What an amazing publication and a man of such high integrity. 

March 9, 2024

 

Time Magazine’s designation of Adolf Hitler as “Man of the Year” for 1938 identified Hitler as “the newsmaker who most influenced world events for better or worse” and was not an endorsement

 

https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/time-magazines-1938-man-year-choice-not-hitler-endorsement-2024-03-08/

Could not have happened to a more nicer person then the grifter.

Being an uneducated man, similar to Trump, I had to look up the definition of 'grifter'

 

''a person who engages in petty or small-scale swindling.''

 

I truly believe Trump is a grifter. Go and watch the old netflix series on Trump. He was doing dodgy deals as a young and more hansum man with his father. Once a rogue, always a rogue

 

 

 

Musk will stump up......his money buys him power and influence and he's not going to give either of those up.

I don't like Trump, and I am sure he committed many crimes.

But that "rape" case, where the woman doesn't even know in which year he supposedly raped her, is just crazy.

It seems he was convicted without any real evidence. He was convicted because that woman who receives the money and some other women said he raped them (or put his hands or fingers in places they should not be or something like that).

How is someone accused of rape, with an uncertain date, supposed to defend himself? Should he account for every hour in his life for a time period of more than a year, to show that he wasn't even anywhere near her in that apartment store?

This is just crazy - American "justice".

16 minutes ago, ubonr1971 said:

Being an uneducated man, similar to Trump, I had to look up the definition of 'grifter'

 

''a person who engages in petty or small-scale swindling.''

 

I truly believe Trump is a grifter. Go and watch the old netflix series on Trump. He was doing dodgy deals as a young and more hansum man with his father. Once a rogue, always a rogue

Does that make him guilty in above case?

4 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I don't like Trump, and I am sure he committed many crimes.

But that "rape" case, where the woman doesn't even know in which year he supposedly raped her, is just crazy.

It seems he was convicted without any real evidence. He was convicted because that woman who receives the money and some other women said he raped them (or put his hands or fingers in places they should not be or something like that).

How is someone accused of rape, with an uncertain date, supposed to defend himself? Should he account for every hour in his life for a time period of more than a year, to show that he wasn't even anywhere near her in that apartment store?

This is just crazy - American "justice".

 

No doubt the Trump defenders will soon inform you....he wasn't convicted.....he was found liable on a preponderance of evidence.....so he's not all bad.

12 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

No doubt the Trump defenders will soon inform you....he wasn't convicted.....he was found liable on a preponderance of evidence.....so he's not all bad.

He has to pay millions to the woman who accused him. Without any evidence. I don't know if that is technically called guilty, but it definitely feels like guilty. 

Just now, OneMoreFarang said:

He has to pay millions to the woman who accused him. Without any evidence. I don't know if that is technically called guilty, but it definitely feels like guilty. 

 

True....... but they will defend him and say he was 'only' found (or held) liable.

 No sources with this thread!

Its on appeal!

On to the next higher court!

 

He would next request an 'en banc' or full justice review of the 2nd District appeal panel court denial -- the 'next highest court is the Supreme Court.