There's A Verdict in the E. Jean Carroll/Trump Case

originally posted by: LSU2018
Have you ever fabricated a story while you were telling it?

Under oath? No. Have you?

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Gothar
Gee
With all that long term damage and horribleness, one would assume that date and time would be seared into the victim’s memory?
Guess not in this case?

She also remembers that it lasted 3 minutes. How can someone so traumatized remember exactly how long it took to be forcibly kissed, have their tights pulled down, and raped all while struggling in a little dressing room that's barely big enough for one person.

FTR, like most of us mean ol hateful men, I would never condone actual rape and would rather see rapists dangle.

I don’t believe her.
I think she is a complete bull crap artist.
I also am chilled by all the “libertarians” here ok with the sliding scale of “justice “.
I no longer believe them either.
No more than small minded revenge artists.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: quintessentone
You are good with a sliding scale on statues of limitations?
Guess that’s not surprising.

I certainly am not Ok with sliding statutes of limitations, I want the limitations to be any time in the past, any time in the future, and any time the alleged victim is ready to come forward.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: quintessentone
You are good with a sliding scale on statues of limitations?
Guess that’s not surprising.

I certainly am not Ok with sliding statutes of limitations, I want the limitations to be any time in the past, any time in the future, and any time the alleged victim is ready to come forward.

Not surprising.
Whatever gets the job done?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LSU2018
That's correct, and you don't need any proof because you're ok with the timely results.

That's it! There's the victim mentality you need.

Major Aggrievement is the bread and butter right now, it permits you to ignore everything someone does because in some twisted version of reality they are all out to get you. Forget someone said they actually do these things, it's not true since everyone is out to get him.

You have no qualms whatsoever that the lady doesn’t know when, where, how it happened, just that he did it. Or that the statute of limitations was magically reopened with very creative conditions to make it happen. Do we have this right ?
But the snark about victimhood …… always important to note.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: quintessentone
You are good with a sliding scale on statues of limitations?
Guess that’s not surprising.

I certainly am not Ok with sliding statutes of limitations, I want the limitations to be any time in the past, any time in the future, and any time the alleged victim is ready to come forward.

The minute you need to take the exact opposite stance for a dem, you will. In the next 10 minutes if it helps you to deny today’s happenings.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Well, the jury who unlike you, heard her evidence given under Oath and then heard submissions from both sides lawyers did believe her.

But you know better.

Trump didn't show.

a reply to: MrInquisitive

That purdee much sums up your ethics then.

GTFO
Show me a Democrat that has ethics, just one.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: shooterbrody

Well, the jury who unlike you, heard her evidence given under Oath and then heard submissions from both sides lawyers did believe her.

But you know better.

Trump didn't show.

I do know changing a statue of limitations to “get” one guy is wrong no matter how you wish to describe it.
Had you any actual sense of any justice you would admit the same.
As you don’t, I don’t expect such.

originally posted by: MrInquisitive

originally posted by: RazorV66
I wish there was a female Democrat politician good looking enough that I would feel comfortable with falsely accusing her of sexual battery against me.
I have a reputation to think about.

Dianne Feinstein wouldn't even give you a hand job. But keep the misogynistic bile coming. I love to retort to it.

But she would give you one? You’d probably take it happily.

If you had any awareness, you would understand that I was making the correlation between me falsely accusing a female Democrat politician when it didn’t happen to Carroll falsely accusing Trump…..
Which is anyone can make sh!t up.

But you don’t have that awareness or the ability to understand her accusations were a scam cooked up by the Democrats once again in an attempt to hurt Trump.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LSU2018
That's correct, and you don't need any proof because you're ok with the timely results.

That's it! There's the victim mentality you need.

Major Aggrievement is the bread and butter right now, it permits you to ignore everything someone does because in some twisted version of reality they are all out to get you. Forget someone said they actually do these things, it's not true since everyone is out to get him.

Maybe if they hadn't been out to get him with BS over and over for the past 7 years then this would sound more believable.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I don't know what happened about how the statute of limitations apparently got extended.

As you seem to know all about this, if you might be kind enough to post how this came about I can have a look at it?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: LSU2018
Have you ever fabricated a story while you were telling it?

Under oath? No. Have you?

You think Carroll was under oath when she told her friends (the witnesses) what happened?

originally posted by: stevieray
You have no qualms whatsoever that the lady doesn’t know when, where, how it happened, just that he did it.

If that were the case he would have been acquitted of everything. Except, you know, it wasn't. Nice try though.

a reply to: MrInquisitive

America is made up of people and you and your ilk seem to hate a goodly portion of them, so you are the America haters.

Whatever you gotta believe to get through the day with your hate.
Liberals are the haters, you guys even hate yourselves.

If it wasn’t for America hating Liberals, this country wouldn’t be in the shape it’s in now.

originally posted by: LSU2018
Maybe if they hadn't been out to get him with BS over and over for the past 7 years then this would sound more believable.

I know, it's a tough break, so many women alleging misconduct, it has to be made up. Did you catch Alyssa Griffen and Stephanie Grisham saying Trump behaved inappropriately with women while in the White House and nothing was done? I bet they made it up too because they hate him. Everyone hates him. No one is nice to the guy. Woe is me. I'm a victim.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: quintessentone
You are good with a sliding scale on statues of limitations?
Guess that’s not surprising.

I certainly am not Ok with sliding statutes of limitations, I want the limitations to be any time in the past, any time in the future, and any time the alleged victim is ready to come forward.

Not surprising.
Whatever gets the job done?

I wonder how quick they'd change their mind about limitations if someone came out against them about something that supposedly happened 20+ years beforehand. Even 10 years is too long in a case like this.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I gather that Trump didn't show up, but presumably his lawyers did.

If, as some here seem to be saying she had such a poor case, it should have been easy for them to have totally trashed her claim?

originally posted by: LSU2018
You think Carroll was under oath when she told her friends (the witnesses) what happened?

She was when she repeated it in her deposition. Do you even know how this stuff works or are you just outraged?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: shooterbrody

I don't know what happened about how the statute of limitations apparently got extended.

As you seem to know all about this, of you might be kind enough to post how this came about I can have a look at it?

Oh
As your expertise is in this particular area I defer to you and your decades of experience.
And of course, you “don’t know”.
Not surprising.
Rules for thee
Not for me