Liberal Forum

*Beekeeper » 13 Jul 2025, 7:35 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 7:35 pm

Since you're trying to be funny, be funnier.

I'll try.

If a therapist commits rape, he becomes the rapist therapist. 
 
 

BuckNaked » 13 Jul 2025, 8:11 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 8:11 pm

Make her lawyer up spend a lot on lawyer fees

There's that. But he risks paying for her lawyers as well as his own, if she successfully counter-sues for malicious prosecution. 
 

Cannonpointer » 13 Jul 2025, 9:02 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 9:02 pm

Trump cannot sue her for having - and voiving - that opinion. The man is on record admitting that he grabs women by the ******.

According to the interweb:If there is a physical (or digital) representation of the false statement, then it is libel.Elements of Libel
In order to prove libel, a plaintiff must show:

• A false statement was made in writing.
• The statement was published or otherwise communicated to third parties.
• The defendant was at fault (either because of negligence or actual malice).
• The plaintiff experienced harm such as reputational damage, economic loss, scorn, contempt, public hatred, ridicule or shame.

 

DeezerShoove » 13 Jul 2025, 10:16 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 10:16 pm

According to the interweb:If there is a physical (or digital) representation of the false statement, then it is libel.Elements of Libel
In order to prove libel, a plaintiff must show:

• A false statement was made in writing.
• The statement was published or otherwise communicated to third parties.
• The defendant was at fault (either because of negligence or actual malice).
• The plaintiff experienced harm such as reputational damage, economic loss, scorn, contempt, public hatred, ridicule or shame.

How does a ****** grabber prove the statement false?

She is of the opinion he is a rapist. He talks like a rapist. He's been accused of rape. She believes the word on the street. 
 

Cannonpointer » 13 Jul 2025, 10:18 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 10:18 pm

How does a ****** grabber prove the statement false?

She is of the opinion he is a rapist. He talks like a rapist. He's been accused of rape. She believes the word on the street.

But isn't true. Not convicted. She meant harm in saying that about him.
I'm merely playing the other side of "she can't be sued".
I believe she sure can.
And I believe a quite credible case can be made against her.

Lawyers and liars will have to straighten this out.  

ps
Legally this will have nothing to do with the Epstein fiasco.
People will try to blend them but this is a simple defamation case while the other is big and scary.

Cannonpointer » 13 Jul 2025, 9:10 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 9:10 pm

There's that. But he risks paying for her lawyers as well as his own, if she successfully counter-sues for malicious prosecution.

He can afford it go for it!

DeezerShoove » 13 Jul 2025, 10:16 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 10:16 pm

According to the interweb:If there is a physical (or digital) representation of the false statement, then it is libel.Elements of Libel
In order to prove libel, a plaintiff must show:

• A false statement was made in writing.
• The statement was published or otherwise communicated to third parties.
• The defendant was at fault (either because of negligence or actual malice).
• The plaintiff experienced harm such as reputational damage, economic loss, scorn, contempt, public hatred, ridicule or shame.

But that's what I'm saying. Prove it's false. 

It's one thing for stephenopolopolopolos to say, "Donald Trump was Convicted of rape by a jury of his peers on this date in this courthouse." Trump produces the verdict, shows the claim is false, sues the wee *** for libel. 

It is quite another for her to simply say, "That's what happens when you put a rapist in office." This is an opinion - not a statement of fact. And the opinion is based on him having said he grabs women that he does not even know by the ******, and on him having been accused of rape by multiple women.

Here is the first paragraph on the topic from wiki:

Since the 1970s, at least 25 women have publicly accused Donald Trump of rape, kissing and groping without consent; looking under women's skirts; and walking in on naked teenage pageant contestants. Trump has denied all of the allegations. He has a history of insulting and belittling women when speaking to the media and on social media,[1][2] and has made lewd comments about women, disparaged their physical appearance, and referred to them using derogatory epithets.[2][3][4]

I'm on record saying he's not gonna sue. You can rub my nose in it if he does. 

I will also jump out there and say if he DOES sue, his political enemies are going to get an enormous smile on their faces, because that lawsuit will damage him a **** of a lot more than it will damage her. 1000% she'll be defended on someone else's dime. She might find a lawyer who will countersue on contingency for malicious prosecution. His entire past with women becomes relevant and admissable. He will be serving himself up - and he's too smart for that. 
 
 
 

Go for it!

DeezerShoove » 13 Jul 2025, 10:47 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 10:47 pm

But isn't true. Not convicted. She meant harm in saying that about him.

She never said he was convicted. Stephenopolopolopolos did.

DeezerShoove » 13 Jul 2025, 10:47 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 10:47 pm

I'm merely playing the other side of "she can't be sued".
I believe she sure can.
And I believe a quite credible case can be made against her.

Lawyers and liars will have to straighten this out.

She absolutely can be sued - and absolutely won't be. That's where my money is sitting.

DeezerShoove » 13 Jul 2025, 10:47 pm » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 10:47 pm

ps
Legally this will have nothing to do with the Epstein fiasco.
People will try to blend them but this is a simple defamation case while the other is big and scary.

The number of trips he took on that plane and the amount of palling around with a sex pest could conceivably make it in front of a jury. It becomes germaine. She called him a rapist. She based that on evidence. She has a right to have the jury weigh that evidence.

**** her make her lawyer up

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2025, 11:07 am » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 11:07 am

She never said he was convicted. Stephenopolopolopolos did.

She absolutely can be sued - and absolutely won't be. That's where my money is sitting.

The number of trips he took on that plane and the amount of palling around with a sex pest could conceivably make it in front of a jury. It becomes germaine. She called him a rapist. She based that on evidence. She has a right to have the jury weigh that evidence.

I never said SHE uttered the word "convicted".
I was referring to the fact that he was never convicted ergo, legally speaking, he is decidedly NOT a rapist.
But she purposely called him that. Meaning to do harm to a political opponent.

Do the Epstein plane rides become germane? As you said: conceivably.
They really aren't though unless a judge allows it. Grasping desperately is allowed sometimes.

Technically riding in a plane isn't against the law...  

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm

I never said SHE uttered the word "convicted".
I was referring to the fact that he was never convicted ergo, legally speaking, he is decidedly NOT a rapist.
But she purposely called him that. Meaning to do harm to a political opponent.

Do the Epstein plane rides become germane? As you said: conceivably.
They really aren't though unless a judge allows it. Grasping desperately is allowed sometimes.

Technically riding in a plane isn't against the law...

What's so funny, CP is reading from HIS script and not the one where the basis for a defamation suit exists. HIS opinion wouldn't be a requirement for a lawsuit, but would "maybe" help it along in getting a settlement. ANY words that are designed to harm, and AOC's words were, are defamation. 

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm

I never said SHE uttered the word "convicted".
I was referring to the fact that he was never convicted ergo, legally speaking, he is decidedly NOT a rapist.
But she purposely called him that. Meaning to do harm to a political opponent.

Do the Epstein plane rides become germane? As you said: conceivably.
They really aren't though unless a judge allows it. Grasping desperately is allowed sometimes.

Technically riding in a plane isn't against the law...

Here's the key point to this entire AOC claim....

• Defamation per se:
  .
  Certain types of false statements (e.g., accusations of serious crimes, certain sexual misconduct) are considered so inherently harmful that a court will presume damages. The plaintiff does not need to prove specific harm in these cases. 

 And THAT is where AOC screwed her own pooch. Too bad. Sooooo sad. See ya' in court, BITCH!!
 

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm

I never said SHE uttered the word "convicted".
I was referring to the fact that he was never convicted ergo, legally speaking, he is decidedly NOT a rapist.

And bin Laden is decidedly not a terrorist, and Epstein dindu nuffin.

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm

But she purposely called him that. Meaning to do harm to a political opponent.

She called him it, and she'll call him it again. And he'll take, and he'll like it.

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm

Do the Epstein plane rides become germane? As you said: conceivably.

Now that Epstein dindu nuffin, it hardly matters.

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 3:29 pm

They really aren't though unless a judge allows it. Grasping desperately is allowed sometimes.

Technically riding in a plane isn't against the law...

Neither is bragging about grabbing pussies. Neither is being accused by a score of women. But it can lead to people opining that you're a rapist.

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2025, 5:55 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 5:55 pm

And bin Laden is decidedly not a terrorist, and Epstein dindu nuffin.

She called him it, and she'll call him it again. And he'll take, and he'll like it.

Now that Epstein dindu nuffin, it hardly matters.

Neither is bragging about grabbing pussies. Neither is being accused by a score of women. But it can lead to people opining that you're a rapist.

So, we both have worthless opinions. No biggie.

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 6:48 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 6:48 pm

So, we both have worthless opinions. No biggie.

Except one of us will be proved correct - elevating his opinion from worthless to PROPHETIC.

When that happens, please: hold your applause.
 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2025, 8:22 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 8:22 pm

Except one of us will be proved correct - elevating his opinion from worthless to PROPHETIC.

When that happens, please: hold your applause.

My opinions are reserved here most of the time.
They always seem to be contests somehow.

In this case, your opinion may well turn out to be prophetic but it will serve to prove that the world is wrong.
So, in a much larger sense I am right and you are bedfellowed with Satan and his accused brethren.

In either case I can feel good about the destruction of life as we know it.  

*Beekeeper » 13 Jul 2025, 6:42 am » wrote: ↑

13 Jul 2025, 6:42 am

You can go to the bank that AOC has done **** WITH THE WRONG ONE HERE!! I see MILLIONS and MILLIONS of AOC's whatever she owns, coming TRUMP'S WAY!! Talking about OWNING SOMEONE, Trump will OWN AOC in a few SHORT MONTHS without any doubt!!!

All she had to do was ask her boy StephyPOOPolous what it costs to claim "Trump is a rapist"!!

New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is under fire after calling President Donald Trump “a rapist” in a Friday post on X, prompting widespread accusations of defamation and calls for a lawsuit.

 The congresswoman posted: “Wow who would have thought that electing a rapist would have complicated the release of the Epstein Files?”

https://x.com/AOC/status/19437366758776 ... kruptcy%2F

https://x.com/BasedMikeLee/status/19439 ... kruptcy%2F

SOUNDS like it COULD ne at LEAST a $16 million verdict for Donald Trump !!

DeezerShoove » 14 Jul 2025, 9:53 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 9:53 pm

My opinions are reserved here most of the time.
They always seem to be contests somehow.

In this case, your opinion may well turn out to be prophetic but it will serve to prove that the world is wrong.
So, in a much larger sense I am right and you are bedfellowed with Satan and his accused brethren.

In either case I can feel good about the destruction of life as we know it.

I would beg to differ, but I am not a beggar. So I just differ, is all.

You would have to search high and low to find a *** who has worked harder than trump to convince folks that calling him a rapist is not out of line. Bragging about ****** grabbing, perving on Miss Teen USA contestants, macking on his own daughter. Give me a **** break. There's nothing evil in seeing him through jaundiced eyes. There's something quite evil about pretending he's george worshington crossing the deleware to assault king george's airports. 

The *** shredded the pedo-files on his way to starting wwiii. It's time for folks to wake up. 
 

Cannonpointer » 14 Jul 2025, 5:55 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Jul 2025, 5:55 pm

And bin Laden is decidedly not a terrorist, and Epstein dindu nuffin.

She called him it, and she'll call him it again. And he'll take, and he'll like it.

Now that Epstein dindu nuffin, it hardly matters.

Neither is bragging about grabbing pussies. Neither is being accused by a score of women. But it can lead to people opining that you're a rapist.

Then perhaps with your "superior intellect" you can explain why your boy Stephypoopolous didn't use the "It's my opinion that Trump is a convicted rapist" defense and fight his $16 million dollar payout??