Words are worth 13x more than sexual abuse

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

Cool, you too can read, fantastic.


Now, about that evidence........?

Evidence for defamation is a non-starter for discussion.

Evidence for him forcing himself on and in her without her consent is the testimony from two women who Carroll told immediately after it happened turns the verdict in Carroll's favor. You will find that with any rape, sexual assault case when the victim confides in someone directly afterwards. You see these are witnesses that can testify to the victim's mental state at the time. Where is that transcript because the evidence from 1996 will be staring you in the face. Whether or not you want to accept it is another matter.

What do you say OldCarpy, how much weight does witness testimony to a victim's state of being/mind really hold with a jury?

a reply to: quintessentone

Evidence for defamation is a non-starter for discussion.

Exactly my point. Well, that no one defending this can point to evidence that is.


If you view evidence as a non starter for justice, that's just absurdly laughable.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

Evidence for defamation is a non-starter for discussion.

Exactly my point. Well, that no one defending this can point to evidence that is.


If you view evidence as a non starter for justice, that's just absurdly laughable.

And you know why it's a non-starter to discussion because he defamed her maliciously and did so without reserve. Stop twisting my words and intent and context.

It's sad that you and others have to resort to that when you can't hold up your end of a discussion.

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

She could have been mistaken for a tranny back then.
I believe they called them Crossdressers in that day.

I bet you could be mistaken for a young Robert Redford back then?

Honestly, I can't take this guff seriously.

Just sad. So sad.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

She could have been mistaken for a tranny back then.
I believe they called them Crossdressers in that day.

I bet you could be mistaken for a young Robert Redford back then?

Honestly, I can't take this guff seriously.

Just sad. So sad.

It is really very sad for ATS.

a reply to: quintessentone

Do you understand that if someone says something that they believe to be true that it cannot be defamation?

You do understand this basic part right?

I don't need to twist your words, they are plain to see.

You literally said that evidence is a non starter. Which is hilarious and leads me to believe that you don't understand what you are talking about.

a reply to: quintessentone

"Stop twisting my words and intent and context.".

Good luck with that!

The triumph of hope over experience?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

She could have been mistaken for a tranny back then.
I believe they called them Crossdressers in that day.

He must have been attracted to the more masculine looking female because he mistook Carroll for one of his wives.

Obviously he didn’t have his glasses on, vanity and all that apparently.
Have another cup of covfefe

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

Do you understand that if someone says something that they believe to be true that it cannot be defamation?

You do understand this basic part right?

I don't need to twist your words, they are plain to see.

You literally said that evidence is a non starter. Which is hilarious and leads me to believe that you don't understand what you are talking about.

We need the court transcript to really get at the meat of what Trump actually said because it wasn't "I'm innocent" now was it?

originally posted by: JinMI
You mean the verdict where they jury didn't find rape but the judge said he raped?

Yup, that one.

Cool. I'm asking what convinced you and others that Trump is liable in your own view and words.

'The' and 'jury'.

What is this non human thing that is evidence please?

Uh, evidence. Testimony and evidence are two different things. Did you go to the Alina Hobba school of lawyering asking such odd questions as that?

a reply to: quintessentone

You were so cocksure.....what happened?


Oh, same thing that happens every time I ask yall to explain what you mean. You defer and deflect.


It's almost like you guys are either too scared or too ill equipped to have an opinion that can be explored.....

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

'The' and 'jury'.

The jury convinced you, great. You can then join the basked of "uh-huhs," thanks.

Uh, evidence. Testimony and evidence are two different things. Did you go to the Alina Hobba school of lawyering asking such odd questions as that?

Oh? Do explain. Proof and testimony are two different things, but I'm ready to explore this novel notion of yours.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: quintessentone

You were so cocksure.....what happened?


Oh, same thing that happens every time I ask yall to explain what you mean. You defer and deflect.


It's almost like you guys are either too scared or too ill equipped to have an opinion that can be explored.....

Judge Kaplan ordered the transcript unsealed; I guess we can find what we need in this.

www.documentcloud.org...

Start at page 127 - he vows to sue her; he did not - he goes on and on about her there after. Page 141 Donald loses it. (this source cuts off too soon)

www.rev.com...

a reply to: JinMI

You mean, the opinions that you don't like, and incessantly try to belittle?

originally posted by: JinMI
Oh? Do explain. Proof and testimony are two different things, but I'm ready to explore this novel notion of yours.

Uh, no. The evidence and testimony I'm referring to in this scintillating case are two different things. I never mentioned proof.

The physical evidence the brilliant Alina Hobba failed to properly provide is entered into the record in a specified manner, testimony is something a witness provides.

a reply to: JinMI

Do you understand that if someone says something that they believe to be true that it cannot be defamation?

The problem is, the right people didn't believe Trump wasn't lying. He got caught in lies too many times. Too bad he refused to submit his DNA, which would have proved he wasn't there, right?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You see?

You didn't mention "proof".

Your posts are being twisted and misrepresented.

It's their MO.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I love that argument.

I'm sure if someone stood outside the local elementary school where their kids went and said, "That ATS guy is a child molester!", and the person yelling that actually believed it and kept repeating it to the point the person being impugned, after losing their job and suffering other financial hardships, would be all like, "No worries, mate! I know it's not true but as long as you really, really believe it I won't sue you for slander".

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
Your posts are being twisted and misrepresented.

When in doubt, obfuscate.

a reply to: quintessentone

So many missing pages. Alas, I did find the statement put out by Trump that is worth 80 some million dollars:

This “Ms. Bergdorf Goodman case” is a complete con job, and our legal system in this Country, but
especially in New York State (just look at Peekaboo James), is a broken disgrace. You have to fight for
years, and spend a fortune, in order to get your reputation back from liars, cheaters, and hacks. This
decision is from the Judge who was just overturned on my same case. I don’t know this woman, have no
idea who she is, other than it seems she got a picture of me many years ago, with her husband, shaking
my hand on a reception line at a celebrity charity event. She completely made up a story that I met her
at the doors of this crowded New York City Department Store and, within minutes, “swooned” her. It is a
Hoax and a lie, just like all the other Hoaxes that have been played on me for the past seven years. And,
while I am not supposed to say it, I will. This woman is not my type! She has no idea what day, what
week, what month, what year, or what decade this so-called “event” supposedly took place. The reason
she doesn’t know is because it never happened, and she doesn’t want to get caught up with details or
facts that can be proven wrong. If you watch Anderson Cooper’s interview with her, where she was
promoting a really crummy book, you will see that it is a complete Scam. She changed her story from
beginning to end, after the commercial break, to suit the purposes of CNN and Andy Cooper. Our Justice
System is broken along with almost everything else in our Country. Her lawyer is a political operative
and Cuomo crony who goes around telling people that the way to beat Trump is to sue him all over the
place. She is suing me on numerous frivolous cases, just like this one, and the court system does nothing
to stop it. In the meantime, and for the record, E. Jean Carroll is not telling the truth, is a woman who I
had nothing to do with, didn’t know, and would have no interest in knowing her if I ever had the chance.
Now all I have to do is go through years more of legal nonsense in order to clear my name of her and her
lawyer’s phony attacks on me. This can only happen to “Trump”!