E. Jean Carroll asks judge to amend lawsuit to seek further damages for what Trump said at CNN town hall

What can normal people attribute this to? One possibility would be incredibly poor judgement. That's not a quality I would want in a man who's president. Another possibility would be mental illness. I think it's safe to say that mental illness disqualifies anyone from being president, The last possibility may be the sickest one. Could Trump actually be trying to get prosecuted in an effort to divide America further?
In reality, he should be declared mentally incompetent to stand trial. He clearly doesn't understand how to defend himself, how to control himself, or how to take direction. He has zero (0) impulse control, and doesn't understand the connections between his actions and the world around him.
 
In reality, he should be declared mentally incompetent to stand trial. He clearly doesn't understand how to defend himself, how to control himself, or how to take direction. He has zero (0) impulse control, and doesn't understand the connections between his actions and the world around him.
That describes you to a tee….lol
 
There are 5 million reasons that demonstrate you again don't know what the hell you're talking about.
They only demonstrate that New Yorkers are idiots. Your theory that juries are infallible is proof that you're an idiot.
 
You idiot. All trials include more than just physical evidence.
That evidence is weighed by a jury of your peers. They decide if there is a preponderance of the evidence, all evidence, shows the defendant guilty of the accusations in a civil case.

It is doubtful that Trump could have been founnd guilty in a criminal trial; beyond a shadow of a doubt.

In future criminal cases you will see physical evidence, I predict, of Trump being guilty of multiple crimes.
Stupid where is the physical evidence? None was presented to the court.
 
They only demonstrate that New Yorkers are idiots. Your theory that juries are infallible is proof that you're an idiot.

That demonstrates that your 'legal analysis' wasn't worth shit. And that you've always got an excuse why you don't know shit.
 
Your ability to predict legal outcomes certainly aren't infallible.

But tell us again how you being wrong *actually* means you're right. So we can all point and laugh.
My legal abilities aren't being discussed here, dumbass. The legal abilities of New York juries are, and they are zilch.

What am I wrong about, that New York juries are populated by imbeciles?

Nope.
 
My legal abilities aren't being discussed here, dumbass. The legal abilities of New York juries are, and they are zilch.

When you're offering us 'legal analysis' with a record of failure as sad as yours....its exactly what we're discussing.

You don't know how the law works.

And what were you wrong about? The legal outcome, of course. See above as to why.
 
When you're offering us 'legal analysis' with a record of failure as sad as yours....its exactly what we're discussing.

You don't know how the law works.

And what were you wrong about? The legal outcome, of course. See above as to why.
Wrong, dumbass. You always try to make the issue about me because you lack the capacity to commit logic.

I didn't offer a differing opinion of the legal outcome. I offered an opinion on the legal knowledge of New Yorkers. The outcome only makes it obvious that their knowledge is zero, just like yours.
 
Wrong, dumbass. You always try to make the issue about me because you lack the capacity to commit logic.

I didn't offer a differing opinion of the legal outcome. I offered an opinion on the legal knowledge of New Yorkers. The outcome only makes it obvious that their knowledge is zero, just like yours.

You're the one giving us 'legal analysis', citing only yourself. Why wouldn't I point out that your 'source' has a dogshit record of accuracy in predicting actual legal outcomes?

If you don't want me point out how useless your 'source' is, get a better source.

As you have no idea how the law works.
 
You're the one giving us 'legal analysis', citing only yourself. Why wouldn't I point out that your 'source' has a dogshit record of accuracy in predicting actual legal outcomes?

If you don't want me point out how useless your 'source' is, get a better source.

As you have no idea how the law works.
No one is predicting an outcome, moron. You don't even understand what is going on in this thread, let along in Trump's case. You know everything you say will get shot down, so you focus on attacking me. I don't need a source to point out that New Yorkers are leftwing imbeciles. The fact is self-evident.
 
What a bunch of evil bastards you leftists have become.
It's clear you don't believe in the truth or justice.
You claim we're trying to destroy democracy all the while you rig elections so that democracy becomes only a memory.
You prefer candidates that cannot think for themselves and then arrest their opponents on trumped up charges using lies and doctored evidence.
What's the point of campaigning anymore.
You use Dominion machines to change election results and you put BLM members in the counting rooms.
You support the criminal while attacking their victims.
Fucking Nazi bastards.
Complete lunacy. :cuckoo:
 
I'm sure. Typical Marxist tactic.
Biden wears diapers so Trump wears diapers.
Keep making a fool of yourself.
Anyone who believes half the shit they make up about Trump is a retard.

Nope this goes back to 2017..

Now Trump is claiming Jean Carroll was stalking him.
 
No one is predicting an outcome, moron. You don't even understand what is going on in this thread, let along in Trump's case. You know everything you say will get shot down, so you focus on attacking me. I don't need a source to point out that New Yorkers are leftwing imbeciles. The fact is self-evident.

New Yorkers just know what kind of pig Trump is since 1980.
 

Forum List

Back
Top