Trump ordered to pay more than 83 Million to E. Jean Carroll.

Yes Alex, I think I will take gold digging w#0r3 for $1000


www.foxnews.com...


If you are surprised by this, you really need to take off your Trump blinders and see these types of people for what they really are.

a reply to: tanstaafl

She defamed herself with the retarded claims.

originally posted by: 777Vader
a reply to: tanstaafl

She defamed herself with the retarded claims.

Didn't the judge also refuse to allow evidence that she calls her black, ex-husband an "ape"?

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: 777Vader
a reply to: tanstaafl

She defamed herself with the retarded claims.

Didn't the judge also refuse to allow evidence that she calls her black, ex-husband an "ape"?

The judge was clearly biased to anyone with an eighth of a brain, and yes, most evidence was refused... Just to scratch the surface... I don't know why citizens allow this kind of injustice to happen unchallenged. There must be a way this can be viewed properly.

This will only create distrust in government. Which will create a domino effect of more government power against the will of the people, and that will be recycled and continued. Will anyone please understand this? We've seen this a hundred times.
Edit for fear of repercussion

ETA: maybe I'm too assuming... This is a wholesale assassination politically, financially, and faux-morally of not only trump, but everyone he is associated with even in a tertiary sense. Is this not insanely clear to everyone? What world is this? Are we ig oring the obvious now?



ETA to add:
In what country would anyone spend hypothetically on finding a missing E. jean Carroll let alone random allegations? Would they spend 83.3m? For a rambling ideologue with no evidence? Would they spend that on your child whoay be actually missing with real evidence? Think about this.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: yuppa

They could bankrupt him first if he is not paying up?

It's a civil case.

He'd have to Appeal.

"Political targeting" is not a valid ground of Appeal.

ACtually Politically motivated cases can be dismissed with prejudice. Expecially if the judge has bias and does not recuse themselves. SO trumps DOJ could vacate the decisions since fed law trumps state law.

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: 777Vader
a reply to: tanstaafl

She defamed herself with the retarded claims.

Didn't the judge also refuse to allow evidence that she calls her black, ex-husband an "ape"?

I wonder if he was the guy who murdered Ashley Babbitt on 1/6/2021?

So Habba entered a filing that Judge Kaplan should've recused himself because Carroll's lawyer worked at the same massive firm over 30 years ago even though they'd never met.

Carroll's lawyer responded earlier today pointing out how dumb Habba's filing was and the spurious nature of it should be grounds for sanctions. L

Less than two hours later Habba filed her response that went along the lines of, "Haha! Just kidding! We're all good!"

a reply to: Threadbarer
Soap opera material, lol.

a reply to: yuppa

IF they had bias, perhaps. Upholding the rules when Habba had no clue, is not bias, per se.

Did Habba apply to have the Judge recused? During the trial?

a reply to: Threadbarer

If I had performed as badly as Habba, which I wouldn't, I'd expect the Judge to have said "May I see your Practicing Certificate? If you have one"?

a reply to: Threadbarer

Did she really?

Blimey.

She should follow the 6 P's: 'Prior Preparation Prevents P*ss Poor Performance."

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: 777Vader
a reply to: tanstaafl

She defamed herself with the retarded claims.

Didn't the judge also refuse to allow evidence that she calls her black, ex-husband an "ape"?

Relevance?

If she'd called him a "black ape" you may have a point. Maybe.

White men get called apes, too. Poor attempt at playing the race card. Very lame.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: 777Vader
a reply to: tanstaafl

She defamed herself with the retarded claims.

Didn't the judge also refuse to allow evidence that she calls her black, ex-husband an "ape"?

Relevance?

If she'd called him a "black ape" you may have a point. Maybe.

White men get called apes, too. Poor attempt at playing the race card. Very lame.

She's white...he's black.
If you are a white dude...would you be okay with calling a black person an ape?

a reply to: CarlLaFong

Come on, that's po faced and lame.

If she married a black man she's hardly a racist?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: CarlLaFong

Come on, that's po faced and lame.

If she married a black man she's hardly a racist?

So, I'll ask you again...

If you are a white dude...would you be okay with calling a black person an ape?

Gonna answer the question...or not?

a reply to: CarlLaFong

Apples and oranges.

She's not a "white dude".

And she married him.

Keep asking, you'll get the same responses.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Chicken s#!t response I expected.

I thought a bit better of you.
My mistake.

a reply to: CarlLaFong

Cheers. Perhaps you might be able to explain what relevance race or perceived racism might have to any issue pertinent to this trial?

Stuff like a penchant for "pussy grabbing" might be, no?

Lay off the insults.

I have answered your question.

Next?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: CarlLaFong

Cheers. Perhaps you might be able to explain what relevance race or perceived racism might have to any issue pertinent to this trial?

Next?

It speaks to the content of her character...which is already sorely questionable.

a reply to: CarlLaFong

You don't seem to understand sir.


When you hurl allegations, you don't get to have a jury take your character into account.

Well, you typically do, but this is Trump we're talking about.

So it's (D)ifferent.