I sincerely hope that she gets ALL the money that she's been awarded. It's just a great pity that Trump has got away with not paying contractors over the years by draging out lawsuits for years so they have to settle for a pittance.

He was found by a court to have sexually abused a woman and was ordered to pay substantial damages. Those are the facts. If, knowing that, you still choose to defend him, then that says something about your moral compass, not mine.

And you know who you are. You know why you do it. That, more than anything, truly terrifies me.

What frightens me is not one individual, but the willingness of ordinary people to excuse, minimise or even celebrate behaviour they would once have condemned. History's darkest chapters were not written by monsters alone. They were written by countless people who looked the other way, made excuses, or decided that loyalty to their tribe mattered more than truth, decency or justice.

Perhaps we flatter ourselves when we think civilisation is robust. It isn't. The distance between decency and barbarism is far shorter than we'd like to believe. The veneer of civilisation is paper-thin, and when enough people decide that principles no longer matter, history shows us exactly where that road can lead.

Arbeit macht frei - choose your side carefully.

1. They met by chance in the store and chatted playfully.

2. Trump suggested they buy lingerie as a joke.

3. They went into the lingerie department together.

4. He followed her into a dressing room.

5. She testified that he suddenly pushed her against the wall, pulled down her tights, digitally penetrated her, and then penetrated her with his penis before she managed to push him away and escape.

Edited July 14Jul 14 by beautifulthailand99

On 7/10/2026 at 9:11 PM, Thingamabob said:

It's not about 'crying, sobbing and debasing women'. It's simply about whether you believe the alleged victims in these cases, or not.

and a jury who sat and listened to all the arguments and reviewed all the evidence provided by both sides did believe the woman......its the way the jury system works....but trump of course has appealed and delayed and defamed and all the way to the supreme court he has lost....it's not about whether you believe the victims ...its about what the jury believes...they sat there and looked and listened to it all and decided the victim was telling the truth and trump was lying.....if you don't like that system of justice maybe go to north korea where there are no trials no evidence no appeals.

14 minutes ago, pomchop said:

and a jury who sat and listened to all the arguments and reviewed all the evidence provided by both sides did believe the woman......its the way the jury system works....but trump of course has appealed and delayed and defamed and all the way to the supreme court he has lost....it's not about whether you believe the victims ...its about what the jury believes...they sat there and looked and listened to it all and decided the victim was telling the truth and trump was lying.....if you don't like that system of justice maybe go to north korea where there are no trials no evidence no appeals.

She possesses an exceptional memory. Not only could she recall the exact time and date, but the physical evidence also strongly corroborated her account.

4 hours ago, pomchop said:

and a jury who sat and listened to all the arguments and reviewed all the evidence provided by both sides did believe the woman......its the way the jury system works....but trump of course has appealed and delayed and defamed and all the way to the supreme court he has lost....it's not about whether you believe the victims ...its about what the jury believes...they sat there and looked and listened to it all and decided the victim was telling the truth and trump was lying.....if you don't like that system of justice maybe go to north korea where there are no trials no evidence no appeals.

Thank you for the advice. Much appreciated.

On 7/9/2026 at 3:48 PM, scottiejohn said:

Why does a person with all his wealth and also being the POTUS not just say something along the lines of " I still maintain my innocence but as POTUS I feel bound to accept the rulings"!

This particular character is unique.

On 7/9/2026 at 3:48 PM, scottiejohn said:

Why does a person with all his wealth and also being the POTUS not just say something along the lines of " I still maintain my innocence but as POTUS I feel bound to accept the rulings"!

Because he sees life as a zero sum game. He keeps score with cash and assets.

If he gives anyone anything, no matter big or small, he sees it as a loss of personal stature. A person slight he can’t forgive or forget.

Anyone trying to get anything he thinks should be his becomes a lowlife enemy for life. Even those who worked for him and whom he owes payment.

Court judgments against him are the worst. It’s lawfare of political weaponization and never his misjudgment and bad faith.

5 hours ago, nick supreme said:

She possesses an exceptional memory. Not only could she recall the exact time and date, but the physical evidence also strongly corroborated her account.

I'll presume sarcasm but, really, the only evidence in the case -- other than Ms. Carroll's own testimony -- was 2 professional journalist friends who remember that they sometime recall getting a phone call from Ms. Carroll about the rape/encounter.

Edited July 15Jul 15 by JerryM

7 hours ago, ravip said:

This particular character is unique.

He is unique for all the wrong reasons!

8 hours ago, JerryM said:

I'll presume sarcasm but, really, the only evidence in the /case -- other than Ms. Carroll's own testimony -- was 2 professional journalist friends who remember that they sometime recall getting a phone call from Ms. Carroll about the rape/encounter.

There was no evidence in this case, only he says, she says. Ms. Carroll's allegation, that she was raped in the middle of an upmarket department store, was made after a period of 30 years had elapsed.

11 hours ago, JerryM said:

I'll presume sarcasm but, really, the only evidence in the case -- other than Ms. Carroll's own testimony -- was 2 professional journalist friends who remember that they sometime recall getting a phone call from Ms. Carroll about the rape/encounter.

so you were in the court room and saw and heard all the evidence as well as all the judge's instructions etc? You should write a book and reveal all the jury deliberations and show the world how the jury saw no evidence and just pulled a verdict out of their rear ends.

33 minutes ago, pomchop said:

so you were in the court room and saw and heard all the evidence as well as all the judge's instructions etc? You should write a book and reveal all the jury deliberations and show the world how the jury saw no evidence and just pulled a verdict out of their rear ends.

33 minutes ago, pomchop said:

so you were in the court room and saw and heard all the evidence as well as all the judge's instructions etc? You should write a book and reveal all the jury deliberations and show the world how the jury saw no evidence and just pulled a verdict out of their rear ends.

This was nothing but a he-said, she-said case.

4 hours ago, TedG said:

This was nothing but a he-said, she-said case.

yes and obviously dear leader as usual could not keep his big flapping mouth shut while bragging about all the women he grabbed by the pussy....no big surprise that a jury would believe him as apparently millions of cult members certainly believe everything he says.....

2 hours ago, pomchop said:

yes and obviously dear leader as usual could not keep his big flapping mouth shut while bragging about all the women he grabbed by the pussy....no big surprise that a jury would believe him as apparently millions of cult members certainly believe everything he says.....

Carroll's testimony and that of the 2 friends who claimed to have received a contemporaneous phone call was the only direct evidence in the case.

The jury found him liable on a preponderance of evidence basis. I don't agree. But an appeal is only based upon procedural errors.

Edited July 15Jul 15 by JerryM

On 7/11/2026 at 7:42 PM, Cory1848 said:

He was found guilty by a jury, and no court, not even his hand-picked Supreme Court, will hear his appeals. He himself earlier admitted that it was fun to assault women, because if you're a star, they let you do it. If you still claim that the charges are “dubious,” you have deliberately twisted yourself into a pretzel to reach that conclusion. And/or, you are deeply misogynist. Use your head, man. Not to mention your heart.

Courts& Judiciary

On 7/10/2026 at 9:04 AM, Thingamabob said:

Anybody who believes this woman is out of their mind.

30 years after the event alleged to have taken place in the middle of a department store. No evidence, only he says, she says.

Don't rape people - it's not difficult unless you are a truly evil piece of filth. It's not difficult either just basic Human 101 and then there are monsters. Don't follow them less you become a monster yourself or think rape is a good thing.

5 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Don't rape people

In New York State, there is no statute of limitations for prosecuting criminal first-degree rape.

From the original Carroll II civil complaint:

Roughly 27 years ago, playful banter at the luxury department store Bergdorf Goodman on Fifth Avenue in New York City took a dark turn when Defendant Donald J. Trump seized Plaintiff E. Jean Carroll, forced her up against a dressing room wall, pinned her in place

with his shoulder, and raped her.

Edited July 15Jul 15 by JerryM

On 7/11/2026 at 2:38 PM, Thingamabob said:

Happily married with a much loved daughter, two grand daughters and three great grand daughters. Thinking on regarding your pretzel reference. Pretzels were created by English monks hundreds of years ago. Not sure how they are relevant to this topic.

"much loved daughter" 🤣

18 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

"much loved daughter" 🤣

Oh and Hitler was a vegetarian and loved dogs. So what ?

3 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

"much loved daughter" 🤣

Your point is ?

14 hours ago, JerryM said:

Carroll's testimony and that of the 2 friends who claimed to have received a contemporaneous phone call was the only direct evidence in the case.

The jury found him liable on a preponderance of evidence basis. I don't agree. But an appeal is only based upon procedural errors.

well i didn't agree with the jury in OJ case but the only opinion that matters is the jury....

9 hours ago, pomchop said:

well i didn't agree with the jury in OJ case but the only opinion that matters is the jury....

There was not one piece of hard evidence that this event ever occurred. And I'll stick with my opinion regardless of the jury's opinion.

23 minutes ago, JerryM said:

There was not one piece of hard evidence that this event ever occurred. And I'll stick with my opinion regardless of the jury's opinion.

And maybe the worst outcome of all these NY State civil and criminal trials, Georgia State criminal, federal indictments and the Carroll defamation/assault cases is that they may have provided Trump with the additional votes needed to win 2024 in all the toss-up swing states.

Edited July 16Jul 16 by JerryM

On 7/16/2026 at 5:00 AM, Thingamabob said:

30 years after the event alleged to have taken place in the middle of a department store. No evidence, only he says, she says.

He says, they say.

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

He says, they say.

So which to you is the preferrable outcome: Trump loses the Carroll case but wins the 2024 election OR Trump wins the Carroll case but loses the 2024 election ?

And if you want to say that all these case against Trump during the 2024 election cycle had no impact on the swing state tight margins, i will disagree.

Trump wins per Gemini:

Wisconsin: Trump +0.86%

Michigan: Trump +1.4%

Pennsylvania: Trump +1.7%

Edited July 16Jul 16 by JerryM

1 minute ago, JerryM said:

So which to you is the preferrable outcome: Trump loses the Carroll case but wins the 2024 election OR Trump wins the Carroll case but loses the 2024 election ?

And if you want to say that all these case against Trump during the 2024 election cycle had no impact on the swing state tight margins, i will disagree.

Please don't involve me in your arguments. I am simply pointing out, that her story was supported by other testimony. As you have mentioned yourself.

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Please don't involve me in your arguments. I am simply pointing out, that her story was supported by other testimony. As you have mentioned yourself.

Yes as have others have said I was not in the courtroom. I posted this going way back:

And on that score you and me both lost. Trump is maybe out now $5 million to Ms. Carroll but winning the 2024 election he is about $1 billion ahead.

Edited July 16Jul 16 by JerryM

As to the above ??, in my opinion, the NET result of the NY State criminal 37 varieties case conviction, the 2 NY state civil cases, and the GA get-me-votes case dismissed, along with the 2 Federal criminal cases dismissed, is that all they collectively did was to help Trump win the 2024 election.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by JerryM

22 minutes ago, JerryM said:

As to the above ??, in my opinion, the NET result of the NY State criminal 37 varieties case conviction, the 2 NY state civil cases, and the GA get-me-votes case dismissed, along with the 2 Federal criminal cases dismissed, is that all they collectively did was to help Trump win the 2024 election.

ExecutiveBranch

It could be different if Judge Merchan sentenced him to prison but he decide not to interfere with his ability to campaign. There again, the constitution allows a convicted criminal to hold office or even if jailed except for insurrection (storming of the capital) and treason (keeping high classified documents).

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

It could be different if Judge Merchan sentenced him to prison but he decide not to interfere with his ability to campaign. There again, the constitution allows a convicted criminal to hold office or even if jailed except for insurrection (storming of the capital) and treason (keeping high classified documents).

As above I was referring to those who maybe saw Trump as being unreasonably picked upon and might have made the difference with the margin of Trump winning e.g. Wisconsin by less than 1% of the vote.

As to jail, Trump was convicted of a lowest level NY Class E felony and, as a first time offender, would rarely if ever get a jail sentence.

As far as the 2 big federal cases, they became moot once Trump was re-elected.

Edited July 17Jul 17 by JerryM