Damn, I mean just damn. trump just slandered Carroll again.

[buckeye45_73]

He cheated his charity...and Trump University.

So did the Clintons, rich and powerful people are corrupt, what a shocker!!!!!!

 

[buckeye45_73]

Let him steal the donations to the RNC for his legal bills and not spend on their House Reps and Senators running campaigns!!

Democrats must win both Houses!

This move by the RNC, will only help democrats.

Given up on ole Biden?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Always an excuse….


Trump could shoot a man in the middle of the street and not lose a single supporter.

That's democrats, especially if it was a queer illegal drag queen....you guys wouldn't arrest them and act like it never happend.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove each and every charge beyond a reasonable doubt, each and every time. There is no partial credit for the prosecution! Usually, a deadlocked jury is not sent back to deliberate further more than once or twice. If jurors cannot reach a consensus, at some point the judge will declare a mistrial.

And the Jury in the Carroll's case, reached an unanimous decision. - that Trump is guilty

No they didn't the trial was only for damages, it wasn't about guilt. The judge overturned the juries verdict in that matter, it was a kangeroo court.

 

[WorldWatcher]

No they didn't the trial was only for damages, it wasn't about guilt. The judge overturned the juries verdict in that matter, it was a kangeroo court.

What are you talking about?

In the Carroll Trials (Carroll I and Carroll II) the Judge didn't make a summary judgement.

In Carroll I the jury found (A) that FPOTUS#45 sexually assaulted Carroll, and as a result (B) he defamed her and awarded compensator and punitive damages. Carroll I was BOTH a Trial of Fact to determine if assault happened and if so, what the damages were.

In Carroll II, the jury only addressed damages because as the Trail of Fact in Carroll I that jury had already found that the sexual assault occurred so it wasn't a question before the second jury.

Maybe you are confusing this with the New York State Civil fraud trail where both the State and FPOTUS#45 legal team requested summary judgement? The Judge in that case ruled on 1 of the 7 claims, the other six were decided based on a bench trial that was conducted from October 2023 to January 2024.

WW

 

[whitehall]

It's constructive criticism and freedom of speech when democrats do it but slander when a republican defends himself.

 

[Care4all]

It's constructive criticism and freedom of speech when democrats do it but slander when a republican defends himself.

She didn't lie. She repeated a story that she was TOLD, and made it clear that she was not a first hand witness.

 

[Lastamender]

No, the law is finally being respected. You break the law, you get indicted. It's really that simple. Your problem here is you're so emotional that you cannot separate fact from fiction. You're hysterical that your god is somehow not immune to the law, fortunately the law doesn't give an eff who you worship.

If the law was respected Obama, Brennan, and others would be up on charges. Comey is free. Don't be fucking ridiculous.

 

[ThisIsMe]

He tried, and failed. https://www.npr.org/2023/08/07/1192526887/e-jean-carroll-trump-defamation-lawsuit-dismissed

The problem with trying a countersuit is that you need to establish that the person is slandering. In this case the jury ruled on the allegations. So no grounds to sue.

No. The reason it was tossed out is because of liberalism judges. Carroll was able to get a 93M dollar judgement based off of zero evidence. She won because she was essentially able to convince a jury that trump COULD have done it, not that he did, and that is what all the defamation cases are about, she won defamation because she accused someone with no evidence, and got a judgment, and I guess because of that, trump is supposed to just admit he’s guilty, even though he claims he had no interaction with her. That are calling him proclaiming his innocence as “defamation”.

Then, when trump tried to counter sue, to try and reverse the decision, suddenly, they said nope, we don’t want to allow you to do that, we don’t want to allow you to try and prove she was lying.

See the difference? SHE was able to bring a frivolous case and win, but when trump wanted to try and force her to come up with actual evidence and prove her allegations, the judge denied him.

Two tiered justice, plain and simple.

 

[TheYellowKing]

She's a liar and a fraud

Sue me

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No. The reason it was tossed out is because of liberalism judges.

An ad hoc lie you could not support with any argument or evidence.

This is just a way to write a verbose post, when you actually have no relevant facts or arguments.

yawn

 

[Crepitus]

The ONLY place he could have lost this case was in NYC. There is a reason L. James didn’t allow her case to leave the city. It has both a totally corrupt judiciary and a very biased jury base.

Let’s see how his cases in Ga go, though a corrupt DA doens’t help there either.

Why would tRump's home town have a jury base biased against him?

The only reason would be all the terrible things he has done there, wouldn't you say?

Why would the judges in NY be corrupt?

Or are you just pissed he wasn't allowed to take it to his pets in Floriduh?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The ONLY place he could have lost this case was in NYC.

Cult fantasy. Coping mechanism.

 

[Crepitus]

Maybe, but they will have to be able to show how it has harmed her since the latest defamation.
MAGA

That shouldn't be that hard.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Maybe, but they will have to be able to show how it has harmed her since the latest defamation.
MAGA

They didn't have to do that in the last round.

 

[Crepitus]

Yeah, she openly talked about spending the cash, after the judge found for her after a jury did not. It was a judge that made this judgement, not a jury. And it only took her 30+ years to bring it up

She's a liar: Carroll was fired from Elle in February 2020; she wrote on Twitter that she was dismissed "because Trump ridiculed my reputation, laughed at my looks, & dragged me through the mud."[22] Elle maintained that the decision to fire Carroll was a business decision unrelated to Trump.[21]

Really ELLE magazine, part of the Hollywood establishment would fire her because of what Trump said? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL, you really believe that, if you do, you are a moron of epic proportions. You people are dumber than a box of rocks

Well post up some links, Son.

Real links, not breitbart and shit.

 

[ThisIsMe]

An ad hoc lie you could not support with any argument or evidence.

This is just a way to write a verbose post, when you actually have no relevant facts or arguments.

yawn

how else would you explain it? Does trump not have a right to counter sue? To force Carroll to produce an evidence? I would think so, under equal justice for all…but Kaplan, the same judge who presided over the entire shenanigan, denied him that right. What else are we to assume?

 

[Aldo Raine]

They didn't have to do that in the last round.

I bet they did. But I hope they can do it again!
MAGA

 

[ThisIsMe]

She's a liar and a fraud

Sue me

lol, I was thinking this today..

“She lied! Trump never touched her!”

Now sue me for defamation lol

 

[Weatherman2020]

Subhuman ape Trump just can't help but to fuck himself over.

CHUBB should immediately withdraw it's offer to bond for the $93 million. Anyone who risks $93 million to bail out that deranged lunatic should be locked up in a rubber room right along with him.

That’s President Trump to you.