Phx-Suns.Net

He looks like an undercooked ham.

He looks like the low IQ brother of Judge Doom (from Who Framed Roger Rabbit).

Trump, endorsed by China, Putin, NK, the Mob, KKK and US evangelicals. Perfect!

From the Trump 2nd defamation trial vs E. Jean Carroll. Judge reminds everyone including Trump who is in the room that he has already been found liable for sexually assaulting her.

Isn't that ruling still appeal? I still have no idea how it could have been ruled that he was guilty, or how she was even considered a credible witness. She doesn't know when it happened including the year. How can you mount a defense if you don't know what date it happened? She has said she thinks people think rape is sexy. She was a massive fan of The Apprentice. She felt no trauma ever going back the location of the alleged crime. She is loony as $3 dollar bill. She named her cats tits and vagina.

There was a trial, and he was found liable for sexually assaulting her. What does it matter what she named her cats, or that she doesn't remember the exact date and time?

I understand there was a trial, it just boggles my mind. It just showed she isn't a credible witness and seemed to be obsessed with Trump in a weird way. If the criteria is that low, almost anyone could accuse anyone else over pure bs made up in their head.

The jury must of thought she was a credible witness. They found Trump guilty. The judge is just stating fact. It was determined that Trump sexually assaulted her in a court of law. Of course Maga isn’t going to like it. Of course Trump says he’s innocent. Of course they are claiming everything and everyone is fraudulent. It’s the same game plan every time.

Nodack wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 17, 2024 12:45 am

The jury must of thought she was a credible witness. They found Trump guilty. The judge is just stating fact. It was determined that Trump sexually assaulted her in a court of law. Of course Maga isn’t going to like it. Of course Trump says he’s innocent. Of course they are claiming everything and everyone is fraudulent. It’s the same game plan every time.

Yes, they are making the same claims and for good reasons. I even gave you some of them that didn't make sense. Not being able to provide the day month or even year is a huge red flag. Not sure why you can't see that. Maybe put yourself in the position of the defense? Try to defend yourself against claims where you can't provide proof you may not have even been in the country during said attack.

This isn't even just a Maga or Trump thing, it could apply to anyone if falsely accused. Try to put your blind hatred for Trump, whether justified or not, aside, and look at the situation if it was Obama or someone you love in the situation.

Listen, if somebody has a weirdly named cat, there's no way they could get raped.

I find no need to argue about this. Trump had his day in court and lost. He lost the case and went outside and spewed the same crap that got I’m in trouble the first place as if to say FU to the verdict and now he’s going to pay even more because he cannot shut his mouth for five minutes. I have zero sympathy for him. Argue the verdict was unfair. It makes no difference to me. He was found guilty in a court of law. Game over.

Nodack wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 17, 2024 9:19 am

I find no need to argue about this. Trump had his day in court and lost. He lost the case and went outside and spewed the same crap that got I’m in trouble the first place as if to say FU to the verdict and now he’s going to pay even more because he cannot shut his mouth for five minutes. I have zero sympathy for him. Argue the verdict was unfair. It makes no difference to me. He was found guilty in a court of law. Game over.

Well, apparently it's not game over, since it's in appeals.

Mori Chu wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 17, 2024 8:12 am

Listen, if somebody has a weirdly named cat, there's no way they could get raped.

It goes to her mindset. You've seen her in interviews, right? She seems perfectly sane to you and would never imagine or make things up? I'm asking, even though I assume that you did and you do believe this.

If you can't possibly prove you weren't even in the vicinity of the incident, how could you possibly defend yourself against made up claims(if just for this mental excercise they are made up)?

My understanding is that Trump's sexual assault of E. Jean Carroll is not in appeals. He's back in court with her for a second separate trial because he keeps repeatedly defaming her online and in his speeches, so she sued him a second time. He's in court because SHE has brought him back there, since he can't keep his mouth shut and won't stop trashing her despite already being found liable for defamation of her and being told to stop doing so.

You may be right, but I think the civil suit about the sexual assault has been filed for appeals.

If I had FU type money and some lunatic falsely accused me of sexual assault, I would flame her in the media too. Now, if the sexual assault civil suit gets overturned, you could overturn the other 2 defamation suits too and then counter sue, I would imagine. I'm not a lawyer, so I could be wrong.

I would be, "F that lying POS batshit crazy bitch!". And, if you think that's wrong, tough. I wouldn't lie down and take it.

I would say nothing and let my lawyer do the talking. Trump appealing a decision against him I think is just assumed in all cases. I don’t have much court experience. When I appealed one of my mother’s decisions growing up, I almost always lost the appeal.

Nodack wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 17, 2024 4:23 pm

I would say nothing and let my lawyer do the talking. Trump appealing a decision against him I think is just assumed in all cases. I don’t have much court experience. When I appealed one of my mother’s decisions growing up, I almost always lost the appeal.

Yeah, I didn't always have the best luck on appeals either growing up.

Fwiw, hearing scheduled for allegations of misconduct by DA Fani Willis.

An article about the charges against DA Fani Willis.