David USF: He doesn't. He has a milliom. Learn to read.
has all of the jew bashing tilted you over the edge?
Printable View
David USF: He doesn't. He has a milliom. Learn to read.
has all of the jew bashing tilted you over the edge?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ll-judge-rape/Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyde
Lol @ hut posting a link to the Washington Post
you can't make this shit up
severe TDS on full display folks
If trump continues to defame this victim can the $88M judgement be increased by the next court/judge/jury to hear the appeal? If no, then what are Ms. Carroll's options to stop the defaming?
Odds that trump can control his "mouth" in the months before the appeal. You tell me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqo5RYOp4nQ
LOL Team Retard
Need to take a closer look at this case, because I haven't been following it. She must not have been deemed a Public Figure, because then the Falwell case would have precluded her claims for defamation if she was deemed a Public Figure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Of course your brainwashed mind wouldn’t actually read the article. You just simply echo what your cult leader says and call it fake news. You actually have the balls to accuse anyone of TDS when you just accept whatever Trump says like he is God. Talk about a sheep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyde
There are one of two things going on here with anyone that believes the allegations in this case and/or are in support of Trump being forced to pay out nearly 90 million.
Either they are so dumb and brainwashed they genuinely believe this bullshit or they are knowingly going along with lies and corruption to fit their agenda.
Either way, despite how much better these people think they are than Trump supporters, this makes them really no different than the worst Trump zealot in the grand scheme of things.
Horseshoe theory at its finest.
Both the charges will never stick, her details are just too sketchy and vague from 1996, and despite what PFA's odd-job failed lawyer Jayjami says, the plaintiff's case will die on appeal. Trump might pay some nuisance cash just to make it go away, but it will be years from now well after he leaves his second term, like 2031. Given her age and the fact she had no kids or husband, her lawyers will just collect it. I guess that was the point of them recruiting her in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by VaughnP
If I am her legal team, I am jumping ship and trying to find clients against Vince McMahon the last 5 years or so, you know they are there.
Yeah I don't get this at all. Common sense would make one believe this is all either completely fabricated or greatly exaggerated. As you said, the Les Moonves allegation makes this especially unlikely. How was a woman in her 50s such a magnet to sexual assault and rape from two different (and unassociated) rich, prominent men?Quote:
Originally Posted by VaughnP
The whole thing looks much more likely to be fiction and/or wild exaggeration.
And I still don't get why Trump had no right to call this a "hoax" or comment on this situation publicly. Not only should this be covered by litigation privilege, but as Cerveza Fria pointed out, Carroll also could have been considered a public figure, given her release of a book making these explosive allegations!
So you can release a book accusing Trump of rape, and he's not allowed to call it a hoax, or make negative comments about you in relation to the allegations?
Bizarre decision, and obviously a result of intense political bias.
Sad!
From Wikipedia:
This is not related to anything involving her allegations against Trump, but that website idea was hilariously bad, even in 2002. I'm shocked that a company actually bought it two years later. (It currently forwards to a dead page on theblush.com.)Quote:
In 2002, Carroll co-founded greatboyfriends.com with her sister, Cande Carroll. On the site, women recommended their ex-boyfriends to each other. GreatBoyfriends was acquired by The Knot Inc in 2004.
Why would women recommend their ex-boyfriend to other women? Their ex is an ex for a reason, right? I suppose if the breakup was strictly the woman's fault and she knows it, then maybe such a recommendation would make sense. But wouldn't such a woman typically want to wait for a possible second chance with such a guy?
Seems like the "recommendation" would come from women who friendzoned nice-but-uninteresting guys they once dated, in order to alleviate some guilt for dumping them. Stupid. And to be clear, I think a converse site (one where men recommend their ex-girlfriends to other men) would be just as dumb.
I'd understand a stupid company acquiring a shit site like this in 1999 or 2000, but 2004 was only 3 years removed from the dot-com bust, so this is so bizarre. Maybe E. Jean used some kind of influence she had as a columnist to get this done. Strange.
couldn't be allowed in his defense ?????
https://x.com/simonateba/status/1750...EENLDqSWyJ3hng
Big time layoffs at WAPO. People tired of reading their lying bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by hutmasterhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ll-judge-rape/Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyde
Getting a contact high off of all this Team Retard copium.
One of Trump’s biggest problems is he can’t get good attorneys to represent him. Not because he’s a fascist moron and the definition of a “problem client” (even I would have zero problem with that), but because he is known to stiff people. Any decent attorney would want a replenishing retainer of about 2 million. So he ends up with shit counsel trying to get “make a name for themselves”.Quote:
Originally Posted by cleatus
let's compare this case with the Johnny Depp case... and i think we should, very comparable cases... why was Depp allowed to bring evidence to show what a whack job Amber Heard was?? well because that is part of the process and a normal and legal defense tactic to discredit an accuser and weed out possible false allegations. Trump was never afforded any of this and was basically told to shut up and take it on the chin... i am pretty sure without looking that the Depp and Trump case were in 2 different court districts but the laws should be not that far off as to what a defense can bring as evidence or try to discredit what the plaintiff brings as evidence. it's a total 180 of what Depp and his defense was able to do compared to Trump's case....
and we all know now what kind of ties the Trump judge had with the plaintiff and who financed the plaintiff's case (Caroll) .... total hit job from start to finish... any lawyers that come here and try to defend what just happened to Trump should be disbarred right in line with this judge and the prosecutor attorneys who represented Caroll... end of story... GET OVER YOUR TDS !!!...
YAWNQuote:
Originally Posted by Tellafriend
Nope. But your lack of a sense of humor seems to have tilted you.
:lol