Video of Trump’s deposition in E. Jean Carroll trial released to the public

[onthedarkside]

 

The video deposition of Donald Trump played before the jury in the E. Jean Carroll civil battery and defamation trial was made public Friday, showing the former president discussing the accusations against him, the “Access Hollywood” tape and the Russia “hoax.”

 

The edited deposition runs for nearly an hour. Trump was interviewed in October 2022.

 

In the video, Trump confirms that he made the allegedly defamatory statements denying knowing Carroll, calling her allegations that he raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman’s dressing room in the mid-1990s a “hoax,” and saying she is not his type.

 

READ MORE

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/05/politics/trump-deposition-released-e-jean-carroll-trial/index.html

 

[Tug]

Pretty damming I watched it thought the woman who was accusing him was his wife the same if you are a star it’s acceptable bs (how did that work out for Harvey winestine)nope that doesn’t help his case one little bit 

[metisdead]

A troll post using an aberrant spelling of Trump's name has been removed. This is a discussion forum, such childish antics are not permitted.

[Bkk Brian]

Oh dear........................

 

“It’s true with stars that they can grab women by the pussy?” Kaplan asked.

“Well, that’s what, if you look over the last million years, I guess that’s been largely true, not always, but largely true, unfortunately or fortunately,” he replied.

When Kaplan asked Trump if he considered himself a star, Trump said, “I think you can say that, yeah.”

 

The deposition also included an apparent gotcha moment in which Trump, who maintained that he didn’t rape Carroll because she wasn’t his type, mistook an old photo of Carroll for his ex-wife Marla Maples, who was presumably his type.

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-deposition-footage-shows-him-admit-stars-get-away-with-sexual-assault

[bamnutsak]

Oof.

 

"Not my type".

 

"But sir, that's not Marla your second wife, that's Ms. Carroll."

 

 

Can you imagine Trump taking the stand in ANY trial?

 

Interesting that he can correctly identify Mr. Johnson.

 

Trump snatches defeat from the jaws of victory, yet again.

 

 

 

[bendejo]

He really stepped in his own doo-doo in the deposition.  "She's a wack job!" might get cheers in redneck country rallies, but saying things like that in court makes him look like the jackass.   

It seems the judge is simpatico with what DT's lawyer is going through:

Behind scenes, Trump’s lawyer disavowed client’s claim he’d ‘confront’ E. Jean Carroll to judge: ‘You understand what I am dealing with’

 

 

[jerrymahoney]

Well I am no Trump apologist but i still think that one or more jurors may say that there is no tangible evidence that this thing ever occurred.  That neither Ms. Carroll, nor even 2 of her witnesses, can give an exact date that this occurred only a 6-8 month window, based on what clothes she remembers wearing, is not sufficient to hold Trump liable for such a loosely defined circumstance.

[placeholder]

30 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Well I am no Trump apologist but i still think that one or more jurors may say that there is no tangible evidence that this thing ever occurred.  That neither Ms. Carroll, nor even 2 of her witnesses, can give an exact date that this occurred only a 6-8 month window, based on what clothes she remembers wearing, is not sufficient to hold Trump liable for such a loosely defined circumstance.

In addition to battery,  Trump is also being sued for defamation.

[Hanaguma]

13 minutes ago, placeholder said:

In addition to battery,  Trump is also being sued for defamation.

Could be a chance for a split decision. No to the battery, yes to defamation.  Also, this is not a criminal proceeding, so the standard of proof is different (and lower).  

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Could be a chance for a split decision. No to the battery, yes to defamation.  Also, this is not a criminal proceeding, so the standard of proof is different (and lower).  

Keep your hopes up.

[jerrymahoney]

I guess that's up to jury decide whether Trump's defamatory statements were a reaction to something that -- at least as presented and as stated repeatedly by Trump and attorney Tacopina -- did not ever happen.

[OneMoreFarang]

I would love the see Trump in jail. And preferably for a crime which he actually did.

 

Where is the evidence that he raped that woman? Where is the evidence that he even met her in that shop?

Most of us are not rich and famous and we don't run to be president.

But what would be our reaction if an old woman goes public and tells the press she was raped when she was over 50 years old? And that was about 30 years ago.

It seems there is no evidence at all. Why is there a court case without any evidence? Strange.

[bamnutsak]

21 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I would love the see Trump in jail. And preferably for a crime which he actually did.

Sorry to interrrupt your rant, but this is a civil trial.

 

And no, you can't speak with the manager.

 

Rant on.

[NORDO]

If an assumed victim waits several months, or even a year to grasp the reality of an assumed incident and report it to the authorities, then one might think it was just period of rationalization and acceptance of the assumed event.   However, a multitude of years passing and no action taken to report the assumed event lay suspect to ones alleged occurrence of the event.

The assumed victim should be held responsible for not reporting an alleged crime of this magnitude rather than attempting to "play the Ace card" many years later. 

 

She is in her golden years.

Her book deal failed.

She lacks the notoriety she once had.

She is likely being played by a pack of "woken" and bitter political mongers.

 

[onthedarkside]

Troll post removed

[vandeventer]

It's a shame Mr. Trump has to try and recall ever knowing this lady, on something he didn't do 27 years ago. Is she writing another book? Is she after a quick buck? Or is she just trying to be in the spotlight for once? Again, the truth will always come out in the end.

[Bkk Brian]

3 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

It's a shame Mr. Trump has to try and recall ever knowing this lady, on something he didn't do 27 years ago. Is she writing another book? Is she after a quick buck? Or is she just trying to be in the spotlight for once? Again, the truth will always come out in the end.

How do you know he didn't do it? He can't even tell his ex wife from Carroll in a photo.

[vandeventer]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

How do you know he didn't do it? He can't even tell his ex wife from Carroll in a photo.

Maybe his eyes are like mine?

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

Maybe his eyes are like mine?

Or maybe he did it. Thats why there is a trial. We will find out soon enough.

[earlinclaifornia]

2 hours ago, vandeventer said:

It's a shame Mr. Trump has to try and recall ever knowing this lady, on something he didn't do 27 years ago. Is she writing another book? Is she after a quick buck? Or is she just trying to be in the spotlight for once? Again, the truth will always come out in the end.

Most all of us  Americans believe in our fair judicial system. We all agree the jurors who have served will decide who is telling the truth and stand by their decisions'.

[ballpoint]

2 hours ago, vandeventer said:

Maybe his eyes are like mine?

Too close together?

[billd766]

On 5/6/2023 at 11:04 AM, jerrymahoney said:

I guess that's up to jury decide whether Trump's defamatory statements were a reaction to something that -- at least as presented and as stated repeatedly by Trump and attorney Tacopina -- did not ever happen.

And you believe a serial liar?

[Pink Mist]

An Off Topic troll post and reply have been removed.