2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

 

 

But the jury agrees with me.

Do you have a problem with trial by jury?
 

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But the jury agrees with me.

Do you have a problem with trial by jury?

 

Juries that award 43 times as much money for mean words as for an alleged rape?  You bet I have a problem.

 

34 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Maybe we have different ideas about what constitutes common decency, it certainly seems that way.

See, there it is again, this assumption that you are the standard and anyone who disagrees with you (which on this topic I actually don't) is somehow lacking.   

This is not about common decency, I believe Trump is an amoral heel. My comments are specifically directed at the way you choose to crow your own superiority.   

 

I believe that one can achieve what you call "common decency" without being either self-righteous or patronizing. 

Just lock him up once and for all

 

Boris Johnson the most vile corrupt evil leader in British Political history was a babe in arms compared to Trump

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

Juries that award 43 times as much money for mean words as for an alleged rape?  You bet I have a problem.

 

Like I said earlier, your boy didn’t help himself, running his mouth in front of the Jury and engaging a failure of a lawyer.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Like I said earlier, your boy didn’t help himself, running his mouth in front of the Jury and engaging a failure of a lawyer.

 

It's almost as if he learned nothing from seeing the train wreck Giuliani got himself into. It's clear that his only hope (in his mind) is to dig himself as deep into the doodoo as he can in order to motivate the base and somehow be elected president. There is a chance it could work but I doubt that he will carry many independents.

Several posts have been removed for including non-news report sources, unsourced claims and off-topic, flaming and trolling comments, along with replies to those.

 

 

30 minutes ago, n00dle said:

See, there it is again, this assumption that you are the standard and anyone who disagrees with you (which on this topic I actually don't) is somehow lacking.   

This is not about common decency, I believe Trump is an amoral heel. My comments are specifically directed at the way you choose to crow your own superiority.   

 

I believe that one can achieve what you call "common decency" without being either self-righteous or patronizing. 

I wear my disdain for the blackguard Trump with pride and I delight in seeing him held to account.

 

You might refer to this as ‘self righteousness’, well it’s far better than obfuscating the moral corruption that Trump represents.

 

And let’s be clear about this, it’s precisely his moral corruption that many of his supporters find so appealing.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I wear my disdain for the blackguard Trump with pride and I delight in seeing him held to account.

 

You might refer to this as ‘self righteousness’, well it’s far better than obfuscating the moral corruption that Trump represents.

 

And let’s be clear about this, it’s precisely his moral corruption that many of his supporters find so appealing.

 

 

 

 

if only your strident occupation of the moral high ground were limited solely to Trump

16 hours ago, G_Money said:

“Carroll has the resources to take it to him all the way.”

 

Quite possibly but one thing is certain.  It ain’t her money.   Another gold digger charity case. 
 

Other Peoples Money (OPM) most likely from the wealthy Globalist, Socialist  that are hell bent on taking down Trump.

 

truth be told ,its Mr. Hoffman another

Marxist supporter. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2023/05/10/what-was-reid-hoffmans-role-in-funding-e-jean-carrolls-case/?sh=2279c8543e15

 

Imop

1 hour ago, impulse said:

 

Juries that award 43 times as much money for mean words as for an alleged rape?  You bet I have a problem.

 

 

Besides that your math is not precise, your bigger problem seems to be your confusion as there is no "alleged rape" (your words) involved. Rather, a jury of his peers found as a matter of fact (NOT found as a matter of allegation) that in 1996 at Bergdorf Goodman, the twice impeached, Maga Republican, 1-term Xpresident Donald J Trump who's facing 91 other criminal charges including 44 federal & 47 state felonies violently slammed E. Jean Carroll against a dressing room wall, pulled down her tights and sexually forced himself on her*.

 

The $83.3 million judgement against The Orange Rapist was not just for "mean words". It was the jury of Trump's peers awarding punitive damages for his defamations against the GOP rapists' victim to try and get him to stop from continually defaming and defaming and defaming and defaming and defaming and defaming her over and over again.

 

Perhaps if Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her over and over again, she'd have gotten more money for that too.

 

Problem solved.

 

* https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db

"Trump slammed the door, pinned her against a wall, planted his mouth on hers, yanked her tights down and raped her as she tried to break away."

3 minutes ago, riclag said:

truth be told ,its Mr. Hoffman another

Marxist supporter. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anafaguy/2023/05/10/what-was-reid-hoffmans-role-in-funding-e-jean-carrolls-case/?sh=2279c8543e15

 

Imop

 

I missed the word "crime" in that article.

 

While Hoffman is known for his work founding LinkedIn, he’s also a big Democratic donor, funding a number of Democratic causes, candidates and legal battles, including civil lawsuits filed by the victims of the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, according to a post on LinkedIn

Edited January 29, 20242 yr by ozimoron

8 hours ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

83 million to Trump is like $800 to most of the broke dems on this forum... 555555

He gets a lot of help from other Republic lovers! Patriots who despise 

the Marxist, Communist, Socialist attempts to bring down the Constitution and the values of the founding fathers.

Hopefully he can use it similar to how Hoffman uses his money( helping  fund Carrol) to interfere with the leading candidate for the POTUS chances at righting the country.

imop

Edited January 29, 20242 yr by riclag

31 minutes ago, thaicurious said:

 

Besides that your math is not precise, your bigger problem seems to be your confusion as there is no "alleged rape" (your words) involved. Rather, a jury of his peers found as a matter of fact (NOT found as a matter of allegation) that in 1996 at Bergdorf Goodman, the twice impeached, Maga Republican, 1-term Xpresident Donald J Trump who's facing 91 other criminal charges including 44 federal & 47 state felonies violently slammed E. Jean Carroll against a dressing room wall, pulled down her tights and sexually forced himself on her*.

 

The $83.3 million judgement against The Orange Rapist was not just for "mean words". It was the jury of Trump's peers awarding punitive damages for his defamations against the GOP rapists' victim to try and get him to stop from continually defaming and defaming and defaming and defaming and defaming and defaming her over and over again.

 

Perhaps if Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her and Trump kept raping her over and over again, she'd have gotten more money for that too.

 

Problem solved.

 

* https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db

"Trump slammed the door, pinned her against a wall, planted his mouth on hers, yanked her tights down and raped her as she tried to break away."

 

I love the definitive way they portray a civil verdict, which only requires a "preponderance of the evidence."  Meaning that it was determined that there's over a 50% chance that it happened.  Hardly establishes any "facts".

 

I think your italics characterization of the alleged event come from the book she was hawking when she first filed the lawsuit in 2019.  It sure didn't come from CCTV or any witnesses.

 

Which is neither here, nor there.  In the first case, $3 million was for defamation and $2 million was for the alleged rape.  Even that should have raised the hackles of every Me Too  SJW.  But it is Trump, and the TDS runs deep.  The total awards were $86.3 million for mean words and $2 Million for the alleged rape.  Which, IMO, is the message that his attorneys and publicists should be sending.  A smack in the face of every woman and every man who has women in their life that they love.  Mean words are over 40x as bad as rape.

 

Edited January 29, 20242 yr by impulse

2 hours ago, riclag said:

He gets a lot of help from other Republic lovers! Patriots who despise 

the Marxist, Communist, Socialist attempts to bring down the Constitution and the values of the founding fathers.

 

imop

You guys crack me up. Calling Democrats marxist, communist, socialist just demonstrates that you have absolutely no idea what marxist, communist and socialist mean, and you’re just repeating the moronic talking points provided to you by Trump and his minions.

 

It is really beyond me how someone can support Trump and at the same time claim to be a patriot, a defender of democracy and the constitution. Those two things are simply incompatible.

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Juries that award 43 times as much money for mean words as for an alleged rape?  You bet I have a problem.

 

The mean words caused Trump's deranged supporters to threaten the plaintiff in various ways. How would you like to be receiving death threats, in a land where the Second Amendment is sacred?

She got $5 million for said mean words. Trump then doubled down with more of them.

The bulk of the second judgment, awarded by a jury of Trump's peers, was $65 million in PUNITIVE damages. That is, damages designed to make Trump think about doing it again. So far, it seems to have worked.

What part of that legal process don't you understand?

1 hour ago, impulse said:

I love the definitive way they portray a civil verdict, which only requires a "preponderance of the evidence."  Meaning that it was determined that there's over a 50% chance that it happened.

 

Yeah, I get what you're saying. It's absolutely shocking that it wasn't at least 50% believable that Orange Sex Offender was being truthful in the case against him for sexually abusing E. Jean Carroll, testifying that she's “not my type” and then identifying "that's Marla, that's my wife", the person who is his type, while pointing to a picture of E. Jean Carroll.

 

How the randomly picked jury of his peers--a whole different set of people from the American public than the recent jury who also found against him--didn't give him the preponderance of believability for his outright lying is absolute mystery.

 

 

Nor does you statement that "$2 Million for the alleged rape ... A smack in the face of every woman" gain the preponderance of believability of any sincerity even in the face of your problem with a victim bringing a sexual offender to civil justice.

53 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Classic look over there response. AFAIK Biden and Harris are not inciting anyone to murder anybody, with posts on social media. Totally false equivalence.

Trump's posts on his failing Truth Social are designed to appeal to fear, grievance, and bigotry. Then he stands back and says I am not responsible for what my loyal supporters do.

I repeat: How would you like to be receiving death threats, in America?

 

You mean like this?

KATHY GRIFFIN IS more adamant now than ever before that she was not in the wrong when she posted a graphic photo of herself holding up President Trump‘s bloody head in her hand earlier this year.

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/kathy-griffin-still-not-sorry-over-trump-photo-i-knew-what-i-was-doing-123599/

 

Or this?

Madonna, at Women's March on Washington, says she has thought about "blowing up the White House"

The pop singer used several obscenities during a speech at the Women’s March on Washington to emphasize her opposition to Mr. Trump.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/madonna-womens-march-washington-dc-white-house/

 

Or this?

Robert De Niro wins ovation for '<deleted> Trump' speech at the Tony awards

De Niro has long been a vociferous critic of Donald Trump. After calling him “totally nuts” in August 2016, the actor released a video during the election campaign stating his desire to punch Trump in the face, and calling him “an idiot, a national disaster, an embarrassment to this country … this fool, this bozo”.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jun/11/robert-de-niro-wins-ovation-<deleted>-trump-speech-tony-awards

More off-topic posts having nothing to do with the Trump-Carroll civil cases have been removed.

 

On 1/27/2024 at 11:15 AM, ozimoron said:

 

That's not my understanding. Trump is appealing the amount of damages in the first trial, not the actual guilty verdict. Correct me if I'm wrong. If that's the case then a victory on the damages awarded in the first trial will have no impact on the second.

 

On 1/27/2024 at 11:27 AM, jerrymahoney said:

You are wrong.

Trump is appealing the verdict in the first trial.  I don't think he is appealing just the compensatory damages assessed. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/11/trump-appeals-verdict-liable-for-sexual-assault-00096568

 

In the first defamation trial trump was penalized $5 million. He was required to post that plus some extra, totaling $5.5 million. He could not find a surety or bondsman willing to post even than small amount, so bad is his reputation. It is highly unlikely he will find anyone to post this new $83.3 million plus, which he will be required to post as soon as he files an appeal.

 

Unless a family member ponies up, or he posts assets worth a multiple of the penalty, donny is going to have to find the money somewhere else. He does have $30 million in a Chinese bank, so that could be part of it, but the rest?  Fire sale time.

2 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

In the first defamation trial trump was penalized $5 million. He was required to post that plus some extra, totaling $5.5 million. He could not find a surety or bondsman willing to post even than small amount, so bad is his reputation. It is highly unlikely he will find anyone to post this new $83.3 million plus, which he will be required to post as soon as he files an appeal.

 

Unless a family member ponies up, or he posts assets worth a multiple of the penalty, donny is going to have to find the money somewhere else. He does have $30 million in a Chinese bank, so that could be part of it, but the rest?  Fire sale time.

Trump will not appeal the second verdict, he will rely on the first verdict being overturned, which would make the second verdict moot.

14 hours ago, Walker88 said:

 

Here's the question people don't get that they should ask themselves before voting. Would someone do a bunch of bad things to have the opportunity to do good things? Did Trump sexually abuse Carroll, then defame his rape victim, to have the opportunity to give her $83.3 million? Or does it make more sense that maybe the Orange Sex Offender did a few good things for his maga who control what once was the Republican Party to give himself the opportunity to do a whole bunch of bad things to the United States of America?

 

 

13 hours ago, Walker88 said:

In the first defamation trial trump was penalized $5 million. He was required to post that plus some extra, totaling $5.5 million. He could not find a surety or bondsman willing to post even than small amount, so bad is his reputation. It is highly unlikely he will find anyone to post this new $83.3 million plus, which he will be required to post as soon as he files an appeal.

 

Unless a family member ponies up, or he posts assets worth a multiple of the penalty, donny is going to have to find the money somewhere else. He does have $30 million in a Chinese bank, so that could be part of it, but the rest?  Fire sale time.

And then there's the $300 or so million the state of NY is looking for with respect to the Trump fraud case. Good luck finding a bondsman to appeal that one too.

14 hours ago, Walker88 said:

 

 

My dislike of Trump is based on a comparatively trivial facet of his character, or rather the lack of it.

Trump cheats at golf. He is well known in golfing circles for it. Any experienced golfer  looking at his round-arm golf swing over a protruding belly knows his claims to be a champion golfer are complete BS. His wins only come on golf courses he owns.

In my country, golf cheats get short shrift. They are ostracised, and once the word gets around, are rejected at every golf club they try to join.

Trump defiles the game of golf, like he defiles everything else.

 

2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump will not appeal the second verdict, he will rely on the first verdict being overturned, which would make the second verdict moot.

IMO it is doubtful Trump could raise the money to appeal the second case. The bond would be $83 million. He can't get it from the family, there's a special master in the NY fraud case specifically to prevent Trump transferring funds. Permit me to doubt he would get anyone stupid enough outside the family to stand for him.

 

The appeal of the first case could be quite entertaining. I am betting Trump will throw his attorneys of that case under the bus, saying he had inadequate representation.

That creates two problems. Who is going to replace Alina Habba? After the drubbing she got from Judge Kaplan, and also lying to him, she has zero credibility. What sane lawyer wants to put their reputation on the line by representing Trump?

The second problem for Trump is Joe Tacopina. If he throws him under the bus, it's a safe bet Joe will come back swinging. He is noted as a bare-knuckle brawler in a court room.

4 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO it is doubtful Trump could raise the money to appeal the second case. The bond would be $83 million. He can't get it from the family, there's a special master in the NY fraud case specifically to prevent Trump transferring funds. Permit me to doubt he would get anyone stupid enough outside the family to stand for him.

 

The appeal of the first case could be quite entertaining. I am betting Trump will throw his attorneys of that case under the bus, saying he had inadequate representation.

That creates two problems. Who is going to replace Alina Habba? After the drubbing she got from Judge Kaplan, and also lying to him, she has zero credibility. What sane lawyer wants to put their reputation on the line by representing Trump?

The second problem for Trump is Joe Tacopina. If he throws him under the bus, it's a safe bet Joe will come back swinging. He is noted as a bare-knuckle brawler in a court room.

Throwing attorneys under the bus does not win appeals. 

 

Trump is going to have to do better than that to win his appeal.

10 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Throwing attorneys under the bus does not win appeals. 

 

Trump is going to have to do better than that to win his appeal.

Agreed, but Trump probably thinks it does.

I chortle each and every time I think of citizen trump finally having consequences for running his mouth I hope it continues with even more folks who have been wrongly besmirched by this nutter this spawn of Roy Cohen lawyer of the monster sen McCarthy of the 1950s for you folks who don’t know who I’m talking about look him up on google the similarities are striking especially when you factor in Roy Cohen being trumps mentor and sen.mcarthys lawyer 

10 hours ago, impulse said:

 

With the appeal soon to follow...

 

Assuming the verdict is disgorgement at the low end - $250 million - where do you think Trump will find that amount to post bond? Who do you think will be stupid enough to lend him the money?

This isn't Trump selling BS trading cards, or grifting his rubes for a few million. This is serious money.

7 hours ago, riclag said:

He gets a lot of help from other Republic lovers! Patriots who despise 

the Marxist, Communist, Socialist attempts to bring down the Constitution and the values of the founding fathers.

Hopefully he can use it similar to how Hoffman uses his money( helping  fund Carrol) to interfere with the leading candidate for the POTUS chances at righting the country.

imop

I really wonder if you were taught civics or any sort of political ideology in grammar school. You toss words around about which you clearly do not know the meaning.  You also don't seem to have the slightest clue what the goal and intent of the Founders was.

 

It makes my teeth hurt that anyone can reach adulthood with so little understanding of anything.

 

In case you missed it, it was trump who sent his goobers to the Capitol to overturn the election and subvert the Constitution. That is Insurrection, and according to the 14th Amendment, he is prohibited from running for any Federal office ever again.  trump also was intimately involved in the fake elector plot, which is something between insurrection and Sedition, the latter being a capital offense for which I would like to see trump fried on Sparky.

 

He also stole highly classified documents that threaten both national security and the identities of clandestine assets. And for what reason? Likely to try to monetize them, unless a goober can make up another excuse.

 

Perhaps you think Hugo Chavez rose from the grave to write some code, upload it to an Italian satellite, which then altered votes on voting machines in the US? That is what one of trump's crack lawyers told the media (but never in a court, as for that idiocy she would be disbarred)?

 

Where---anywhere---are these "Marxists, Communists and Socialists trying to bring down the Constitution? If you mean non-trump cult members, then you are woefully mistaken, as the Constitution and rule of law---you know, what the Founders laid out---are EXACTLY what the non-trump cultists are following.

 

At this point, when trump's efforts to ACTUALLY subvert the Constitution and destroy what much better people than he could ever be in his own fantasies sacrificed for are not readily apparent to someone, the only explanation is that such people are either anti-Americans themselves or else a few standard deviations left of the mean on the IQ Bell curve.

 

ZERO actual patriots support the clown trump.

 

May he die in jail or sizzle like Sunday morning bacon on Sparky if convicted of the capital crime of Sedition.