"BREAKING" NEWS: Donald Trump RAPED Katie Johnson and E Jean Carroll- $83M verdict

[BillStime]

11 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

You truly believe that if Trump were to turn over his DNA over to any court in NYC it would not be quickly in the hands of the DA? You and I are certainly different 

What was the DA going to do with his DNA? 

 

The law that NYS passed allowed sexual-assault victims to file civil suits beyond expired statutes of limitations.

 

Keep spinning 

 

 

[aristocrat]

 

[Orlando Tim]

48 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

I'll bet you just about nothing comes out of that.   R's have as much admitted sketchy things but not illegal.

I dont think that can happen.   Completely different courts.

 

Hopefully a resident lawyer can chime in.  

Rachel Maddow ended up with some his tax returns that only the courts had access to but you think the DNA record would not get over to the DA real quick? You believe the NYC govt and courts are on the up and up?

[ChiGoose]

1 minute ago, Orlando Tim said:

Rachel Maddow ended up with some his tax returns that only the courts had access to but you think the DNA record would not get over to the DA real quick? You believe the NYC govt and courts are on the up and up?

Just a reminder: people outside the courts had access to those records as well. Specifically, the large company that prepared Trump’s taxes. 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

1 hour ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

I'll bet you just about nothing comes out of that.   R's have as much admitted sketchy things but not illegal.

Why are you libs ok with it. Biden is dirty and corrupt AF. Trump distain aside you can’t like this dirty corrupt bag of skin can you? 

[Orlando Tim]

32 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Just a reminder: people outside the courts had access to those records as well. Specifically, the large company that prepared Trump’s taxes. 

So the courts fined them for that illegal leak then right? This trial had no evidence except the testimony and basically the jury had said while I don't believe the words you actually said the lack of evidence still helps you. 

[ChiGoose]

12 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

So the courts fined them for that illegal leak then right? This trial had no evidence except the testimony and basically the jury had said while I don't believe the words you actually said the lack of evidence still helps you. 

I was just pointing out that the claim that only the court had Trump’s tax records was false. I don’t know how Maddow got them. I don’t know if it was in conjunction with the lawsuit or just someone who had access passing them along. 

[Orlando Tim]

8 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

I was just pointing out that the claim that only the court had Trump’s tax records was false. I don’t know how Maddow got them. I don’t know if it was in conjunction with the lawsuit or just someone who had access passing them along. 

Your point that liberals will break laws with impunity in NYC is noted. 

[ChiGoose]

10 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

Your point that liberals will break laws with impunity in NYC is noted. 

Not something I said or implied. I’m sorry if you struggle to read. 

[BillStime]

1 hour ago, Orlando Tim said:

Rachel Maddow ended up with some his tax returns that only the courts had access to but you think the DNA record would not get over to the DA real quick? You believe the NYC govt and courts are on the up and up?

Buffalo Timmy - Not that facts matter to you - but man, you will turn yourself inside out trying to back up a false premise and then dig yourself deeper with more BS because you clearly don’t know wtf you’re tasking about.

The big reveal, which Maddow did not get to until after a lengthy monologue and commercial break, showed that in 2005 Trump paid $38 million in federal income taxes on a reported income of $150 million. 

That information was based on two pages of an IRS 1040 form supplied to journalist David Cay Johnston, who was a guest on Maddow's show.

By the time Maddow got around to sharing that information, it had already been supplied by the White House and published on The Daily Beast, where Johnston is a columnist. Even so, the documents left the public with more questions than answers.

 

https://money.cnn.com/2017/03/14/media/rachel-maddow-donald-trump-2005-taxes/

 

Edited May 10, 2023 by BillStime

[Orlando Tim]

10 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

Not something I said or implied. I’m sorry if you struggle to read. 

Who was prosecuted for that clearly illegal dissemination of information? I also know that you did not intentionally imply it, but it is a valid conclusion from your point since no one cared that a law was broken against Trump

 

[ChiGoose]

7 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

Who was prosecuted for that clearly illegal dissemination of information? I also know that you did not intentionally imply it, but it is a valid conclusion from your point since no one cared that a law was broken against Trump

 

So here’s a fun thing about the first amendment: if you innocently obtain information, such as some anonymous source mailing you old tax documents, you can publish them as part of a journalistic endeavor.

 

Now maybe the person who sent them broke some law, maybe not, but if it was anonymous, it’s unlikely to result in a successful prosecution of the leaker. 

[Orlando Tim]

5 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Buffalo Timmy - Not that facts matter to you - but man, you will turn yourself inside trying to back up a false premise and then dig yourself deeper with more BS because you clearly don’t know wtf you’re tasking about.

The big reveal, which Maddow did not get to until after a lengthy monologue and commercial break, showed that in 2005 Trump paid $38 million in federal income taxes on a reported income of $150 million. 

That information was based on two pages of an IRS 1040 form supplied to journalist David Cay Johnston, who was a guest on Maddow's show.

By the time Maddow got around to sharing that information, it had already been supplied by the White House and published on The Daily Beast, where Johnston is a columnist. Even so, the documents left the public with more questions than answers.

 

https://money.cnn.com/2017/03/14/media/rachel-maddow-donald-trump-2005-taxes/

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/media/shortcuts/2017/mar/15/rachel-maddow-and-the-trump-tax-bombshell-that-wasnt

 

The journalist claims that someone dropped the papers in his mailbox and the white house release was only due to the White House knowing what was being leaked. CNN pretending that the journalist had any right to the info is disingenuous but you are so used to be mislead it seems normal.

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, Orlando Tim said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/media/shortcuts/2017/mar/15/rachel-maddow-and-the-trump-tax-bombshell-that-wasnt

 

The journalist claims that someone dropped the papers in his mailbox and the white house release was only due to the White House knowing what was being leaked. CNN pretending that the journalist had any right to the info is disingenuous but you are so used to be mislead it seems normal.

Ok - I’m going to pull a “Buffalo Timmy” -  lol - are you upset that someone hacked the DNC servers?

 

 

[ChiGoose]

5 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/media/shortcuts/2017/mar/15/rachel-maddow-and-the-trump-tax-bombshell-that-wasnt

 

The journalist claims that someone dropped the papers in his mailbox and the white house release was only due to the White House knowing what was being leaked. CNN pretending that the journalist had any right to the info is disingenuous but you are so used to be mislead it seems normal.

I’m sorry, but is your argument that if someone dumps the president’s secret tax returns on the doorstep of a journalist that it’s the journalist’s duty NOT to report on it?

Edited May 10, 2023 by ChiGoose

[Orlando Tim]

1 minute ago, BillStime said:

Ok - I’m going to pull a “Buffalo Timmy” -  lol - are you upset that someone hacked the DNC servers?

 

 

No I don't care- when have I ever mentioned it? But I do know there was an investigation, thanks for proving my point.

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, Orlando Tim said:

No I don't care- when have I ever mentioned it? But I do know there was an investigation, thanks for proving my point.

What point was proved?

 

You just keep digging and making yourself look pathetic as usual.

 

As Chef Jim would say - carry on.

 

lolz

[T master]

2 hours ago, BillStime said:

I didn’t need a court case to tell me Conald is a POS.

 

Remember when the cult defended this as locker room talk?

 

 

 

 

 

Well no because of your bias/hatered but it's just more fuel for you which you didn't need any more .

[Orlando Tim]

8 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

So here’s a fun thing about the first amendment: if you innocently obtain information, such as some anonymous source mailing you old tax documents, you can publish them as part of a journalistic endeavor.

 

Now maybe the person who sent them broke some law, maybe not, but if it was anonymous, it’s unlikely to result in a successful prosecution of the leaker. 

So he just believes the tax return is real without any proof of authentication, and Maddow designs a whole show without any verification? The defamation lawsuit would be a slam dunk if it was not true.

[BillStime]

 

2 minutes ago, T master said:

 

Well no because of your bias/hatered but it's just more fuel for you which you didn't need any more .

 

Yeah - Trump is a saint. 

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

So he just believes the tax return is real without any proof of authentication, and Maddow designs a whole show without any verification? The defamation lawsuit would be a slam dunk if it was not true.

Here’s an idea: spend a couple minutes looking up something for yourself instead of asking people to do it for you. 
 

Also: the idea that there is a potential defamation suit with this is ridiculous. 

[T master]

Just now, BillStime said:

 

 

Yeah - Trump is a saint. 

 

I NEVER said that & will never say that but you are just a flat out hater period !! There were some things that he did that wasn't as bad as you say but you WILL NOT HAVE IT AT ALL . That is just watered pure & simple .

 

I will & have always admitted when he's a ass but you on the other hand can't find 1 thing positive & yet you look at this POS that's in office now & blindly follow him no matter what & that is total 110 % Hypocrisy because it's in no way the same for both because of your bias/hatered for .

[Orlando Tim]

6 minutes ago, BillStime said:

What point was proved?

 

You just keep digging and making yourself look pathetic as usual.

 

As Chef Jim would say - carry on.

 

lolz

That leaks of Dems are investigated and the leaks that hurt Trump are not, what did you think you were responding to?

1 minute ago, ChiGoose said:

Here’s an idea: spend a couple minutes looking up something for yourself instead of asking people to do it for you. 
 

Also: the idea that there is a potential defamation suit with this is ridiculous. 

Printing false derogatory  information can cause you pay out money, that is simple. What information don't I know?

[ChiGoose]

9 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

Printing false derogatory  information can cause you pay out money, that is simple. What information don't I know?

You are upset that Trump’s actual tax documents were leaked but also that leaking the actual documents is defamatory because they are fake?

 

Or are you upset that there were fake documents that purported to be Trump’s tax returns but were defamatory because they were fake but also upset that there was no investigation into how someone obtained Trump’s actual tax documents (which were fake)?

[BillStime]

13 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

That leaks of Dems are investigated and the leaks that hurt Trump are not, what did you think you were responding to?

You don’t even realize that you keep digging yourself into a hole Buffalo Timmy.

 

Why didn’t the Republicans investigate this when they had control of the House AND Senate in 2017 and NOW?
 

Btw - can you imagine if Obama didn’t release his taxes? How would Buffalo Timmy respond? I bet you were irate when he wore a brown suit, too.
 

lmao

[Orlando Tim]

8 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

You are upset that Trump’s actual tax documents were leaked but also that leaking the actual documents is defamatory because they are fake?

 

Or are you upset that there were fake documents that purported to be Trump’s tax returns but were defamatory because they were fake but also upset that there was no investigation into how someone obtained Trump’s actual tax documents (which were fake)?

Your defense is that the journalist received the papers "innocently" which we know is false because a competent journalist would never run with something of that nature that is not confirmed. Once again a liberal says a clear lie about breaking the law but you agree to ignore it. 

[ChiGoose]

Just now, Orlando Tim said:

Your defense is that the journalist received the papers "innocently" which we know is false because a competent journalist would never run with something of that nature that is not confirmed. Once again a liberal says a clear lie about breaking the law but you agree to ignore it. 

I did like 5 minutes of Googling and I’m pretty sure not only that I know who leaked them but also that the person had obtained them legally. 
 

Which means that there would be no need for a criminal investigation. There may be a civil cause of action that Trump could pursue but doing so would confirm their authenticity.

 

So the most likely outcome is that there is no legal action taken from them being made public. 

[Orlando Tim]

Just now, ChiGoose said:

I did like 5 minutes of Googling and I’m pretty sure not only that I know who leaked them but also that the person had obtained them legally. 
 

Which means that there would be no need for a criminal investigation. There may be a civil cause of action that Trump could pursue but doing so would confirm their authenticity.

 

So the most likely outcome is that there is no legal action taken from them being made public. 

So you know who leaked it and they were not charged or investigated? FBI did a bang up job.

[ChiGoose]

2 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

So you know who leaked it and they were not charged or investigated? FBI did a bang up job.

I’ll repeat: the person who had them almost certainly obtained them legally. Therefore, there would be no crime for the FBI to investigate.

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

I’ll repeat: the person who had them almost certainly obtained them legally. Therefore, there would be no crime for the FBI to investigate.

If so, were they legally allowed to leak them?

[ChiGoose]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

If so, were they legally allowed to leak them?

If I hand you my tax records, there’s no crime I’m aware of that you violate from making them public. 
 

Depending on the circumstances, I may be able to sue you for breach of contract or something similar, but I don’t think you’d be risking criminal charges. 

[BillStime]

 

[Irv]

This verdict just won the 2024 election for Trump.  Absolute political mistake by Demented Biden and his buddies.  Thank you.  What a mess.  

[L Ron Burgundy]

8 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

Why are you libs ok with it. Biden is dirty and corrupt AF. Trump distain aside you can’t like this dirty corrupt bag of skin can you? 

No.  Don't like him at all.  But, unlike Trump, I don't believe he I'd crossed the line legally.  If he has throw the book at him I don't care.  

[Joe Ferguson forever]

7 hours ago, Orlando Tim said:

So he just believes the tax return is real without any proof of authentication, and Maddow designs a whole show without any verification? The defamation lawsuit would be a slam dunk if it was not true.

Gosh, you're slow.  And you actually teach people?  And someone asks what's wrong with education...Is slowness now a requirement to be an R?  Do you need to fail some kind of test?

Edited May 10, 2023 by redtail hawk

[Joe Ferguson forever]

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-gop-rival-asa-hutchinson-235500215.html

 

More R civil warring.  So much winning!

[L Ron Burgundy]

7 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

How the f was that pos president?  He doesn't even make sense.  Wow.  It'd be funny if it were happening to another country. 

[TH3]

1 minute ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

How the f was that pos president?  He doesn't even make sense.  Wow.  It'd be funny if it were happening to another country. 

How was he 45? 40 percent of America is angry and either brainwashed, racist, ignorant, or myopically rich.

[Irv]

Trump could never get a fair trial in NYC.  The charges were for rape.  Instead they convict for a lesser charge.  He either did it or didn’t. There’s no middle ground.  It’s like convicting a guy who’s charged with murder for assault. Nice try Demented Biden.  Just won the 2024 election for 45 soon to be 47.  What a mess.  

Edited May 10, 2023 by Irv

[ChiGoose]

5 minutes ago, Irv said:

Trump could never get a fair trial in NYC.  The charges were for rape.  Instead they convict for a lesser charge.  He either did it or didn’t. There’s no middle ground.  It’s like convicting a guy who’s charged with murder for assault. Nice try Demented Biden.  Just won the 2024 election for 45 soon to be 47.  What a mess.  

1. There is a middle ground between “didn’t do anything” and “rape”. It’s called sexual assault, which is the thing they found him guilty of. 
 

2. Thinking that someone cannot get a fair trial based on the trial location is brain worms thinking. 95%+ of Americans don’t spend their time thinking politics all day. 
 

3. Thinking the average voter will be more inclined to vote for Trump after he was found liable of sexual assault is also brain worms. Normie voters will likely be less inclined to support him.

 

4. Thinking Joe Biden was involved in this somehow is way behind brain worms. It’s brain dead. There’s no way any rational thinking person could possibly believe it. 
 

Go see a shrink.

 

What a mess.