How pathetic! A woman was sexually assaulted and some play politics with it.
The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
Just like judge Kavanaugh.......hmmm same play book different people.
danthewolf00
Veteran Expediter
The fact that they HAD to change the law in new York to charge trump should call into question as to why they charged trump.
And Carroll openly admitted on tv that she helped get that pesky law changed because it was keeping them from charging trump.
And Carroll openly admitted on tv that she helped get that pesky law changed because it was keeping them from charging trump.
Beware of Artificial Intelligence
With AI now a thing, it seems all voters will need to be careful this election year about their information sources.
With AI now a thing, it seems all voters will need to be careful this election year about their information sources.
The recent AI photos of Taylor Swift have also "exposed" the capabilities of AI that had previously gone unnoticed by many. The possibilities for the harm this technology could cause are infinite.
Trump Tax Return Leaker Gets 5 Years
I agree with this sentence. The leaker had his reasons for doing what he did, but it was illegal. While I share his opinion that all presidential candidates should release their tax returns, and I share his concern over the decline of the middle class and the growing concentration of wealth among a privileged few, and I share his concern that current tax law unfairly favors the rich, it was illegal to leak Trump's tax returns and the returns of other wealthy people. It was right for DOJ to prosecute this guy and right for the judge to give him the maximum sentence.
www.politico.com
I agree with this sentence. The leaker had his reasons for doing what he did, but it was illegal. While I share his opinion that all presidential candidates should release their tax returns, and I share his concern over the decline of the middle class and the growing concentration of wealth among a privileged few, and I share his concern that current tax law unfairly favors the rich, it was illegal to leak Trump's tax returns and the returns of other wealthy people. It was right for DOJ to prosecute this guy and right for the judge to give him the maximum sentence.
Trump tax return leaker sentenced to 5 years in prison
Judge Ana Reyes said: "It cannot be open season on our elected officials."
www.politico.com
Like Cockroaches Scattering When the Light Comes On
www.newsweek.com
Donald Trump's financial empire is undergoing a major restructure
An independent monitor spent eight months studying the restructuring but didn't get answers from the Trump Organization.
www.newsweek.com
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Judge Luttig lays it out:
Retired conservative judge: ‘Trump disqualified himself’ from ballot
Like most of the trouble The Orange Menace™ finds himself in, he has only himself to blame !
Retired conservative judge: ‘Trump disqualified himself’ from ballot
Like most of the trouble The Orange Menace™ finds himself in, he has only himself to blame !
Money Walls Closing In on Trump?
With a jury ordering Trump to pay E. Gene Carroll $83.3 million in damages (on top of the $5 million in damages a previous jury awarded), and Trump vowing to appeal, the rules require Trump to post that amount in cash or bond to cover the appeal. The money is held by the court to be paid to Carroll if she prevails over Trump in the appeal. Once the final judgement is written by the judge (a formality that will happen soon), Trump has 30 days to appeal. If he does not appeal, he becomes immediately obligated to pay Carroll the jury mandated damages.
Posting the cash is straightforward. Trump would deliver $83.3 million in good funds to the court. Trump did that very thing with the previous $5 million. With the $83.3 million, the court may give Trump the option (or require instead) that Trump post bond. To do that, Trump would have to find a bonding company that (1) can handle that large amount, and (2) be willing to take the credit risk Trump presents. In the end, posting bond brings significantly higher costs to Trump because of the fees the bonding company requires.
Of course, if the verdict is overturned on appeal, Trump's liability for damages would be reduced to zero. While an appeals court may tinker with the $83.3 million amount, a finding of zero damages, or even vastly reduced damages, is highly unlikely. Either way, Trump must still post $83.3 million in cash or bond if he wishes to appeal the most-recent jury finding.
The risk to the bonding company is an issue because, in another trial, this one for fraud, Judge Engoron is just days away from issuing his judgement. That one could top $300 million if the NY AG gets the damages she is asking for. I can't imagine any bonding company agreeing to cover Trump's $83.3 million obligation before the amount of the Engoron judgement is known.
These puzzle pieces will come together in the next few days. Judge Kaplan will issue his written judgement, which starts the 30 day appeal clock. Judge Engoron will issue his judgement and that amount will be known.
Then we get to see if Trump actually has the cash on hand he said under oath he has.
A possible additional source of funds for Trump is his political contributors. Some of them may be perfectly happy to send more of their money to a billionaire whose behavior (sexual assault, defamation, and fraud) resulted in these expenses. It is strange but true that a good number of MAGA people will send money to billionaire Trump to help him cover the costs of (and reward) his illegal and unethical behavior.
With a jury ordering Trump to pay E. Gene Carroll $83.3 million in damages (on top of the $5 million in damages a previous jury awarded), and Trump vowing to appeal, the rules require Trump to post that amount in cash or bond to cover the appeal. The money is held by the court to be paid to Carroll if she prevails over Trump in the appeal. Once the final judgement is written by the judge (a formality that will happen soon), Trump has 30 days to appeal. If he does not appeal, he becomes immediately obligated to pay Carroll the jury mandated damages.
Posting the cash is straightforward. Trump would deliver $83.3 million in good funds to the court. Trump did that very thing with the previous $5 million. With the $83.3 million, the court may give Trump the option (or require instead) that Trump post bond. To do that, Trump would have to find a bonding company that (1) can handle that large amount, and (2) be willing to take the credit risk Trump presents. In the end, posting bond brings significantly higher costs to Trump because of the fees the bonding company requires.
Of course, if the verdict is overturned on appeal, Trump's liability for damages would be reduced to zero. While an appeals court may tinker with the $83.3 million amount, a finding of zero damages, or even vastly reduced damages, is highly unlikely. Either way, Trump must still post $83.3 million in cash or bond if he wishes to appeal the most-recent jury finding.
The risk to the bonding company is an issue because, in another trial, this one for fraud, Judge Engoron is just days away from issuing his judgement. That one could top $300 million if the NY AG gets the damages she is asking for. I can't imagine any bonding company agreeing to cover Trump's $83.3 million obligation before the amount of the Engoron judgement is known.
These puzzle pieces will come together in the next few days. Judge Kaplan will issue his written judgement, which starts the 30 day appeal clock. Judge Engoron will issue his judgement and that amount will be known.
Then we get to see if Trump actually has the cash on hand he said under oath he has.
A possible additional source of funds for Trump is his political contributors. Some of them may be perfectly happy to send more of their money to a billionaire whose behavior (sexual assault, defamation, and fraud) resulted in these expenses. It is strange but true that a good number of MAGA people will send money to billionaire Trump to help him cover the costs of (and reward) his illegal and unethical behavior.
Last edited:
By now many of us have seen the video below of the alleged sexual assault victim celebrating her victory with her pals on MSNBC. Does this look like someone who was truly scarred for life by the traumatic experience she claimed to have happened in the mid-90s (she can't remember the exact year)?
The more one reads and reviews her testimony, the more unbelievable it becomes. Add to that her social media postings and other quotes like "rape is sexy", and her entire narrative about her alleged experience with Trump in a dressing room inside a large, busy department store is flimsy to say the least. Hopefully the appeals court will reverse this entire miscarriage of justice, and open the door for Trump to counter-sue Carroll for libel, slander and defamation plus compensation for attorneys fees for his defense against this "Get Trump" hoax.
The more one reads and reviews her testimony, the more unbelievable it becomes. Add to that her social media postings and other quotes like "rape is sexy", and her entire narrative about her alleged experience with Trump in a dressing room inside a large, busy department store is flimsy to say the least. Hopefully the appeals court will reverse this entire miscarriage of justice, and open the door for Trump to counter-sue Carroll for libel, slander and defamation plus compensation for attorneys fees for his defense against this "Get Trump" hoax.
I find her story kind of weak also, but could there be enough to overturn the 5 million dollar award on appeal? Maybe, but the second one was all him, he kept running his mouth about her, every time he said something there was more evidence against him.
Do you believe that he has the right to say whatever he wants?
People are free to see and interpret what they want. In a court of law, before a jury, with all evidence considered, and with Trump's attorney's having every opportunity to make their case, the jury found in Carroll's favor. Trump sexually assaulted Carroll. Trump repeatedly defamed Carroll. Trump must pay Carroll the damages the juries in two trials granted.
Trump seems to have learned his lesson. He has not mentioned Carroll since the second jury rendered its verdict.
You and the jury are free to believe whatever you want about Carroll. The difference is the jury was better positioned to know the facts and form an informed opinion, and what the jury says goes.
While I think it is unwise of Carroll to taunt Trump now that it will be very, very expensive to defame her again, I can understand the impulse. Trump savaged her with vitriol for years.
So what exactly did he say that was defamatory? Specific examples. Nobody seems to know exactly what he said.
Carroll will probably never see a dime of Trump's money; he'll appeal these ridiculous verdicts all the way to SCOTUS. This process will take years.
Were they really? They weren't allowed to see a lot of Trump's defense exhibits, and the "evidence" against him was based on hearsay. The judge disallowed the defense to show the jury Carroll's social media posts that would certainly have cast doubt on her character and credibility. Below is a link to just a few.
Specifically what savage vitriol? Does this include his denials that the incident ever happened? We've all heard the vague statements that he called her a liar - which could have been true - and a "whack job". Somewhere there must be a complete summary of his "vitriol" that was worth $83M.
No, but in this case we're dealing with what he actually said. But Trump does have a tendency to run his mouth at the wrong time and place.
Last edited:
From the evidence and testimony presented, I presume the jury came to know. The fact that you don't know does not mean the jury didn't. The fact that I'm not going to spend my time digging up old Trump quotes does not negate what the jury had available to them. The information you seek is in the court transcripts. If you really want to know, look at those.
As I understand it, it will take about a year for the appeal to complete. And SCOTUS is highly unlikely to hear the case. If Carroll or Trump or both die before the money is distributed, the award and liability will be managed by their estates.
If so, the case will be overturned on appeal. It's not just that Trump could not introduce what he wanted to introduce into the case. The judge allowed certain things in and kept certain things out based on the rules of evidence and procedure. If the judge made reversible error in those rulings, the appeals court will reverse his rulings. But there is no overwhelming commentary by the talk-show legal experts suggesting that the judge made reversible errors.
Trump re-offended and he demonstrated contempt for the jury. It's really stupid -- like monumentally stupid -- to show contempt for the people who are moments away from meeting to decide the amount of damages you must pay. In doing so Trump proved in person and in real time the case Carroll made against him.
This stuff is not difficult to understand if you accept that Trump actually sexually assaulted Carroll and defamed her; and if you accept that no man is above the law. Yes, I hear your complaints about the law not applying equally to Democrats. That's not a good thing. If no man is above the law, no Democrat is either. For the law to be credible and accepted by all, it must be applied equally to all.
Last edited:
To the Maga minions it is difficult to understand how their hero can be accused of this, for he can do no wrong.
Trump Seeks New Lawyers for Carroll Case Appeal
This is actually a good thing for Trump to do. The TV lawyers I listen to say this is a good practice. When you appeal a ruling, you want different lawyers to represent you than those who represented you in the lower court. The new lawyers will put fresh eyes on the case and avoid the bias and errors (if any) the losing lawyers manifested when arguing he case in the lower court.
thehill.com
This is actually a good thing for Trump to do. The TV lawyers I listen to say this is a good practice. When you appeal a ruling, you want different lawyers to represent you than those who represented you in the lower court. The new lawyers will put fresh eyes on the case and avoid the bias and errors (if any) the losing lawyers manifested when arguing he case in the lower court.
Trump says he’s interviewing new lawyers for Carroll case appeal, attacks judge
Former President Trump suggested late Tuesday night he may be shopping for new lawyers to represent him in an imminent appeal of the damages verdict in the case brought against him by writer E. Jea…
thehill.com
If there were any noteworthy examples of Trump vitriol, neither one of us would have to do deep dives into court transcripts of the internet; the media would've done that for us and shouted it to the rooftops.
True, but there's no penalty for contempt of jury. It's irrelevant, other than that it may play into the hands of Trump's appeal proving bias and personal animus. This jury came from a district in Manhattan that votes 85% Democrat. They were against him before they even walked into the courtroom. Also, a display of animus for the judge and jury has nothing to do with the Carroll charges.
That sums up the whole issue. But why should we accept the allegation that he sexually assaulted her when there's no proof; not a shred of evidence was offered in court, just her vague and unbelievable hearsay. Anyone who's ever been in a large, busy department store would find her tale incredible. We're supposed to believe no one heard her resist - scream, fight, kick, claw, etc? Or did she do any of that? She apparently couldn't offer proof that they were in the building at the same time because she couldn't remember what year it happened. There was no surveillance footage, nothing. So if it didn't happen, there would be no defamation if Trump was doing nothing more than denying the false allegations against him.
Bottom line: we don't know for sure that he did it, we don't know what he said that was $83M bad, but the jury punished him anyway because they didn't like him. This will surely be reversed; juries can't create their own reality.
Those social media postings by Carroll weren’t allowed at trial by the Clinton appointed judge, yet he allowed “locker room” talk from the Access Hollywood tape admitted to the jury.
Last edited: