Then why did Trump lie about not knowing her and that she was not his type?
Carroll herself was the sole source of testimony of the dirty deed, and her testimony came many, many years after the event. If Trump had simply denied this without further comment, that would likely have been the end of it, but instead he called Carroll a liar, claimed he didn’t know her and had never heard of her, and dismissed her as “not my type”, and his bluster opened the door to both a defamation claim and to evidence aimed at Trump’s credibility. Meanwhile, New York changed its laws to allow a window of opportunity to make direct claims for sexual assaults many years after the original statute of limitations might have barred the claims.
When Trump misidentified a photo of Carroll as one of his ex-wife, Marla Maples, he blew away his “not my type” defense, which made him sound creepy anyway - and juries dislike creeps.
The infamous “Access Hollywood” hot mike recording undermined Trump’s defense that he wasn’t the sort of person who would sexually assault someone.
Did Donald Trump rape E. Jean Carroll? Here's what a jury and judge said.
.
Having said all of the above, the reality is that a jury of his peers found him guilty. Peers meaning that half of the jury was picked by the defense.
I am not going to continue this conversation because this is history and there is nothing you can do to change it. The reality is that no person in history has been taken to court (over 4000 times) and found guilty of something so many times as Trump (at least 150 times). That, in and of itself, shows what kind of person Trump is and that is highly likely to be guilty of something he is accused of. Simply stated, the man is a criminal.
Whether this or that verdict is wrong or not is of small importance because overall he has the MENTALITY of a criminal.
As far as the SCOTUS thing, lets leave as "We disagree". That too, is not something you or I can decide on. It is what Trump and Vance are saying about women that is important.
End of story. I will not be responding to any other posts of yours on this issue.
End of story. I will not be responding to any other posts of yours on this issue.
lol, so i provide the proof you ask for and now you’re just going to check out? Wow..
I’ll answer your questions anyway.
Then why did Trump lie about not knowing her and that she was not his type?
Maybe he met her and even spoke with her, that doesn’t mean he knows her. Also, this happened back in the 90’s. He probably didn’t remember her. That would be a testament to the fact that he doesn’t KNOW her. He’s probably met and talked to many people…but he doesn’t know them.
Carroll herself was the sole source of testimony of the dirty deed, and her testimony came many, many years after the event
Correct, and she couldn’t remember dates and details from the event.
but instead he called Carroll a liar, claimed he didn’t know her and had never heard of her, and dismissed her as “not my type”, and his bluster opened the door to both a defamation claim and to evidence aimed at Trump’s credibility.
No, Carroll brought the defamation on herself when she accused someone of rape and couldn’t prove it. Then when trump denied the claim (as any person would do), she called it defamation. As if her making the allegation was supposed to be taken as true and trump was not allowed to deny it. Even after he was convicted, he can still deny it because he says it never happened. Just because the jury found him guilty in a shallow evidentiary statute doesn’t mean he has to agree with it. He still claims his innocence. If you are convicted but you maintain you are innocent, that doesn’t mean you have to stop proclaiming your innocence. That would be silly.
Meanwhile, New York changed its laws to allow a window of opportunity to make direct claims for sexual assaults many years after the original statute of limitations might have barred the claims.
I know, that was awfully convenient of that to happen right around the time Trump was running for re election, and the time Carroll decided to come forward…..
The infamous “Access Hollywood” hot mike recording undermined Trump’s defense that he wasn’t the sort of person who would sexually assault someone.
It doesn’t prove he did sexually assault anyone either. Also, if you listen to the tape, I don’t believe he was talking about sexual assault, he said “they let you”. I think that was in reference to women being more “open” with men of wealth.
Having said all of the above, the reality is that a jury of his peers found him guilty. Peers meaning that half of the jury was picked by the defense.
Technically they found him “liable”
If it goes to the Supreme Court, it should be overturned. The amount was ridiculous anyway. She sued for $5 million and $83 million. At that time, her net worth was only 2 million…so where does she get that trump did 83 million in damages? It’s not like she would ever make that much anyway.
So, I would try and give Carroll the benefit of the doubt, after all, part of me thinks “why would she risk this if it weren’t true”, the problem with that is, is there is just too much strangeness around the case.
Also, it doesn’t help her story that she made the claim in a boom she wrote, not by going to the press, and what’s more juicy to entice people to buy your book that to make it a public spectacle.
Also, there’s the claim that this whole thing was hatched and planned…
The reality is that no person in history has been taken to court (over 4000 times) and found guilty of something so many times as Trump (at least 150 times). That, in and of itself, shows what kind of person Trump is and that is highly likely to be guilty of something he is accused of. Simply stated, the man is a crimina
Sued 4000 times? You mean his businesses have been involved in over 4000 legal cases. That’s probably typical for a business like his.
Still, none of that proves he did anything to Carroll.
Whether this or that verdict is wrong or not is of small importance because overall he has the MENTALITY of a criminal
Really? You’re saying because someone may be a criminal, the law and verdicts and justice don’t matter? Really?
It’s your opinion he’s a criminal. Remember, all these lawsuits are brought on by a vengeful liberal party bent on “getting trump”
End of story. I will not be responding to any other posts of yours on this issue.
So after all this, me providing the proof you asked for, you’re just going to eject with basically an “I’m right and I’m not going to talk to you anymore” kind of approach?
Hmm..well, okie dokie..
But if you do read this, I’ve provided the proof of why I think he might not be guilty. Let’s see your proof that he is guilty.
