Liberal Forum

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 11:58 am » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 11:58 am

The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped, finding Trump responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse. The judgment adds to Trump’s legal woes and offers vindication to Carroll, whose allegations had been mocked and dismissed by Trump for years.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-c ... f9ec83d7db

Say what?  Take the L.

Post the date of your citation.

Failure to do so will constitute your abject surrender on the point.


The filing from Judge Lewis A. Kaplan came as Trump’s attorneys have sought a new trial and have argued that the jury’s $5 million verdict against Trump in the civil suit was excessive. The reason, they argue, is that sexual abuse could be as limited as the “groping” of a victim’s breasts.

Kaplan roundly rejected Trump’s motion Tuesday, calling that argument “entirely unpersuasive.”

“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.

He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... udge-rape/

 

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:05 pm

SO your argument is you never rejected our posts that contain opinion pieces?  LMAO!

You have the balls to lecture us on integrity?  Oh, wait, you have no balls.  Your wife took your balls when she ran as far as she could to Brazil, to get away from you.  Oh, which is further than Columbia.

That format looks wrong...and there's clear evidence of Issue.

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:06 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:06 pm

Post the date of your citation.

Failure to do so will constitute your abject surrender on the point.

The filing from Judge Lewis A. Kaplan came as Trump’s attorneys have sought a new trial and have argued that the jury’s $5 million verdict against Trump in the civil suit was excessive. The reason, they argue, is that sexual abuse could be as limited as the “groping” of a victim’s breasts.

Kaplan roundly rejected Trump’s motion Tuesday, calling that argument “entirely unpersuasive.”

“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.

He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... udge-rape/

My comment was has found liable or covicted of rape by a jury.  Your proper response to prove me wrong is to show an article that says a jury did.  Don't care what the judge said.  I was very specific in what I said.  The date is not relevant.

If I was like you I would strike thru you post because those words don't apply. 

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:07 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:07 pm

That format looks wrong...and there's clear evidence of Issue.

Sorry, bad open.

Biden is toast.  Schiff just said it is time for Biden to exit the race.

JustinSane » 17 Jul 2024, 12:04 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:04 pm

Criminal: Yes, we all watched what you pig-**** did there and the consequences for poll numbers speak for themselves - let's just say we're all less than impressed
Coup plotters: Everyone is allowed to challenge the outcome of an election
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... oter-fraud: Can't read as I have no subscription. It's a great shame. Maybe you should make your argument up-front and in the room

Stop paying Epoch Times, Ruby.

Perhaps you might be less of a cretin.

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 12:09 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:09 pm

Sorry, bad open.

Biden is toast.  Schiff just said it is time for Biden to exit the race.

No answer, no need to read.

Nod.

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 11:51 am » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 11:51 am

https://youtu.be/Spgab0skb0c?si=rpUn1VMWVvjtTA_A

"When I was President Trump's White House Press Secretary, I got the chance to take my 4-year-old son, Huck, to Bring Your Kid To Work Day — much like Jill now drags Joe to bring your husband to work," GOP Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Tuesday to a standing ovation from many RNC goers.

No jury found him guilty of rape and his felon conviction is based on a law no one ever was tried for and the underlying crime that allowed the trial hasn't been named.

All you have to do is post what jury found him guilty or liable for rape.  

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:08 pm

My comment was has found liable or covicted of rape by a jury.  Your proper response to prove me wrong is to show an article that says a jury did.  Don't care what the judge said.  I was very specific in what I said.  The date is not relevant.

If I was like you I would strike thru you post because those words don't apply.

Seriously...

Your citation is demonstrably misinformed. 

And you're every bit as wrong about the other.

Because you don't know ****, Little Shamus. 
 

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:10 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:10 pm

No answer, no need to read.

Nod.

Don't lie.  You did.  Biden is toast. He is not going to be the nominee.  At least Trump was't deemed not mentally capable of standing trial.

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:13 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:13 pm

Seriously...

Your citation is demonstrably misinformed. 

And you're every bit as wrong about the other.

Because you don't know ****, Little Shamus.

Stil waiting for that source that shows a jury found trump guilty or liable for rape.  Let me now when you get it, Meltdown Mary.

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 12:14 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:14 pm

Stil waiting for that source that shows a jury found trump guilty or liable for rape.  Let me now when you get it, Meltdown Mary.

I'm waiting for you to confirm the date of your citation

You have the words of the presiding judge on that very question.

They are not vague.
 

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 12:13 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:13 pm

Don't lie.  You did.  Biden is toast. He is not going to be the nominee.  At least Trump was't deemed not mentally capable of standing trial.

Forget your strained interpretation of Hur.

Let's see what Grifty's attorney said about that...

Dowd then explained to Mueller and Quarles why he was trying to keep the president from testifying: “I’m not going to sit there and let him look like an idiot. And you publish that transcript, because everything leaks in Washington, and the guys overseas are going to say, ‘I told you he was an idiot. I told you he was a goddamn dumbbell. What are we dealing with this idiot for?’ ”


https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/09 ... to-testify

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:09 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:09 pm

Stop paying Epoch Times, Ruby.

Perhaps you might be less of a cretin.

Whether my views are representative of those who read The Epoch Times or not, I would say is the least of the Democrat supporters problems at the moment. You are all in such a quagmire of your own making, that the idea of you winning the next election is now all but forgettable. That could well change, agreed, but maybe some internal monologue questioning how you pig-**** ended up here might be worthwhile.. Politicized lawfare against your opponent has to come in to the mix
 
 
 

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:23 pm

I'm waiting for you to confirm the date of your citation

You have the words of the presiding judge on that very question.

They are not vague.

The date of my citation is not relevant to the fact NO JURY has found him guilty of or liable for rape.  If you need the date  simply click the link.  

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:24 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:24 pm

No need whatsoever.

Looks like you **** up that attempt at ST.  Hell, even you know what you posted is not relevant.        

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 12:26 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:26 pm

Looks like you **** up that attempt at ST.  Hell, even you know what you posted is not relevant.      

I had a change of heart when I saw the Stupid.

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:23 pm

I'm waiting for you to confirm the date of your citation

You have the words of the presiding judge on that very question.

They are not vague.

I didn't say you had the judges word.  What you don't have is s Juries words.

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:24 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:24 pm

Forget your strained interpretation of Hur.

Let's see what Grifty's attorney said about that...

Dowd then explained to Mueller and Quarles why he was trying to keep the president from testifying: “I’m not going to sit there and let him look like an idiot. And you publish that transcript, because everything leaks in Washington, and the guys overseas are going to say, ‘I told you he was an idiot. I told you he was a goddamn dumbbell. What are we dealing with this idiot for?’ ”

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/09 ... to-testify

Sorry, many of us posted from the report, not Vanity Fair.  And you are not allowed to use them because they are linked off of Drudge.

*Huey » 17 Jul 2024, 12:26 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:26 pm

The date of my citation is not relevant to the fact NO JURY has found him guilty of or liable for rape.  If you need the date  simply click the link.

Of course it is, Cretin.

After the verdict, Team Grifty was making that argument. Which obliged the PRESIDING JUDGE to clarify.

Which he did..

Note the emphasis.

Blackvegetable » 17 Jul 2024, 12:36 pm » wrote: ↑

17 Jul 2024, 12:36 pm

Of course it is, Cretin.

After the verdict, Team Grifty was making that argument. Which obliged the PRESIDING JUDGE to clarify.

Which he did..

Note the emphasis.

Sorry, wrong format.

Any post where you use strike thru will not be considered for discussion.