Exhausting Court Proceedings on the Horizon

[Solkern]

There was? Odd... thought it was just her saying it happened. Did she have police reports, hospital records, texts, phone messages, anything else? Or just what she said?

If that's evidence, then I guess you are correct.

Also... tell me why she first published it in the magazine she ran vs. filing a case against him at the start? I mean... if she'd truly been aggrieved, wouldn't you think a victim would file charges instead of just writing about it in the magazine she operated?

But, I'm sure you're 100% correct. It happened exactly as she said it did, no doubt.

Well, let’s look at some of it.
Mainly Roger Ailes, who Trump claimed in 2022, he met 7 or 8 years ago.
Why is this important? Well Ailes was Trump’s friend back in 1995, a full 20ish years before Trump said he met the guy. They did interviews, had friendly banter etc etc.
Ailes was Carroll’s boss, and she was afraid if she reported it at the time, she would have been fired. Which is fair imho.
Dude claimed she wasn’t his type, but pointed to her and said that’s my ex-wife… then said the photo was blurry when it was not blurry at all. Trump kept getting himself in trouble, like regarding Carroll’s husband.
"Nice guy," Trump said in the deposition.

And then he caught himself.

"I thought, I mean. I don't know him," Trump said. "But I thought he was pretty good at what he did."

Trump lied during his deposition countless times, and was caught countless times, how can you trust a damn thing he said?

[Solkern]

There is no guilty verdict in a civil trial.

Yeah liable, I shouldn’t use them interchangeably, my bad bro.

[Shaps]

Well, let’s look at some of it.
Mainly Roger Ailes, who Trump claimed in 2022, he met 7 or 8 years ago.
Why is this important? Well Ailes was Trump’s friend back in 1995, a full 20ish years before Trump said he met the guy. They did interviews, had friendly banter etc etc.
Ailes was Carroll’s boss, and she was afraid if she reported it at the time, she would have been fired. Which is fair imho.
Dude claimed she wasn’t his type, but pointed to her and said that’s my ex-wife… then said the photo was blurry when it was not blurry at all. Trump kept getting himself in trouble, like regarding Carroll’s husband.
"Nice guy," Trump said in the deposition.

And then he caught himself.

"I thought, I mean. I don't know him," Trump said. "But I thought he was pretty good at what he did."

Trump lied during his deposition countless times, and was caught countless times, how can you trust a damn thing he said?

Again - I didn't say if he did it or not. I have no idea.

Saying he lied, when she lied also... is a wash in my opinion.

My main sticking point is - she never filed anything accusing him of something, prior to her writing an article that was a straight accusation. That is a FACT. Then her defense was paid by a Democrat Super PAC donor with some shady dealings already. That is a FACT.

What he said or she said are NOT facts.

I'm sure you remember everyone from 30 years ago though. God help you if you are accused of something and fuck up in a response. That's the amazing part about something like this... there is absolutely ZERO way to confirm/deny that it did/didn't happen. There are no FACTS to support or defend against it.

So /shrug.

[Solkern]

Again - I didn't say if he did it or not. I have no idea.

Saying he lied, when she lied also... is a wash in my opinion.

My main sticking point is - she never filed anything accusing him of something, prior to her writing an article that was a straight accusation. That is a FACT. Then her defense was paid by a Democrat Super PAC donor with some shady dealings already. That is a FACT.

What he said or she said are NOT facts.

I'm sure you remember everyone from 30 years ago though. God help you if you are accused of something and fuck up in a response. That's the amazing part about something like this... there is absolutely ZERO way to confirm/deny that it did/didn't happen. There are no FACTS to support or defend against it.

So /shrug.

Can you show me, where she lied in court and it was proven?

[Parkbandit]

It was a he said / she said claim she cashed in on. She was bankrolled by the left, it took place in one of the most leftists states in the country and was against someone the left hates more than anyone. It takes place just prior to an election that the left will have an absolute meltdown if he's elected and will do literally anything to make sure he doesn't get elected again.

Is anyone surprised at the outcome?

I'm not at all.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

It was a he said / she said claim she cashed in on. She was bankrolled by the left, it took place in one of the most leftists states in the country and was against someone the left hates more than anyone. It takes place just prior to an election that the left will have an absolute meltdown if he's elected and will do literally anything to make sure he doesn't get elected again.

Is anyone surprised at the outcome?

I'm not at all.

Not a lawyer, but I'd assume Trump can appeal? I'd imagine he'll fight this for years if so.

[Shaps]

Can you show me, where she lied in court and it was proven?

Sure... her own testimony - though major outlets won't highlight it.

https://www.fingerlakesdailynews.com...d-trump-attack

"“When do you believe Donald Trump assaulted you?” her attorney, Mike Ferrara, asked Carroll during her testimony Wednesday.

“This question, the when, the when, the date, has been something I’ve constantly trying to pin down,” Carroll said.

At first she said she thought it was 1994 or 1995, but she said her friend Lisa Birnbach published an article about Trump for New York magazine in February 1996.

“Lisa never would have gone down to Mar-a-Lago … if she knew what Donald Trump had done to me,” Carroll said, leading her to believe the alleged attack occurred in 1996.

In her opening statement, Carroll attorney Shawn Crowley suggested the lack of specificity doesn’t matter.

“While Ms. Carroll doesn’t remember exactly when this happened, she remembers almost every detail of what happened, and her testimony alone will be enough for you to find Donald Trump liable in this case,” Crowley said.

That first sentence bolded alone... should really raise red flags... we're not talking what day, we're not talking what month, she doesn't know the YEAR.

Not sure what else you want. Believe what you will... I'll believe the money.

Also... what happened to this evidence?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/don...s-his-n1126796

"E. Jean Carroll, who says Trump raped, her seeks his DNA to test against sample from her dress"

""The Donna Karan coatdress still hangs on the back of my closet door, unworn and unlaundered since that evening," she wrote. She donned it for a photo accompanying the magazine piece."

"Advice columnist E. Jean Carroll's lawyers served notice to a Trump attorney Thursday for Trump to submit a sample March 2 in Washington for "analysis and comparison against unidentified male DNA present on the dress."

BUT - surprise surprise...

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/15/judg...tion-case.html

"Judge rejects Trump offer to provide DNA sample in E. Jean Carroll rape defamation case"

"Kaplan also said that Trump had no justification for making his offer on the condition that Carroll’s lawyers be ordered to turn over a previously undisclosed appendix to a report on male DNA found on a dress she has said she was wearing when Trump allegedly attacked her."

So, you tell me.... They claim to have DNA results of 4 people on this alleged "dress"... Trumps Team says they want the results turned over to the Court, prior to him providing his DNA sample so the results can't magically be changed... but the Judge says nah, not happening.

Sounds like it really happened to me. Nothing fishy going on at all.

If this is the standard and preponderance of evidence needed to get a guilty verdict... god help us all.

You keep believing what you want - I'll keep posting FACTS.

[Seran]

As expected Shaps has nothing. Keep flying your ring wing conspiracy theories and accept as fact Trump sexual assaulted a woman, there's a judgment proving it.

[ClydeR]

Who is more convincing?

Clinton..



or..

[ClydeR]

Trump..