Words are worth 13x more than sexual abuse

a reply to: JinMI

Can we start there?

No. I am not aware that there's a question of whether or not Donald Trump used to troll the women's lingerie department of Bergdorf Goodman, looking for women to "move on like a bitch".

Seems like a desperate strawman attempt on your part to me.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Asking for a basic piece of evidence to support your claim is a strawman?

I think you're being abit too liberal with your word choices again.....

I mean, if he was in fact there, that should be an easy accomplishment evidence wise, right?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Trump doesn't say, "I would never rape a woman"

Why does a man ever need to say that... It seems like the old "have you stopped beating your wife" loaded question.

In my 63 years, I have also never said "I would never rape a woman" and not saying it in no way does it mean I would... Bad logic there, girl...

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Trump doesn't say, "I would never rape a woman"

Why does a man ever need to say that... It seems like the old "have you stopped beating your wife" loaded question.

In my 63 years, I have also never said "I would never rape a woman" and not saying it in no way does it mean I would... Bad logic there, girl...

So, if credibly accused of rape, your defense would be...."Look at her! She's not my type." Really? In your 68 years, that's what you would say?

No. It's like I said. Trump didn't disavow the act. He simply claimed that the woman was way too ugly to have been raped by him.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Vermilion

Are you asking me? If so, F-off! What I think is sexy none of your business.

Clearly you don't think rape is sexy.


It would appear you and E Jean disagree on that.

You don't know what turn E Jean Carroll on, or what turns her off.

Do you? Or has Ms Carroll graced ATS with her presence? If not aren’t you do’ith that which thoust accuseth thereof?

a reply to: JinMI

Asking for a basic piece of evidence to support your claim is a strawman?

Look. This case has been litigated already, by people much more in the know of the law all the legal details of this case than you or I. I'm not going to pretend to be the judge, or on some make believe jury, and relitigate this case because you don't like how the real judge and jury decided the case.

The judge and jury found what they found, the court has spoken. I'm glad Trump is getting justice, you know, due process and all.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Trump didn't disavow the act.

He maintains he never met her.

Pretty sure that's disavowing....

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JinMI

Asking for a basic piece of evidence to support your claim is a strawman?

Look. This case has been litigated already, by people much more in the know of the law that legal details of this case than you or I. I'm not going to pretend to be the judge, or on some make believe jury, and relitigate this case because you don't like how the real judge and jury decided the case.

The judge and jury found what they found, the court has spoken. I'm glad Trump is getting justice, you know, due process and all.

Thank you.

This entire thread has been dedicated to folks like you just nodding at gross injustice because it's the orange man.

I gave you two chances to run away with the argument by simply proving that he was at the establishment. And that's just the bare bones basics.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Trump doesn't say, "I would never rape a woman"

Why does a man ever need to say that... It seems like the old "have you stopped beating your wife" loaded question.

In my 63 years, I have also never said "I would never rape a woman" and not saying it in no way does it mean I would... Bad logic there, girl...

No. It's like I said. Trump didn't disavow the act. He simply claimed that the woman was way too ugly to have been raped by him.

Interesting little tidbit.

Yes, yes it is.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Trump didn't disavow the act.

He maintains he never met her.

Pretty sure that's disavowing....

He did meet her. There are pictures. Pretty sure that's lying.

Trump doesn't disavow the act of rape as being a bad thing that he would never do. He never has with all the 23 women that claimed he sexually assaulted them. He simple claims that the woman is not his type, too fat, too ugly. He's already made it known that he thinks he's entitled to sexual assault women, "grab 'em", and he doesn't even ask, because he's rich and famous.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Trump doesn't say, "I would never rape a woman"

Why does a man ever need to say that... It seems like the old "have you stopped beating your wife" loaded question.

In my 63 years, I have also never said "I would never rape a woman" and not saying it in no way does it mean I would... Bad logic there, girl...

No. It's like I said. Trump didn't disavow the act. He simply claimed that the woman was way too ugly to have been raped by him.

Interesting little tidbit.

Yes, yes it is.

“I’ve never met this person in my life,” Trump said in the statement. “She is trying to sell a new book — that should indicate her motivation. It should be sold in the fiction section.”

Interesting indeed....

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

So, if credibly accused of rape, your defense would be...."Look at her! She's not my type." Really? In your 68 years, that's what you would say?

First... you used the word "credibility"... you need to look up the definition of that...

If some strange woman said I groped her 30 years ago in a public place as she tried to live through some TV sexual fantasy, I would say much worse.

We are back to the guilty until proven innocent and you do not see it. I'm sure Trump is tired of it, I surely am...

a reply to: JinMI

I gave you two chances to run away with the argument by simply proving that he was at the establishment. And that's just the bare bones basics.

Again, Trump isn't looking at an almost $90 million payout to Carroll for sexually assaulting her. He's paying because he defamed her. Whether or not Trump was trolling the lingerie department that infamous day, or not, is not the question. "Did Trump defame Carroll, with malice?" is the question. The jury said yes.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

He did meet her. There are pictures. Pretty sure that's lying.

There's a picture, fantastic. From 1986 if memory serves. Does that mean they met? Or are we stretching definitions to fit our rhetoric again?

Trump doesn't disavow the act of rape as being a bad thing that he would never do.

Yep, definitely stretching, got it.


Did you find that evidence of Trump being at the establishment? Pretty sure that should be an easy feat. I mean you surely want evidence to back up your position, right?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JinMI

I gave you two chances to run away with the argument by simply proving that he was at the establishment. And that's just the bare bones basics.

Again, Trump isn't looking at an almost $90 million payout to Carroll for sexually assaulting her. He's paying because he defamed her. Whether or not Trump was trolling the lingerie department that infamous day, or not, is not the question. "Did Trump defame Carroll, with malice?" is the question. The jury said yes.

I know, I posted it remember?

Problem being, if Trump didn't rape her, the defamation is unfounded by definition.


You've already made your point though. You want all the bad things to happen to Trump because he's Trump. Him keeping his mouth shut is what you said.

And you'll burn everything down to accomplish it.

No common sense, no critical thinking and certainly not for women, their rights or their harm.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: tanstaafl
This was about defamation.

Still waiting for one of you to prove you actually know what that means, and provide some sourced precise/exact quote you claim constitutes defamation.

Trump just had to run his mouth. 100% his doing.

Its a free country, and Trump is free to run his mouth just as much as you or me.

All he had to do was shut his mouth

So, you'll deny Trump the same freedom you yourself enjoy here on an hourly basis.

The jury — with evidence presented — made their decision.

A D.C. jury full of Trump haters like yourself... sure, thats fair...

a reply to: JinMI

Problem being, if Trump didn't rape her, the defamation is unfounded by definition.

No. Again, Trump could have disavowed the act. But he didn't. Instead, he chose to maliciously attack the woman personally, her looks, her personality, her character, her career, and her motives. He chose to sell the story that that woman wasn't worth him to even consider raping. She wasn't his type.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Again, Trump could have disavowed the act.

He did, does an is still.

How many times do I have to post his quote of never meeting her?

a reply to: JinMI

Did you find that evidence of Trump being at the establishment? Pretty sure that should be an easy feat. I mean you surely want evidence to back up your position, right?

Nope. I already told you, I'm not going there. This is about defamation, not whether or not Trump made it habit of trolling the women's lingerie department at Bergdorf Goodman.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Again, Trump could have disavowed the act.

He did, does an is still.

How many times do I have to post his quote of never meeting her?

How many times do I have to post it? Trump is having to pay, not because he sexually assaulted/raped E Jean Carroll, but because he defamed her.

It's a matter of public record.