Judge Lewis Kaplan rules that a Jury found that Trump RAPED E. Jean Carroll as the word 'RAPE' is commonly used

[Anonymous]

New yorkers are not stupid enough to be conned by trump. Good for them.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The man who played a key role in the the E Jean Carroll lawsuit is so moved by his handiwork that he wants you to see the CNN appearance in which he discusses how moved he is by his handiwork.

Another view: This is a case that should never have been brought. The original incident occurred in 1995 or 1996; Carroll has said she does not remember precisely. She told two friends what she said happened, but never said another word to anyone, including authorities. Five years passed, then 10, then 15, then 20. Even in 2016, when a number of women accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, Carroll stayed silent, in part because she worried that accusing Trump might help him politically, and she most certainly did not want to do that. She only spoke up in 2019, during promotion for a new book in which she revealed the alleged incident. She got lots of media, including a splashy rollout in New York magazine. (She also conducted paid 'Hideous Men' walking tours of New York, including a stop at Bergdorf Goodman, where she said the attack occurred.) She originally had no thought of suing Trump. Then she went to a Resistance cocktail party in Manhattan in honor of Kathy Griffin, the comedian famous for holding up a bloody effigy of Donald Trump's severed head. There she met the anti-Trump lawyer George Conway, who convinced her she had a good case and suggested a lawyer. She hired the lawyer. Plus: New York passed a one-year-only #MeToo law lifting the statute of limitations to allow people who said they were victimized long ago to sue. So all those years in which Carroll never said a word no longer mattered; Carroll sued minutes after the new law took effect. And to top it off, the Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman paid for the whole operation! This case was political from the start. There is no way to know what did or did not happen in 1995 or 1996. It should never have been brought.

And now, with an $83.3 million damage award based on an accusation that can never be proved or disproved, the lawyer behind the lawsuit pronounces on CNN: 'It brings to mind the old saying, the saying attributed to Dr. Martin Luther King -- the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice.'

How does Byron not understand that this was proved, by the determination of a jury in federal court? How much more “proved” can something be?

Please. And, OJ Simpson "proved" that he was not guilty of savagely murdering 2 people.

You may want to take a refresher on the US justice system. Simpson didn't have to prove anything. He was presumed innocent. The prosecutors failed to make the case.

Trump had the same presumption but a jury was convinced of his guilt.

[Anonymous]

It's a win for her and for all the victims of sexual assault out here to see justice served for once. And it a win for all the dads and moms and brother and sisters and uncles and aunts and friends, etc. of the millions of assault victims. Most of these women (and men) never see any justice for their suffering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a win for her and for all the victims of sexual assault out here to see justice served for once. And it a win for all the dads and moms and brother and sisters and uncles and aunts and friends, etc. of the millions of assault victims. Most of these women (and men) never see any justice for their suffering.

+1

[Anonymous]

Trump has zero judgment. He us such fool. He disrespected the judge, jury and defendant.

Of course it was an easy call for the jury. He showed extreme hubris. Judges and juries don't like that.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The man who played a key role in the the E Jean Carroll lawsuit is so moved by his handiwork that he wants you to see the CNN appearance in which he discusses how moved he is by his handiwork.

Another view: This is a case that should never have been brought. The original incident occurred in 1995 or 1996; Carroll has said she does not remember precisely. She told two friends what she said happened, but never said another word to anyone, including authorities. Five years passed, then 10, then 15, then 20. Even in 2016, when a number of women accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, Carroll stayed silent, in part because she worried that accusing Trump might help him politically, and she most certainly did not want to do that. She only spoke up in 2019, during promotion for a new book in which she revealed the alleged incident. She got lots of media, including a splashy rollout in New York magazine. (She also conducted paid 'Hideous Men' walking tours of New York, including a stop at Bergdorf Goodman, where she said the attack occurred.) She originally had no thought of suing Trump. Then she went to a Resistance cocktail party in Manhattan in honor of Kathy Griffin, the comedian famous for holding up a bloody effigy of Donald Trump's severed head. There she met the anti-Trump lawyer George Conway, who convinced her she had a good case and suggested a lawyer. She hired the lawyer. Plus: New York passed a one-year-only #MeToo law lifting the statute of limitations to allow people who said they were victimized long ago to sue. So all those years in which Carroll never said a word no longer mattered; Carroll sued minutes after the new law took effect. And to top it off, the Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman paid for the whole operation! This case was political from the start. There is no way to know what did or did not happen in 1995 or 1996. It should never have been brought.

And now, with an $83.3 million damage award based on an accusation that can never be proved or disproved, the lawyer behind the lawsuit pronounces on CNN: 'It brings to mind the old saying, the saying attributed to Dr. Martin Luther King -- the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice.'

How does Byron not understand that this was proved, by the determination of a jury in federal court? How much more “proved” can something be?

Please. And, OJ Simpson "proved" that he was not guilty of savagely murdering 2 people.

You may want to take a refresher on the US justice system. Simpson didn't have to prove anything. He was presumed innocent. The prosecutors failed to make the case.

Trump had the same presumption but a jury was convinced of his guilt.

And Simpson subsequently lost in his civil case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are going to have a proven rapist in the White House. I’d rather have a confused 81 yo.

He was never proven to have raped

Even if you believe he never raped or sexually assaulted EJC, how do you feel about him continuing to badmouth her and the judge presiding over the defamation case (which is separate than the sexual assault case) on X and on TV? Does it make sense to you that someone charged with defamation would continue to defame the plaintiff during the defamation case? Does that signal psychological stability to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a win for her and for all the victims of sexual assault out here to see justice served for once. And it a win for all the dads and moms and brother and sisters and uncles and aunts and friends, etc. of the millions of assault victims. Most of these women (and men) never see any justice for their suffering.

The long and short of it is that this is Trump's FAFO moment culminating from his decades of "grab 'em by the pussy."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump has zero judgment. He us such fool. He disrespected the judge, jury and defendant.

Of course it was an easy call for the jury. He showed extreme hubris. Judges and juries don't like that.

He and his attorneys are allowed too many warnings. We hear it every time he is in court.
“Control your client”. “You won’t be allowed to talk about X, Y and Z” (spends 5 minutes talking about X, Y and Z”). Warning, warning, warning in the courtroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are going to have a proven rapist in the White House. I’d rather have a confused 81 yo.

He was never proven to have raped

“He only used his fingers not his dick” is a great clarification. Go with that in the campaign materials. Republicans are disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The man who played a key role in the the E Jean Carroll lawsuit is so moved by his handiwork that he wants you to see the CNN appearance in which he discusses how moved he is by his handiwork.

Another view: This is a case that should never have been brought. The original incident occurred in 1995 or 1996; Carroll has said she does not remember precisely. She told two friends what she said happened, but never said another word to anyone, including authorities. Five years passed, then 10, then 15, then 20. Even in 2016, when a number of women accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, Carroll stayed silent, in part because she worried that accusing Trump might help him politically, and she most certainly did not want to do that. She only spoke up in 2019, during promotion for a new book in which she revealed the alleged incident. She got lots of media, including a splashy rollout in New York magazine. (She also conducted paid 'Hideous Men' walking tours of New York, including a stop at Bergdorf Goodman, where she said the attack occurred.) She originally had no thought of suing Trump. Then she went to a Resistance cocktail party in Manhattan in honor of Kathy Griffin, the comedian famous for holding up a bloody effigy of Donald Trump's severed head. There she met the anti-Trump lawyer George Conway, who convinced her she had a good case and suggested a lawyer. She hired the lawyer. Plus: New York passed a one-year-only #MeToo law lifting the statute of limitations to allow people who said they were victimized long ago to sue. So all those years in which Carroll never said a word no longer mattered; Carroll sued minutes after the new law took effect. And to top it off, the Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman paid for the whole operation! This case was political from the start. There is no way to know what did or did not happen in 1995 or 1996. It should never have been brought.

And now, with an $83.3 million damage award based on an accusation that can never be proved or disproved, the lawyer behind the lawsuit pronounces on CNN: 'It brings to mind the old saying, the saying attributed to Dr. Martin Luther King -- the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice.'

How does Byron not understand that this was proved, by the determination of a jury in federal court? How much more “proved” can something be?

Please. And, OJ Simpson "proved" that he was not guilty of savagely murdering 2 people.

You really are stupid. All you said here is that you have no clue who has the burden of proof in a criminal trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The man who played a key role in the the E Jean Carroll lawsuit is so moved by his handiwork that he wants you to see the CNN appearance in which he discusses how moved he is by his handiwork.

Another view: This is a case that should never have been brought. The original incident occurred in 1995 or 1996; Carroll has said she does not remember precisely. She told two friends what she said happened, but never said another word to anyone, including authorities. Five years passed, then 10, then 15, then 20. Even in 2016, when a number of women accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, Carroll stayed silent, in part because she worried that accusing Trump might help him politically, and she most certainly did not want to do that. She only spoke up in 2019, during promotion for a new book in which she revealed the alleged incident. She got lots of media, including a splashy rollout in New York magazine. (She also conducted paid 'Hideous Men' walking tours of New York, including a stop at Bergdorf Goodman, where she said the attack occurred.) She originally had no thought of suing Trump. Then she went to a Resistance cocktail party in Manhattan in honor of Kathy Griffin, the comedian famous for holding up a bloody effigy of Donald Trump's severed head. There she met the anti-Trump lawyer George Conway, who convinced her she had a good case and suggested a lawyer. She hired the lawyer. Plus: New York passed a one-year-only #MeToo law lifting the statute of limitations to allow people who said they were victimized long ago to sue. So all those years in which Carroll never said a word no longer mattered; Carroll sued minutes after the new law took effect. And to top it off, the Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman paid for the whole operation! This case was political from the start. There is no way to know what did or did not happen in 1995 or 1996. It should never have been brought.

And now, with an $83.3 million damage award based on an accusation that can never be proved or disproved, the lawyer behind the lawsuit pronounces on CNN: 'It brings to mind the old saying, the saying attributed to Dr. Martin Luther King -- the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice.'

How does Byron not understand that this was proved, by the determination of a jury in federal court? How much more “proved” can something be?

Please. And, OJ Simpson "proved" that he was not guilty of savagely murdering 2 people.

You really are stupid. All you said here is that you have no clue who has the burden of proof in a criminal trial.

No wonder people think MAGAs are a bunch of dumb hicks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alina Habba, Esq. speaks out regarding the justice system in New York, and the practice of law. Most passionately, her outrage at the Trump decision and trial process:

Raw emotion. Here is a video.

Obviously, she’s outraged. But do you think Trump is surprised with the amount. Were they (Habba et al) expecting this amount? Were they expecting something lower?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The man who played a key role in the the E Jean Carroll lawsuit is so moved by his handiwork that he wants you to see the CNN appearance in which he discusses how moved he is by his handiwork.

Another view: This is a case that should never have been brought. The original incident occurred in 1995 or 1996; Carroll has said she does not remember precisely. She told two friends what she said happened, but never said another word to anyone, including authorities. Five years passed, then 10, then 15, then 20. Even in 2016, when a number of women accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct, Carroll stayed silent, in part because she worried that accusing Trump might help him politically, and she most certainly did not want to do that. She only spoke up in 2019, during promotion for a new book in which she revealed the alleged incident. She got lots of media, including a splashy rollout in New York magazine. (She also conducted paid 'Hideous Men' walking tours of New York, including a stop at Bergdorf Goodman, where she said the attack occurred.) She originally had no thought of suing Trump. Then she went to a Resistance cocktail party in Manhattan in honor of Kathy Griffin, the comedian famous for holding up a bloody effigy of Donald Trump's severed head. There she met the anti-Trump lawyer George Conway, who convinced her she had a good case and suggested a lawyer. She hired the lawyer. Plus: New York passed a one-year-only #MeToo law lifting the statute of limitations to allow people who said they were victimized long ago to sue. So all those years in which Carroll never said a word no longer mattered; Carroll sued minutes after the new law took effect. And to top it off, the Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman paid for the whole operation! This case was political from the start. There is no way to know what did or did not happen in 1995 or 1996. It should never have been brought.

And now, with an $83.3 million damage award based on an accusation that can never be proved or disproved, the lawyer behind the lawsuit pronounces on CNN: 'It brings to mind the old saying, the saying attributed to Dr. Martin Luther King -- the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice.'

Then why was he found guilty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a win for her and for all the victims of sexual assault out here to see justice served for once. And it a win for all the dads and moms and brother and sisters and uncles and aunts and friends, etc. of the millions of assault victims. Most of these women (and men) never see any justice for their suffering.

It's also a phyric victory for all the people Trump has screwed by not paying them.