law. However, the word “rape” in other contexts (including dictionaries) also includes forms of sexual assault such as penetration with fingers. So while the actions the jury found Trump did would constitute rape as it is commonly understood, it did not meet the definition in NYS law at that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L Ron Burgundy Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 hour ago, Tenhigh said: This is such a weird case to which I never paid much close attention. I looked up a few articles and I am a little confused as to why the jury awarded her anything in the first place. Anyone have any impartial resources? Like from what I read she said he raped her, but the jury only put him on the hook for sexual assault. Why? Remember when Trump said "I just grab them by the pu$$y"? He did what he said he does. Uninvited. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 8 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Under NYS law as applicable at the trial, rape required intercourse (penis in *****). The jury found that Trump had penetrated Carroll with his fingers but was not convinced he had done so with his penis. Therefore, they could not find he had committed rape as defined by NYS law. However, the word “rape” in other contexts (including dictionaries) also includes forms of sexual assault such as penetration with fingers. So while the actions the jury found Trump did would constitute rape as it is commonly understood, it did not meet the definition in NYS law at that time. But what was the evidence was it based on? Did she really not remember even what year it occurred? 7 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Remember when Trump said "I just grab them by the pu$$y"? He did what he said he does. Uninvited. How do you know he actually did it? She also claimed he raped her, why wasn't that included in rhe verdict? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 3 hours ago, Tenhigh said: But what was the evidence was it based on? Did she really not remember even what year it occurred? How do you know he actually did it? She also claimed he raped her, why wasn't that included in rhe verdict? There was no proof he did anything to her. On the contrary, her testimony was unreliable because she couldn't remember the year and had to change it several times and she claimed she was wearing an outfit that wasn't even made then, and there was no video footage of them ever together at the store. But they don't care (in this case, while otherwise they need incontroveritble proof ) because they hate him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 Beyond a reasonable doubt? Nope Preponderance of evidence? Nope Orange man guilty by accusation? Yup. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 6 hours ago, Tenhigh said: But what was the evidence was it based on? Did she really not remember even what year it occurred? Carroll's case contained the following: Testimony from Carroll After she entered the dressing room, Trump slammed her against the wall and penetrated her first with his fingers and then with his penis She called a friend, Lisa Birnbach to tell her what happened Birnbach told her that she was raped and should report it to the police The next day, she told her friend Carol Martin Martin told her that if she publicly discussed it, Trump would send his legal team after her When shown an email exchange between her and Martin indicating a scheme to do their patriotic duty, she stated that she was not scheming to bring down Donald Trump She didn't go public in 2016 because she believed he was doing better in the polls the more women who accused him She filed the suit now because he repeatedly called her a liar and it hurt her reputation Carroll initially thought the event occurred in 1994 or 1995 until she realized that Lisa Birnbach visited Mar-a-Lago in February 1996 which she did not believe would have occurred after Birnbach knew about the incident Testimony from a former Bergdorf Goodman manager: Departments were often left unattended and dressing rooms left open Testimony from Lisa Birnbach: Met with Trump in January 1996 for a story she was writing Carroll called her short of breath and said that Trump had assaulted her Birnbach offered to take Carroll to the police but Carroll refused and told her to keep the conversation a secret They did not talk about it again until 2019 when Carroll had decided to go public Testimony from retired stockbroker Jessica Leeds: Trump had suddenly grouped her in a manner similar to Trump on an airplane after a flight attendant invited her to move to first class and sat her next to Trump She said he groped her breast and tried to kiss her but she broke away when he started reaching up her skirt Passengers behind her did not seem to react The whole incident was probably less than a minute Trump saw her later and referred to her as "that [c-word] from the airplane" Trump's video deposition: He rarely shopped at Bergdorf Goodman He did not read Carroll's written accusations in either her book or her New York Magazine article Denied the incident occurred Confirmed he stood by his statements that Carroll was making up the story for financial and political reasons When asked if he had any basis for these assertions, he said he didn't know Confirmed that he made the comments "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful women - I just start kissing them, it's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the p***y" in the Access Hollywood tape When asked about the statement, replied "Well, historically, that's true with stars." Confirmed that he considered himself a star When shown a photo of Carroll, Trump claimed it was his former wife, Marla Maples Said he was married to his first wife from "about '78 to the early 90's" (they married in 1977 and divorced in 1990) Was unable to state when he married Maples Would not answer when asked when he married his current wife Clinical psychologist testimony: She evaluated Carroll and found she had been harmed by the incident but found no signs of mental disorder Testimony from journalist Natasha Stoynoff: While visiting Mar-a-Largo in December 2005, Trump brought her to look at a room while his wife Melania was changing He forced her against a wall and kissed her while she tried to push him off He told her they were going to have an affair She only told a few people because she did not want it to affect her career Video was shown of Trump denying Stoynoff's claim while campaigning and implying she was unattractive Testimony from Carol Martin: Corroborated Carroll's account of their conversation following the incident She and Carroll did not scheme against Trump though Martin did not like him. She claimed their plan was to support Democratic party causes On cross-examination by Trump's attorney (Joe Tacopina): Testimony / responses from Carroll: Carroll stated that she did not scream during the incident because she was in too much of a panic and surprised by the suddenness of the assault She experienced daily regret since first suing Trump due to feeling threatened She could not recall the meaning of her 2017 email to Martin She omitted it from her diary because she did not want to think about it She was inspired by MeToo and the Harvey Weinstein cases to come forward While she wanted her book to be successful, she was not struggling financially Comments from Tacopina: Carroll stated that she had not used the Bergdorf fitting rooms since the incident before saying she had actually used them after Audio clip of Carroll stating that she did not blame Trump for the cessation of her romantic life but that "maybe in that dressing room my desire for desire was just killed" Carroll stated that she was a big fan of Trump's The Apprentice show Carroll asked on social media if people would have sex with Donald Trump for $17,000 Asked Carroll if she had seen a 2012 episode of Law & Order SVU about a rape in a Bergdorf fitting room; which she said she had not seen Referenced an incident where Carroll called the police to report vandalism to a mailbox, to which she explained that she didn't want anyone to know that she suffered. Until now, she was ashamed to let people know what was going on The defense did not present a case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 ⬆️ The King regurgitating leftist crap from its masters? Yup. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 53 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Carroll's case contained the following: Testimony from Carroll After she entered the dressing room, Trump slammed her against the wall and penetrated her first with his fingers and then with his penis She called a friend, Lisa Birnbach to tell her what happened Birnbach told her that she was raped and should report it to the police The next day, she told her friend Carol Martin Martin told her that if she publicly discussed it, Trump would send his legal team after her When shown an email exchange between her and Martin indicating a scheme to do their patriotic duty, she stated that she was not scheming to bring down Donald Trump She didn't go public in 2016 because she believed he was doing better in the polls the more women who accused him She filed the suit now because he repeatedly called her a liar and it hurt her reputation Carroll initially thought the event occurred in 1994 or 1995 until she realized that Lisa Birnbach visited Mar-a-Lago in February 1996 which she did not believe would have occurred after Birnbach knew about the incident Testimony from a former Bergdorf Goodman manager: Departments were often left unattended and dressing rooms left open Testimony from Lisa Birnbach: Met with Trump in January 1996 for a story she was writing Carroll called her short of breath and said that Trump had assaulted her Birnbach offered to take Carroll to the police but Carroll refused and told her to keep the conversation a secret They did not talk about it again until 2019 when Carroll had decided to go public Testimony from retired stockbroker Jessica Leeds: Trump had suddenly grouped her in a manner similar to Trump on an airplane after a flight attendant invited her to move to first class and sat her next to Trump She said he groped her breast and tried to kiss her but she broke away when he started reaching up her skirt Passengers behind her did not seem to react The whole incident was probably less than a minute Trump saw her later and referred to her as "that [c-word] from the airplane" Trump's video deposition: He rarely shopped at Bergdorf Goodman He did not read Carroll's written accusations in either her book or her New York Magazine article Denied the incident occurred Confirmed he stood by his statements that Carroll was making up the story for financial and political reasons When asked if he had any basis for these assertions, he said he didn't know Confirmed that he made the comments "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful women - I just start kissing them, it's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the p***y" in the Access Hollywood tape When asked about the statement, replied "Well, historically, that's true with stars." Confirmed that he considered himself a star When shown a photo of Carroll, Trump claimed it was his former wife, Marla Maples Said he was married to his first wife from "about '78 to the early 90's" (they married in 1977 and divorced in 1990) Was unable to state when he married Maples Would not answer when asked when he married his current wife Clinical psychologist testimony: She evaluated Carroll and found she had been harmed by the incident but found no signs of mental disorder Testimony from journalist Natasha Stoynoff: While visiting Mar-a-Largo in December 2005, Trump brought her to look at a room while his wife Melania was changing He forced her against a wall and kissed her while she tried to push him off He told her they were going to have an affair She only told a few people because she did not want it to affect her career Video was shown of Trump denying Stoynoff's claim while campaigning and implying she was unattractive Testimony from Carol Martin: Corroborated Carroll's account of their conversation following the incident She and Carroll did not scheme against Trump though Martin did not like him. She claimed their plan was to support Democratic party causes On cross-examination by Trump's attorney (Joe Tacopina): Testimony / responses from Carroll: Carroll stated that she did not scream during the incident because she was in too much of a panic and surprised by the suddenness of the assault She experienced daily regret since first suing Trump due to feeling threatened She could not recall the meaning of her 2017 email to Martin She omitted it from her diary because she did not want to think about it She was inspired by MeToo and the Harvey Weinstein cases to come forward While she wanted her book to be successful, she was not struggling financially Comments from Tacopina: Carroll stated that she had not used the Bergdorf fitting rooms since the incident before saying she had actually used them after Audio clip of Carroll stating that she did not blame Trump for the cessation of her romantic life but that "maybe in that dressing room my desire for desire was just killed" Carroll stated that she was a big fan of Trump's The Apprentice show Carroll asked on social media if people would have sex with Donald Trump for $17,000 Asked Carroll if she had seen a 2012 episode of Law & Order SVU about a rape in a Bergdorf fitting room; which she said she had not seen Referenced an incident where Carroll called the police to report vandalism to a mailbox, to which she explained that she didn't want anyone to know that she suffered. Until now, she was ashamed to let people know what was going on The defense did not present a case. IOW...no evidence at all. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 2 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Carroll's case contained the following: Testimony from Carroll After she entered the dressing room, Trump slammed her against the wall and penetrated her first with his fingers and then with his penis She called a friend, Lisa Birnbach to tell her what happened Birnbach told her that she was raped and should report it to the police The next day, she told her friend Carol Martin Martin told her that if she publicly discussed it, Trump would send his legal team after her When shown an email exchange between her and Martin indicating a scheme to do their patriotic duty, she stated that she was not scheming to bring down Donald Trump She didn't go public in 2016 because she believed he was doing better in the polls the more women who accused him She filed the suit now because he repeatedly called her a liar and it hurt her reputation Carroll initially thought the event occurred in 1994 or 1995 until she realized that Lisa Birnbach visited Mar-a-Lago in February 1996 which she did not believe would have occurred after Birnbach knew about the incident Testimony from a former Bergdorf Goodman manager: Departments were often left unattended and dressing rooms left open Testimony from Lisa Birnbach: Met with Trump in January 1996 for a story she was writing Carroll called her short of breath and said that Trump had assaulted her Birnbach offered to take Carroll to the police but Carroll refused and told her to keep the conversation a secret They did not talk about it again until 2019 when Carroll had decided to go public Testimony from retired stockbroker Jessica Leeds: Trump had suddenly grouped her in a manner similar to Trump on an airplane after a flight attendant invited her to move to first class and sat her next to Trump She said he groped her breast and tried to kiss her but she broke away when he started reaching up her skirt Passengers behind her did not seem to react The whole incident was probably less than a minute Trump saw her later and referred to her as "that [c-word] from the airplane" Trump's video deposition: He rarely shopped at Bergdorf Goodman He did not read Carroll's written accusations in either her book or her New York Magazine article Denied the incident occurred Confirmed he stood by his statements that Carroll was making up the story for financial and political reasons When asked if he had any basis for these assertions, he said he didn't know Confirmed that he made the comments "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful women - I just start kissing them, it's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the p***y" in the Access Hollywood tape When asked about the statement, replied "Well, historically, that's true with stars." Confirmed that he considered himself a star When shown a photo of Carroll, Trump claimed it was his former wife, Marla Maples Said he was married to his first wife from "about '78 to the early 90's" (they married in 1977 and divorced in 1990) Was unable to state when he married Maples Would not answer when asked when he married his current wife Clinical psychologist testimony: She evaluated Carroll and found she had been harmed by the incident but found no signs of mental disorder Testimony from journalist Natasha Stoynoff: While visiting Mar-a-Largo in December 2005, Trump brought her to look at a room while his wife Melania was changing He forced her against a wall and kissed her while she tried to push him off He told her they were going to have an affair She only told a few people because she did not want it to affect her career Video was shown of Trump denying Stoynoff's claim while campaigning and implying she was unattractive Testimony from Carol Martin: Corroborated Carroll's account of their conversation following the incident She and Carroll did not scheme against Trump though Martin did not like him. She claimed their plan was to support Democratic party causes On cross-examination by Trump's attorney (Joe Tacopina): Testimony / responses from Carroll: Carroll stated that she did not scream during the incident because she was in too much of a panic and surprised by the suddenness of the assault She experienced daily regret since first suing Trump due to feeling threatened She could not recall the meaning of her 2017 email to Martin She omitted it from her diary because she did not want to think about it She was inspired by MeToo and the Harvey Weinstein cases to come forward While she wanted her book to be successful, she was not struggling financially Comments from Tacopina: Carroll stated that she had not used the Bergdorf fitting rooms since the incident before saying she had actually used them after Audio clip of Carroll stating that she did not blame Trump for the cessation of her romantic life but that "maybe in that dressing room my desire for desire was just killed" Carroll stated that she was a big fan of Trump's The Apprentice show Carroll asked on social media if people would have sex with Donald Trump for $17,000 Asked Carroll if she had seen a 2012 episode of Law & Order SVU about a rape in a Bergdorf fitting room; which she said she had not seen Referenced an incident where Carroll called the police to report vandalism to a mailbox, to which she explained that she didn't want anyone to know that she suffered. Until now, she was ashamed to let people know what was going on The defense did not present a case. They probably thought they didn't need to. I'm not sure I blame them.Thanks for the write up though. Why do you think they only went with sexual assault vs rape? I think Trump is a POS, and think it's possible he could have sexually assaulted someone. But what seems fishy and sticks out most to me is the fact she can't remember even the year (seems a pretty monumental event in anyones life), the timing of coming out due to the book sales and the complete diary omission. And the scheme email. How do you get yourself ok with that beyond your feelings about Trump? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 50 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: They probably thought they didn't need to. I'm not sure I blame them.Thanks for the write up though. Why do you think they only went with sexual assault vs rape? I think Trump is a POS, and think it's possible he could have sexually assaulted someone. But what seems fishy and sticks out most to me is the fact she can't remember even the year (seems a pretty monumental event in anyones life), the timing of coming out due to the book sales and the complete diary omission. And the scheme email. How do you get yourself ok with that beyond your feelings about Trump? As to rape vs. sexual assault, the word rape is commonly defined in a way that includes unwanted penetration by things that aren't a penis. However, under NY law at the time, rape was specifically defined as requiring intercourse (I believe they recently updated that definition to be more in line with the common understanding of the word rape). If I recall correctly, while Carroll believed that Trump had used his penis, she did not actually see it and instead was inferring from what she was experiencing. So the jury believed she was penetrated but didn't feel that she had proved he used his penis. Unfortunately, a lot of sexual assault cases come down to "he said, she said" and the jury has to decide who they find more credible. And the cases are often very messy with no clear set of facts that everybody would agree to. Having two people with contemporaneous accounts of being told about the incident probably helped Carroll a good deal here. Trump's deposition also likely hurt him (he couldn't state when two of his marriages happened, confirmed that he said that when you're a star you can just grab women, confirmed that he considered himself a star, confused Carroll with Marla Maples, etc). I could see it going either way, but given Trump's history with women, him assaulting someone in a changing room seems fairly on brand. And while I've seen people claim that the jury was in the tank against Trump, if they were, they would have said they believed Carroll about him using his penis and also found he had raped her under NY law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: As to rape vs. sexual assault, the word rape is commonly defined in a way that includes unwanted penetration by things that aren't a penis. However, under NY law at the time, rape was specifically defined as requiring intercourse (I believe they recently updated that definition to be more in line with the common understanding of the word rape). If I recall correctly, while Carroll believed that Trump had used his penis, she did not actually see it and instead was inferring from what she was experiencing. So the jury believed she was penetrated but didn't feel that she had proved he used his penis. Unfortunately, a lot of sexual assault cases come down to "he said, she said" and the jury has to decide who they find more credible. And the cases are often very messy with no clear set of facts that everybody would agree to. Having two people with contemporaneous accounts of being told about the incident probably helped Carroll a good deal here. Trump's deposition also likely hurt him (he couldn't state when two of his marriages happened, confirmed that he said that when you're a star you can just grab women, confirmed that he considered himself a star, confused Carroll with Marla Maples, etc). I could see it going either way, but given Trump's history with women, him assaulting someone in a changing room seems fairly on brand. And while I've seen people claim that the jury was in the tank against Trump, if they were, they would have said they believed Carroll about him using his penis and also found he had raped her under NY law. Do you honestly think he think he deserved to lose based on this evidence? Seems eerily similar to Clinton and several of the allegations against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 3 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Carroll's case contained the following: Testimony from Carroll After she entered the dressing room, Trump slammed her against the wall and penetrated her first with his fingers and then with his penis She called a friend, Lisa Birnbach to tell her what happened Birnbach told her that she was raped and should report it to the police The next day, she told her friend Carol Martin Martin told her that if she publicly discussed it, Trump would send his legal team after her When shown an email exchange between her and Martin indicating a scheme to do their patriotic duty, she stated that she was not scheming to bring down Donald Trump She didn't go public in 2016 because she believed he was doing better in the polls the more women who accused him She filed the suit now because he repeatedly called her a liar and it hurt her reputation Carroll initially thought the event occurred in 1994 or 1995 until she realized that Lisa Birnbach visited Mar-a-Lago in February 1996 which she did not believe would have occurred after Birnbach knew about the incident Testimony from a former Bergdorf Goodman manager: Departments were often left unattended and dressing rooms left open Testimony from Lisa Birnbach: Met with Trump in January 1996 for a story she was writing Carroll called her short of breath and said that Trump had assaulted her Birnbach offered to take Carroll to the police but Carroll refused and told her to keep the conversation a secret They did not talk about it again until 2019 when Carroll had decided to go public Testimony from retired stockbroker Jessica Leeds: Trump had suddenly grouped her in a manner similar to Trump on an airplane after a flight attendant invited her to move to first class and sat her next to Trump She said he groped her breast and tried to kiss her but she broke away when he started reaching up her skirt Passengers behind her did not seem to react The whole incident was probably less than a minute Trump saw her later and referred to her as "that [c-word] from the airplane" Trump's video deposition: He rarely shopped at Bergdorf Goodman He did not read Carroll's written accusations in either her book or her New York Magazine article Denied the incident occurred Confirmed he stood by his statements that Carroll was making up the story for financial and political reasons When asked if he had any basis for these assertions, he said he didn't know Confirmed that he made the comments "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful women - I just start kissing them, it's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the p***y" in the Access Hollywood tape When asked about the statement, replied "Well, historically, that's true with stars." Confirmed that he considered himself a star When shown a photo of Carroll, Trump claimed it was his former wife, Marla Maples Said he was married to his first wife from "about '78 to the early 90's" (they married in 1977 and divorced in 1990) Was unable to state when he married Maples Would not answer when asked when he married his current wife Clinical psychologist testimony: She evaluated Carroll and found she had been harmed by the incident but found no signs of mental disorder Testimony from journalist Natasha Stoynoff: While visiting Mar-a-Largo in December 2005, Trump brought her to look at a room while his wife Melania was changing He forced her against a wall and kissed her while she tried to push him off He told her they were going to have an affair She only told a few people because she did not want it to affect her career Video was shown of Trump denying Stoynoff's claim while campaigning and implying she was unattractive Testimony from Carol Martin: Corroborated Carroll's account of their conversation following the incident She and Carroll did not scheme against Trump though Martin did not like him. She claimed their plan was to support Democratic party causes On cross-examination by Trump's attorney (Joe Tacopina): Testimony / responses from Carroll: Carroll stated that she did not scream during the incident because she was in too much of a panic and surprised by the suddenness of the assault She experienced daily regret since first suing Trump due to feeling threatened She could not recall the meaning of her 2017 email to Martin She omitted it from her diary because she did not want to think about it She was inspired by MeToo and the Harvey Weinstein cases to come forward While she wanted her book to be successful, she was not struggling financially Comments from Tacopina: Carroll stated that she had not used the Bergdorf fitting rooms since the incident before saying she had actually used them after Audio clip of Carroll stating that she did not blame Trump for the cessation of her romantic life but that "maybe in that dressing room my desire for desire was just killed" Carroll stated that she was a big fan of Trump's The Apprentice show Carroll asked on social media if people would have sex with Donald Trump for $17,000 Asked Carroll if she had seen a 2012 episode of Law & Order SVU about a rape in a Bergdorf fitting room; which she said she had not seen Referenced an incident where Carroll called the police to report vandalism to a mailbox, to which she explained that she didn't want anyone to know that she suffered. Until now, she was ashamed to let people know what was going on The defense did not present a case. LOL Doesn't appear Soros' attorneys presented a case either 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 In DC, NYC and elsewhere you can get a conviction on The Great Orange Menace for removing a mattress tag. And useful idiots will insist the case was bulletproof, as rock solid as it gets, all while accusing you of being blind. So it goes with useful idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 25 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: Do you honestly think he think he deserved to lose based on this evidence? Seems eerily similar to Clinton and several of the allegations against him. I think it would depend on how credible I found Birnbach’s and Martin’s testimony. There are problems with both Carroll’s testimony and Trump’s deposition that hamper each of their cases. Having credible testimony of Carroll discussing the incident at the time it happened helps alleviate some of the issues with her case. If you don’t find them credible, then I think it’d be hard to find for Carroll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L Ron Burgundy Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: I think it would depend on how credible I found Birnbach’s and Martin’s testimony. There are problems with both Carroll’s testimony and Trump’s deposition that hamper each of their cases. Having credible testimony of Carroll discussing the incident at the time it happened helps alleviate some of the issues with her case. If you don’t find them credible, then I think it’d be hard to find for Carroll. Would you agree with the statement that Trump lost because he's a stupid liar and had crap lawyers? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 ⬆️ Two useful idiots. On ignore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 1 minute ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Would you agree with the statement that Trump lost because he's a stupid liar and had crap lawyers? In the first Carroll trial (where the jury found he assaulted her), I would not. Joe Tacopina seems like a decent lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L Ron Burgundy Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 (edited) 10 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: In the first Carroll trial (where the jury found he assaulted her), I would not. Joe Tacopina seems like a decent lawyer. Stupid + liar yes but bad lawyer no, got it. Rather than saying I've never raped or sexually assaulted anyone he said she's not my type, then he mistook a photo of e jean for his ex wife. Fn stupid liar. Edited February 5 by L Ron Burgundy 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 ⬆️ Dance for meeeeeee! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted February 5 Share Posted February 5 11 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Stupid + liar yes but bad lawyer no, got it. Rather than saying I've never raped or sexually assaulted anyone he said she's not my type, then he mistook a photo of e jean for his ex wife. Fn stupid liar. It’s always good to keep an eye on who is representing Trump for a particular legal issue. Tacopina seems like a good lawyer but he lost a difficult case in which Trump was ordered to pay $5 million. He stopped representing Trump and his replacement not only lost the next case (costing Trump more than $80 million) but was so bad she risked being found in contempt. Aside from being an absolutely terrible client, Trump has a history of stiffing people. That’s why Chris Kise (a good lawyer) required him to pay $3 million up front before he’d represent him. It’s also why he’s currently being represented by people so bad at their jobs that they are putting their licenses on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 hour ago, ChiGoose said: In the first Carroll trial (where the jury found he assaulted her), I would not. Joe Tacopina seems like a decent lawyer. Would you agree that the venue affected the outcome? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 This seems like it should have ended it right there on the spot. https://www.businessinsider.com/e-jean-carroll-rape-corroborator-addresses-anti-trump-views-2023-5 The email Martin sent Carroll in September 2017 included a link to a humorous New Yorker column mocking Trump, who Martin called "orange crush." "This has to stop," Martin wrote at the time. "As soon as we're both well enough to scheme, we must do our patriotic duty again." "TOTALLY!!!" Carroll responded. "I have something special for you when we meet." 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 hour ago, Tenhigh said: Would you agree that the venue affected the outcome? Ehh, probably not. You always want a venue that you think will be friendly, but ultimately what decides the case is what is presented at trial. The jury deliberated for three hours and sided with Carroll on every issue except the top one. If they were in the tank for her, they would have given her everything. If it was a bunch of diehard libs determined to stick it to Trump with one or two holdouts, it would have taken longer than three hours. Not to mention one of the jurors admitted he got his news from Tim Pool. People who spend their time thinking about politics tend to believe everyone thinks like they do, but they don’t. The average American doesn’t think that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 Bonnie you better donate now or you’re going to MAGA hell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 (edited) 10 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Ehh, probably not. You always want a venue that you think will be friendly, but ultimately what decides the case is what is presented at trial. The jury deliberated for three hours and sided with Carroll on every issue except the top one. If they were in the tank for her, they would have given her everything. If it was a bunch of diehard libs determined to stick it to Trump with one or two holdouts, it would have taken longer than three hours. Not to mention one of the jurors admitted he got his news from Tim Pool. People who spend their time thinking about politics tend to believe everyone thinks like they do, but they don’t. The average American doesn’t think that way. So in Tennessee it is still the same outcome? I think you are way off the mark of you believe that. Edited February 6 by Tenhigh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 11 hours ago, Tenhigh said: This seems like it should have ended it right there on the spot. https://www.businessinsider.com/e-jean-carroll-rape-corroborator-addresses-anti-trump-views-2023-5 The email Martin sent Carroll in September 2017 included a link to a humorous New Yorker column mocking Trump, who Martin called "orange crush." "This has to stop," Martin wrote at the time. "As soon as we're both well enough to scheme, we must do our patriotic duty again." "TOTALLY!!!" Carroll responded. "I have something special for you when we meet." @Ron Burgundy what is there to eye roll here? You don't think the email exchange raises ANY questions? And the fact that she didn't even know the year the rape supposedly happened? Or the fact that she knew it would increase her book sales? You can still dislike Trump AND believe that this case is as thin as one ply. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L Ron Burgundy Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 5 hours ago, Tenhigh said: @Ron Burgundy what is there to eye roll here? You don't think the email exchange raises ANY questions? And the fact that she didn't even know the year the rape supposedly happened? Or the fact that she knew it would increase her book sales? You can still dislike Trump AND believe that this case is as thin as one ply. Raises questions sure. You said should have ended it right on the spot. That's a bigly exaggeration. I think he lost because he's borderline reetarded. He's too stupid to stfu. Then again it's very possible he did it. It's literally something he says he does isn't it? Just walks up to women and grabs them....would you be shocked if he actually did something he said he does? I get you'll defend him no matter what but come on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 12 hours ago, Tenhigh said: @Ron Burgundy what is there to eye roll here? You don't think the email exchange raises ANY questions? And the fact that she didn't even know the year the rape supposedly happened? Or the fact that she knew it would increase her book sales? You can still dislike Trump AND believe that this case is as thin as one ply. Or what she was wearing. But hey, ot's only OK for Dems to use "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 17 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Raises questions sure. You said should have ended it right on the spot. That's a bigly exaggeration. I think he lost because he's borderline reetarded. He's too stupid to stfu. Then again it's very possible he did it. It's literally something he says he does isn't it? Just walks up to women and grabs them....would you be shocked if he actually did something he said he does? I get you'll defend him no matter what but come on. I actually think he is a POS human, but that doesn’t mean he sexual assaulted this woman. I believe you're right that they found him liable because of who he is, which isn’t how its supposed to work. 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts