Me, I never beat my wife, but following Trumps lead, I just grab her.....................................................................And when did you stop beating your wife?
Me, I never beat my wife, but following Trumps lead, I just grab her.....................................................................And when did you stop beating your wife?
I have a problem with this! Firstly, that was not the jury's finding. The jury's finding is that in the balance of probabilities, they think there is a greater than 50% chance bad orange man abused her. Call me pedantic but that is the reality.Yes, it does. In order to defame it must be a non-truthful statement. The Jury found that he did indeed sexually abuse her, therefore her statement is true and not defamatory.
Then by your logic any female that is molested has zero recourse unless there is video or witnesses. She should just be silent, is that correct? Or does your logic only applly to Trump, who has bragged about what he can do because of his celebrity. I didn't take it as locker room talk, because I have spent a lot of times in locker rooms as an athlete and never heard anyone brag about molesting women against their will.Except that Trump cannot charge her with defamation because he is a public figure. She gets to accuse him of sexual assault with no facts. He is prevented from defending himself and when he does, she accuses him of defamation. She accused him of a heinous crime and those with TDS of course believe her despite the flaws in her memory and complete inability to provide any concrete facts which Trump might have been able to use to exonerate himself. So now, in "their" democracy, the defendant, if they don't like him, doesn't get to provide any defense because it might offend the person who accused him??????????? It is really good for you that there wasn't a person (man or woman) living in the state of NY who hated you enough to charge you with a sex crime last year because you would not have been able to defend yourself either and it would have cost you a ton of money to just go to trial and we would all be oooing and ahhing over what an awful person you are. No facts required, simply "j'accuse" And, if you dare to even try to defend yourself publically, you get charged with the crime of defaming the person who accused you. WHAT COUNTRY ARE WE LIVING in people?
The "law" that was used to enable this woman to accuse Trump of sexual assault and get her case heard was specifically passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor in 2022 so that it could be used to allow this woman to accuse Trump of doing something completely outrageous and unbelievable. It seems to have come from a Law & Order episode rather than from reality.
SHE DEFAMED HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why do you not understand that? Her accusation was political and a fabrication and done with malice aforethought. She is even being funded in this endeavor by a Trump hater with the specific intention of keeping him off the ballot in 2024.
Trump never said he did it against their will. He said they let him, which is the opposite of against their will.Then by your logic any female that is molested has zero recourse unless there is video or witnesses. She should just be silent, is that correct? Or does your logic only applly to Trump, who has bragged about what he can do because of his celebrity. I didn't take it as locker room talk, because I have spent a lot of times in locker rooms as an athlete and never heard anyone brag about molesting women against their will.
My thoughts entirely Pat. You summarised it well. Sadly, these witch hunts seem to be in the fabric of human DNA and repeat themselves as history has shown.Except that Trump cannot charge her with defamation because he is a public figure. She gets to accuse him of sexual assault with no facts. He is prevented from defending himself and when he does, she accuses him of defamation. She accused him of a heinous crime and those with TDS of course believe her despite the flaws in her memory and complete inability to provide any concrete facts which Trump might have been able to use to exonerate himself. So now, in "their" democracy, the defendant, if they don't like him, doesn't get to provide any defense because it might offend the person who accused him??????????? It is really good for you that there wasn't a person (man or woman) living in the state of NY who hated you enough to charge you with a sex crime last year because you would not have been able to defend yourself either and it would have cost you a ton of money to just go to trial and we would all be oooing and ahhing over what an awful person you are. No facts required, simply "j'accuse" And, if you dare to even try to defend yourself publically, you get charged with the crime of defaming the person who accused you. WHAT COUNTRY ARE WE LIVING in people?
The "law" that was used to enable this woman to accuse Trump of sexual assault and get her case heard was specifically passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor in 2022 so that it could be used to allow this woman to accuse Trump of doing something completely outrageous and unbelievable. It seems to have come from a Law & Order episode rather than from reality.
SHE DEFAMED HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why do you not understand that? Her accusation was political and a fabrication and done with malice aforethought. She is even being funded in this endeavor by a Trump hater with the specific intention of keeping him off the ballot in 2024.
This explains it a little https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...donald-trump-ra**-e-jean-carroll/72295009007/I have a problem with this! Firstly, that was not the jury's finding. The jury's finding is that in the balance of probabilities, they think there is a greater than 50% chance bad orange man abused her. Call me pedantic but that is the reality.
In some states digital or oral penetration is included in the definition of ra**.Carroll testified that she struggled to get Trump off her as he shoved his mouth on hers, yanked her tights down, and penetrated her with his hand and then his penis. She described him curving his finger inside her, saying it was "extremely painful" and "a horrible feeling."
Under New York criminal law, an assault only constitutes "ra**" if it involves vaginal penetration by a penis. That was the definition the jury was instructed to use in the civil case.
By responding "no" to the question of whether Carroll proved Trump raped her, the jurors indicated they weren't convinced Trump penetrated Carroll with his penis, according to Kaplan, who first wrote about the issue in July, when he denied Trump a new trial in the sexual abuse case.
Her lawyers were trying to convince the jury that Trump raped her in the "traditional" manner. Since the jury did not believe her, they are essentially saying that on the balance of evidence, she is probably lying.This explains it a little https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...donald-trump-ra**-e-jean-carroll/72295009007/
In some states digital or oral penetration is included in the definition of ra**.
She was unsure if he actually penetrated her with his penis but that he did try. Juries believe complainants all the time but can't convict because ALL the elements of that crime can not be proven, but they can convict on lesser included crimes. They awarded her $2 million for the abuse so obviously they believed her.Since the jury did not believe her, they are essentially saying that on the balance of evidence, she is probably lying.
14. The lawsuit was only able to proceed after Democrats created the Adult Survivors Act in 2022. She conveniently pursued this suit in November following the law going into effect, which allowed her to avoid the statute of limitations for this case.
One person on Breitart made the comment below:6. She never came forward with these allegations over the years despite constantly being open about sexuality, posting things that were very sexual in nature on social media — many of which Trump has shared. They include remarks such as “How do you know your ‘unwanted sexual advance’ is unwanted, until you advance it?” and “Sex Tip I Learned From My Dog: When in heat, chase the male until he collapses with exhaustion … then jump him!”
No complaint to Bergdorf, no complaint to police,
no complaint to a friend or family member of what had
to be a pretty amazing thing as being raped by Donald Trump.
Not even a diary entry about it. How in the world did this
stroll through the courts?
From the link you gave it says she did say he raped her, unless the article is inaccurate:She was unsure if he actually penetrated her with his penis but that he did try. Juries believe complainants all the time but can't convict because ALL the elements of that crime can not be proven, but they can convict on lesser included crimes. They awarded her $2 million for the abuse so obviously they believed her.
Carroll testified that she struggled to get Trump off her as he shoved his mouth on hers, yanked her tights down, and penetrated her with his hand and then his penis.
Given the way the uber rich are "handled", I find the fact that she was alone with Trump in the lingerie department unbelievable for starters. So, that kills the rest of the storyline. I have been in Bergoff's and other high-end outlets. It wouldn't happen with an ordinary man. Women who shop in that kind of store would NOT be happy if men were wandering around alone in the lingerie department. It would never happen with a famous man because he would always immediately attract a personal shopper and a non-famous man would attract a tail to ensure that he didn't bother the female shoppers. If you believe this women with no facts, why do you not believe the woman who worked for Biden. I find her account far more credible and she recounted it to people at the time. It even got airplay on TV if I recall. Instead she was made out to be the "bad guy". I guess she should have sued for defamation. Oh, right. You can't sue a Biden or a Clinton. Hillary just ruined the women who accused her womanizing husband. No need for lawsuits. Although, Clinton did lose the one that was brought.She was unsure if he actually penetrated her with his penis but that he did try. Juries believe complainants all the time but can't convict because ALL the elements of that crime can not be proven, but they can convict on lesser included crimes. They awarded her $2 million for the abuse so obviously they believed her.
Yup, little people. https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race/donald-trump/contributors?id=N00023864jpl458 said:
Defaminng is expensive. Remember, it was jury, not Joe Biden. ButwhataboutHuntereslaptop? In days, what's the over and under , in days, before he asks you to send him money.
Read your point. WHO donates to Trump - the little people with little amounts. WHO donates to Biden and Haley and DeSantis - rich people who expect favors. That alone should explain to you why the "system" hates Trump so much. They don't own him. They cannot control him. He is an existential threat to "their" democracy.
Contributor Total Las Vegas Sands $45,010,542 Adelson Clinic for Drug Abuse Treatment & Research $45,005,600 America First $37,416,082 Walt Disney Co $10,589,052 Laura & Isaac Perlmutter Foundation $10,500,000 Energy Transfer LP $10,033,580 Marcus Foundation $10,000,000 Eshelman Ventures LLC $7,000,000 GH Palmer Assoc $6,005,600 Hendricks Holding Co $5,007,548 Uline Inc $4,093,701 Pulse Biosciences $4,005,600 Stephens Inc $3,520,490 Blackstone Group $3,034,030 Mountaire Corp $1,500,100 Irving Moskowitz Foundation $1,300,000 Beal Bank (Employees) $1,109,555 Cerberus Capital Management $1,087,624 RDV Corp $1,034,369 Intercontinental Exchange Inc $1,018,537
Indeed, Reade has questioned why there has never been an investigation into her claims against Biden and called for him to drop out of the presidential race in 2020.
And your looking at the wrong cycle. There are no totals for 2024 cycle as it's still ongoing.So, I say - BOGUS and misleading crap designed to impress the low-information reader.
And when did you stop beating your wife?
Considering she's been dead for 14 years and in a nursing home for years before that I'd say never. But thanks for asking.And when did you stop beating your wife?