Trump Given A Subpoena For All Documents Relating To Assault Allegations

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: yuppa

Just like the Russia probe is turning up nothing?

LOL

Was trump prosecuted for his comments? NO he was not. Did said woman press charges? No she did not. SOme women like a aggressive guy.

ANd SO far No nothing on Trump himself. No prosecution. No conviction,so No not anything has turned up. Oh and Lol.

remember its not guilty until proven to be so. Not the other way around.

Unfortunately no conviction for the elite is not an indicator of justice. Ahem HRC.

Thats not how our "justice" system works. No there has been lack of evidence an dthat swhy no prosecutor will do anything yet. On HRC you need a triple slam dunk.

a reply to: yuppa

It is how it works. All the time. But go ahead and think different because it's your guy.

a reply to: yuppa

The point was, since you seem to have completely missed it, is that there is a huge difference between consensual and non-consensual.

Period.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: yuppa

It is how it works. All the time. But go ahead and think different because it's your guy.

Im independent. i dont like him,but i dislike hillary even more so,but even though i do not like him i wont just let him get slammed for no reason other than waaah my hiwwawy didn win.

Trace these allegations and i bet a associate of hers is involved somewhere.

You dotn want justice. you demonstrated that with your comment. Its INNOCENT until proven GUILTY. COnstitution does not specify your class or wealth when applying that.

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: yuppa

The point was, since you seem to have completely missed it, is that there is a huge difference between consensual and non-consensual.

Period.

PROOF. is the difference. Although you will say that isnt just as above.

a reply to: loam

It's been building since the campaign, everyone knows Trump has a thing for the ladies. But in somewhat recent history we've seen the largest news peddler (Ailes) go down, we just saw the most powerful guy in Hollywood (Weinstein) go down. Trump and Weinstein used to hang out a lot. Trump hung out with Epstein too. I strongly suspect he's guilty... proving it is another matter, but there's at least 13 women right now who have claimed Trump raped them.

a reply to: loam

That's because it's topical with the Weinstein stuff going on.

a reply to: yuppa

If it in fact did or did not happen, yes.

But. That. Wasn't. The. Point. I. Was. Making.

It was about the difference between a consensual act to a non-consensual act. Period.

Pay attention.

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
I'm sure Trump has had some sexual proclivities throughout his life. Funny that these never became an issue until he tried to help the USA get back on it's feet. I do think Trump should be held accountable if he committed illegal actions, but clearly this is an attempt to ruin a US President and keep the US as a globalist puppet.

Powerful people who keep the money flowing tend to get away with it. It has nothing to do with politics.

originally posted by: MysticPearl
Why are liberals so sexist?

Automatically believe any woman claiming she was touched inappropriately. It automatically puts a woman's word above a man's. Happens over and over. Duke lacrosse? Just a well known example.

If a man were to claim the same, he'd be laughed at.

There's a lot more than 1 woman claiming it in the case of Trump.

a reply to: loam

This seems odd to me--why would a court want potentially thousands of documents pertaining to things that are not a part of the case? I've had plenty of experience with trials, and I have never seen such a thing happen.

I'm calling BS on this actually happening--Trump's lawyers are correct when stating that this is an exceptionally broad request and seeks out information that is irrelevant to the case, which is a defamation lawsuit based on Trump saying that she is lying.

We'll see how it goes, since apparently October 31 is the deadline for the stay of action that, apparently, both parties agreed upon, pending an attempt to have the case thrown out.

I'm been a part of both aiding in prosecution and defense of sexual assault and rape cases, and I'll tell you right now, from what I've seen (and given the length of time since the claimed incident), this will most likely get thrown out due to it being a he-said-she-said case that doesn't appear to have any evidence (which is why they're throwing the hail Mary pass of trying to subpoena everything associated with all accusations).

I know a desperate attempt by an attorney when I see one.

originally posted by: nicevillegrl
That being said, in my opinion, it’s only when the pursuer or aggressor refuses to take no for an answer, threaten retribution for non-compliance, or forces a woman into participation, that I personally believe it’s a “situation” that is in need of outside intervention or addressing. I think we are hurting the very real victims of those situations when every “unwanted” sexual advance is called sexual harassment. Which might be why Weinstein got away with his behavior for so long...

Weinstein got away with it because Hollywood is a cesspool. I'll save all that for another thread but suffice it to say, the music, fashion, and acting worlds run on sexual "favors". Those who come out and expose it tend to have their careers ruined. Those who stay in, often go crazy... especially if they were young when the abuse started.

There's some evidence (although less than the other cases) that politics has the same thing going on. Perhaps it would be easier to say that anywhere there's a lot of power and money, there's sexual abuse.

a reply to: yuppa

Well I didn't state he was guilty. I said the unfortunate truth is the elite have a different set of rules. For instance being able to have a team of the best legal experts and in states with elected judges being donors.

I agree however, that the media can't be convicting people.

As a bleeding heart libertarian/independent myself I am just not going to lie to myself and assume a non conviction for powerful politicians or businessmen mean they are innocent.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Doesn't a judge have to sign the subpoena? Surely they are aware of the situation and possibly more information than the public. Or not. Who knows it's pretty broken out there in the system.

a reply to: Aazadan

Werent all of those guys Democrats and liberals except Trump? Guilt by association in in style these days though i am afraid.

And soe of those 13 women who complained about trump id bet more than half are getting paid something to do so. Maybe not in money,but other ways.

a reply to: loam


I have no doubt trump has violated women, as the tapes of him saying he does. I hope this is true, and I hope he gets outed. He is a pig!

a reply to: yuppa

So you defend Bill Clinton as well I suppose? With his accusers or have you used hilLary and her cover ups in arguments?

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: yuppa

Well I didn't state he was guilty. I said the unfortunate truth is the elite have a different set of rules. For instance being able to have a team of the best legal experts and in states with elected judges being donors.

I agree however, that the media can't be convicting people.

As a bleeding heart libertarian/independent myself I am just not going to lie to myself and assume a non conviction for powerful politicians or businessmen mean they are innocent.

Im a little different. Im a Word of law kind of guy. Even IF they are guilty in my eyes if the court finds them not so I treat it as such. Even though he can hire exspensive lawyers and has lots of money Thats not germaine to my stance.
If you want to get technical..Aint no one innocent except children who do not know any better yet.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: yuppa

So you defend Bill Clinton as well I suppose? With his accusers or have you used hilLary and her cover ups in arguments?

As much as I dislike Him yeah the accussers didnt prove him guilty of anything. MOnica was th eonly one who had proof of anything with bills DNA on her dress.

a reply to: yuppa

Sure but the reality is powerful people get away with crimes regularly.


Poor people get convicted for the same crimes much more regularly.


I guess you don't get that.

I am a realist. The word of law has been broken for some time.