Jury finds Trump liable for sexual abuse of E. Jean Carroll

[GoAU 1,600]

Understand, but I’m still sure it has to be something more than her just saying something happened 30 years ago.  

[JMWATS 104]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Nope.  We need him to get the Republican nomination.

I know that is the game being played.  

[Mikey 16,714]

On 5/10/2023 at 12:49 PM, TitanTiger said:

I would say that at least 80% of the people I know who voted for Trump in 2016 and 2020 tell me some version of "I didn't support him in the primary, but once it was him against Hillary or Biden in the general election, I had no choice but to vote for him/he was the lesser of two evils/it was a vote against the Dems not a vote FOR Trump."

If that's true, why is he leading all the polls for the GOP nomination for 2024?  Will you actually act in ways that make that previous statement about the reasons for supporting him true by nominating someone other than Trump this time?  Because the only explanation for that many people saying they wouldn't or didn't support him in the primary but him still winning is that a lot of folks are lying.

I won't support Trump in the primary this time. I will, however, enthusiastically vote for him against Joe & the Giggling Hyena if Trump should win the nomination. I might even buy a Mega-Maga cap if one is produced. It's not an unusual position to take.

About that 80% in prior primaries, I have no idea if that's accurate or not. I don't recall who I wanted to win the primary back then. This time, as of today, I'd prefer DeSantis or Nikki Haley. That could change with time.

As to why Trump leads in the current polls, there are a lot of people who feel that a Trump election will tell the radical left to "stick it where the sun don't shine". That idea does have some merit.

If elected, Trump will: Close the border. Free up American energy production. Kill the liberal's over regulation that prevails in so many areas of business and industry. Restore fear/respect in foreign governments, both friends and foes.

Worse things could happen. We could elect another Democrat and continue America's march to becoming California internally and irrelevant internationally.

[homersapien 11,428]

18 hours ago, JMWATS said:

I know that is the game being played.  

Well, I don't know about a "game being played", I see it as simply taking advantage of the mistakes being made by one's political opponent.

That's more like common sense than a "game".

(And it's not like Trump needs help from Democrats to secure the nomination.)

[JMWATS 104]

Game as in scheme. 

 

[homersapien 11,428]

20 hours ago, GoAU said:

So, I assume no one else saw the evidence of this 30 year old sexual assault either?   I’m kind of curious as to how the decision was arrived at.  

I'm pretty sure the trial transcript is publicly available.

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,428]

7 minutes ago, JMWATS said:

Game as in scheme. 

 

Hell yeah.  No doubt "I'm not Trump" will be a core message in Biden's campaign.

"Don't compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternative."

But again, it's not like Trump needs any help in getting nominated. That's on Republicans.

[JMWATS 104]

Biden will need to keep from “popping a circuit breaker” on stage somewhere and asking somebody who the president is between now and election day.     But then again Democrats seem content with electing candidates that don’t have all their mental faculties.

[Mikey 16,714]

On 5/13/2023 at 6:50 PM, GoAU said:

Understand, but I’m still sure it has to be something more than her just saying something happened 30 years ago.  

No it doesn't have to be anything more. It was a New York jury. The only interest most of them had was to "get Trump". Pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal.

[homersapien 11,428]

13 hours ago, Mikey said:

No it doesn't have to be anything more. It was a New York jury. The only interest most of them had was to "get Trump". Pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal.

Yep, his home town.  

[Didba 5,256]

On 5/14/2023 at 5:09 PM, JMWATS said:

Biden will need to keep from “popping a circuit breaker” on stage somewhere and asking somebody who the president is between now and election day.     But then again Democrats seem content with electing candidates that don’t have all their mental faculties.

First, Reagan. Second, tons of Dems are tired of all the old politicians on both sides. I am all for restricted the age of politicians to 55 or something similar.  Also, lower the age a person can be president by 5 years.

[Didba 5,256]

21 hours ago, Mikey said:

No it doesn't have to be anything more. It was a New York jury. The only interest most of them had was to "get Trump". Pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal.

Can you explain your legal rational that causes you to be "Pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal", please?  Reversible error is a pretty high standard to reach.

[GoAU 1,600]

33 minutes ago, Didba said:

Can you explain your legal rational that causes you to be "Pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal", please?  Reversible error is a pretty high standard to reach.

I wish I would say it is likely he’d win on appeal, but it’s tough to find anything at all about the facts / evidence of the case.  I just think it’s garbage that a claim like this can be made decades after the alleged event.   
 

I am all about supporting women, and have ZERO tolerance for any sort of abuse of women, but waiting this long to pursue a civil suit sure smells of ulterior motives.   

[Mikey 16,714]

2 hours ago, Didba said:

Can you explain your legal rational that causes you to be "Pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal", please?  Reversible error is a pretty high standard to reach.

My rationale is that this was nothing but a kangaroo court. Trivial BS brought in one of the few venues in the country where such a biased jury could be seated.

[Didba 5,256]

12 hours ago, Mikey said:

My rationale is that this was nothing but a kangaroo court. Trivial BS brought in one of the few venues in the country where such a biased jury could be seated.

non-responsive to the question asked.

So your answer is “no, I cannot explain my legal rationale/basis that causes me to be pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal.”

Kangaroo court is not a legal rationale, Mikey. 

Edited May 16, 2023 by Didba

[aubiefifty 16,890]

15 hours ago, GoAU said:

I wish I would say it is likely he’d win on appeal, but it’s tough to find anything at all about the facts / evidence of the case.  I just think it’s garbage that a claim like this can be made decades after the alleged event.   
 

I am all about supporting women, and have ZERO tolerance for any sort of abuse of women, but waiting this long to pursue a civil suit sure smells of ulterior motives.   

look it happened to my sister. she got it repeatedly and was so ashamed and afraid she did not tell anyone until she hit her fifties. and let me tell you it ruined her life. she still would not go into details with my mom about what all exactly he did to her.she turned to drugs, alcohol, and i always suspected prostitution as well. i was at home when it happened and i never knew. ever. but i was kept locked up. my point is people are different. quit thinking with that military mind and realize a lot of folks are not john wayne who can handle that kind of stuff.she started wearing tons of makeup to grammar school. she would put it on after we left the house. and let me tell you something. i pay for that every single day and it will never go away.

[GoAU 1,600]

I understand that it is absolutely tragic, and devastating for the victim.  I also agree that “Isis style” justice should be applied to those who inflict this type of hell on people.  
 

The “mental scars” are the worst type - whether it be like the hell your sister went through, or the suicides of friends I’ve seen in the military.  Even those who have a hard shell can be hurting beyond belief inside - I get it.  
 

But I also have to be somewhat pragmatic about claims that arise decades after the fact, that net the victims millions of dollars and also do double duty as an attempted political assassination.  Something very similar happened to Cavanaugh in his confirmation hearings.   
 

This is precisely why I initially asked about the evidence that was presented in the trial - as I haven’t been able to find anything about that.  

[Mikey 16,714]

4 hours ago, Didba said:

non-responsive to the question asked.

So your answer is “no, I cannot explain my legal rationale/basis that causes me to be pretty sure Trump will prevail on appeal.”

Kangaroo court is not a legal rationale, Mikey. 

I'll leave any official legal rationale to the shysters. Common sense says that a 30 year old complaint against a rich person who has announced for political office should be laughed out of court, town and country. As mentioned above, this same ploy was attempted against Kavanaugh. The Democrats should try something new.

[homersapien 11,428]

17 hours ago, Mikey said:

I'll leave any official legal rationale to the shysters. Common sense says that a 30 year old complaint against a rich person who has announced for political office should be laughed out of court, town and country. As mentioned above, this same ploy was attempted against Kavanaugh. The Democrats should try something new.

You apparently don't appreciate the rule of law.

That's exactly what would happen in a totalitarian government like Russia.

Edited May 17, 2023 by homersapien

[Didba 5,256]

On 5/16/2023 at 4:11 PM, Mikey said:

I'll leave any official legal rationale to the shysters. Common sense says that a 30 year old complaint against a rich person who has announced for political office should be laughed out of court, town and country. As mentioned above, this same ploy was attempted against Kavanaugh. The Democrats should try something new.

Just an fyi, a NY law temporarily eliminated statute of limitations for sexual abuse in civil cases for one year ending November 1, 2023. 
 

honestly, it’s pretty weird, and I’ve never seen a law like it.
 

Normally, statutes of limitations for sexual abuse are around 5 years in red states and 10-15 in blue states unless it involves a child then they are much longer. 
 

@GoAU this explains why this was possible. It normally isn’t. 

Edited May 17, 2023 by Didba

[Didba 5,256]

On 5/16/2023 at 1:10 PM, GoAU said:

I understand that it is absolutely tragic, and devastating for the victim.  I also agree that “Isis style” justice should be applied to those who inflict this type of hell on people.  
 

The “mental scars” are the worst type - whether it be like the hell your sister went through, or the suicides of friends I’ve seen in the military.  Even those who have a hard shell can be hurting beyond belief inside - I get it.  
 

But I also have to be somewhat pragmatic about claims that arise decades after the fact, that net the victims millions of dollars and also do double duty as an attempted political assassination.  Something very similar happened to Cavanaugh in his confirmation hearings.   
 

This is precisely why I initially asked about the evidence that was presented in the trial - as I haven’t been able to find anything about that.  

I think the evidence that damned trump was his own deposition testimony mistaking the plaintiff for his ex-wife when his major defense was “I’d never sleep with this woman, she isn’t my type.”

like I’m not joke he literally doubled down think the picture of the plaintiff was his ex-wife. 

Edited May 18, 2023 by Didba
wife to type

[cbo 7,915]

34 minutes ago, Didba said:

I think the evidence that damned trump was his own deposition testimony mistaking the plaintiff for his ex-wife when his major defense was “I’d never sleep with this woman, she isn’t my wife.”

like I’m not joke he literally doubled down think the picture of the plaintiff was his ex-wife. 

In fairness to Trump, when you've xxxx'ed over as many people as he has, it's easy to get confused.