|
I didn't follow the case super closely, but pretty much everything that was shown from Trump's deposition was just about the worst possible thing you could say.
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
It helps when one side refuses to put up a defense.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
He's 100% not going to give a gently caress and do whatever he wants irt evidence and social media and I doubt he will suffer any consequences for it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
cr0y posted:He's 100% not going to give a gently caress and do whatever he wants irt evidence and social media and I doubt he will suffer any consequences for it. His takeaway will be "I was acquitted of rape. She was lying about the rape. They want me to be a rapist but I'm not folks I'm not they're all liars."
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:It helps when one side refuses to put up a defense. And be completely unlikeable, and refuse to even show up at the same time.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
Also, someone needs to create an image of Biden holding a newspaper with the headline stating TRUMP GUILTY!, just like the photo of Truman holding the paper stating DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN!
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:His takeaway will be "I was acquitted of rape. She was lying about the rape. They want me to be a rapist but I'm not folks I'm not they're all liars." 100% this. I'm already hearing his stupid voice in my head saying it.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:38
|
|
|
This smells like a juror trade off. A compromise if you will. We know these things happen.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:43
|
|
|
mdemone posted:This smells like a juror trade off. A compromise if you will. We know these things happen. Does it? If the jury was unanimous on agreeing allegations A, B, and C were true, but split on allegation D, wouldn't that look exactly like this? Assuming they spent hours arguing with the (one?) holdout about the last allegation and eventually decided they'd never change their mind?
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
Edit: whoops wrong thread
Piell fucked around with this message at 22:41 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 22:38
|
|
|
Piell posted:https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1656050429644673026 His campaign finances seem like the kind of thing you give to an intern they’re so full of fraud.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 22:41
|
|
|
This is bullshit! The Deep State is just mad that Santos won 3 Nobel Prizes, 14 Olympic gold medals, and was the first man on the moon. Since Santos was apparently trying to out-crime the Trump family, I'm baffled why he ran for office, since the only reason I can come up with is that he assumed because no one looked into his background during the campaign, no one would ever look into it if he actually won. azflyboy fucked around with this message at 22:59 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 22:53
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Does it? If the jury was unanimous on agreeing allegations A, B, and C were true, but split on allegation D, wouldn't that look exactly like this? Assuming they spent hours arguing with the (one?) holdout about the last allegation and eventually decided they'd never change their mind? The compromise I (with no evidence) was thinking of was "well, I don't want to call that rape, but I'm willing to call it sexual abuse".
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 23:02
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I didn't follow the case super closely, but pretty much everything that was shown from Trump's deposition was just about the worst possible thing you could say. Right. Like "I would never rape her because she's not my type"
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 00:06
|
|
|
Trump will never pay a dime of that and somehow that's going to be just fine.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 01:53
|
|
|
The Bible posted:Trump will never pay a dime of that and somehow that's going to be just fine.  Can we stop this poo poo now? "Trump will never face charges." Trump gets charged. "Trump will never be convicted." Trump gets convicted. Trump has been fined numerous times and has paid up. There is absolutely no basis to think this court judgment will be ignored by everyone involved, least of all Jean Carroll.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 01:59
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:
I'll be happy to be wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 02:01
|
|
|
The Bible posted:I'll be happy to be wrong. Post user combo BREAKER
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 02:30
|
|
|
Heh, I mean, 5 million is not even a slap on the wrist. More like a winking nudge in the ribs, but 2 different justice systems, what else is new.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 02:31
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:The compromise I (with no evidence) was thinking of was "well, I don't want to call that rape, but I'm willing to call it sexual abuse". There is a legal definition of rape in the jurisdiction that the jurors should have been informed of. It's a question of "was there vaginal penetration?" or whatever, not "what am I willing to call rape?" In theory, at least. Edit: In a more general sense, the definition of rape is a legal question decided by the judge. The jury only decides factual questions, ie: did X happen or did Y happen.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 02:56
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:
This is not a criminal conviction. It is a civil judgment. There's a very big difference between the two. He has not been convicted at all.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 03:03
|
|
|
I believe he cannot be criminally convicted for this because of the statute of limitations.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 03:03
|
|
|
Say what you want about Trump but he certainly has conviction
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 03:16
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:This is not a criminal conviction. It is a civil judgment. There's a very big difference between the two. He has not been convicted at all. What happens in a civil case when you just don't pay the judgement? I'm not being snarky, I just remember awhile back, when I was a kid, my deadbeat dad never paid child support as ordered, and even when he was ordered to in court, he just didn't, and nothing ever happened to him. No garnishments, no asset seizures, absolutely nothing, he was just allowed to decide to not pay. My mother complained to the courts several times and they were just like  .This was in Texas, which is kind of infamous for this sort of thing, so maybe my case is exceptional.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 03:18
|
|
|
It varies, but generally speaking, the winning party can go to court and get a lien against property the lower owns, plus collection costs. If you have no property to force the sale of via lien, then *shrug* no blood from a stone.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 03:21
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It varies, but generally speaking, the winning party can go to court and get a lien against property the lower owns, plus collection costs. That's probably it, then. He didn't own poo poo. He had a job and a paycheck, but maybe they won't garnish for child support, I have no clue.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 03:22
|
|
|
The Bible posted:What happens in a civil case when you just don't pay the judgement? I'm not being snarky, I just remember awhile back, when I was a kid, my deadbeat dad never paid child support as ordered, and even when he was ordered to in court, he just didn't, and nothing ever happened to him. No garnishments, no asset seizures, absolutely nothing, he was just allowed to decide to not pay. My mother complained to the courts several times and they were just like Collecting child support is hit-or-miss anywhere you go. In a normal civil case you could get any of a few different types of writ to go after wages or to seize and sell property. You could also go for contempt sanctions. Edit: beaten, sorta.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 03:30
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:The compromise I (with no evidence) was thinking of was "well, I don't want to call that rape, but I'm willing to call it sexual abuse". Maybe they didn't think that he was endowed enough to penetrate her while they were standing up given the whole toad thing. So sexual assault but not rape*. *as defined by whatever statute that was used.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 04:26
|
|
|
Skex posted:Maybe they didn't think that he was endowed enough to penetrate her while they were standing up given the whole toad thing. So sexual assault but not rape*. She reportedly testified that she couldn't tell whether it was his dick or a finger penetrating her, and so that could be it.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 06:58
|
|
|
JohnCompany posted:She reportedly testified that she couldn't tell whether it was his dick or a finger penetrating her, and so that could be it. Lmao
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 10:32
|
|
|
WaltherFeng posted:Lmao But, yes, we have been told explicitly that Trump has a small dick and it looks like Toad from Mario Kart. lmao
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 10:57
|
|
|
JohnCompany posted:She reportedly testified that she couldn't tell whether it was his dick or a finger penetrating her, and so that could be it. Sad to say, this is probably the only way this trial could actually hurt trump’s election chances.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
Adhemar posted:Sad to say, this is probably the only way this trial could actually hurt trump’s election chances. Doubt it. A big gun is a lot like a big truck, compensation-wise. He's going to have a lot of mockers who secretly sympathize with him.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 02:08
|
|
|
The CNN Trump Town Hall went as well as could be expected. Spouts racist poo poo like people in Chinatown dont speak English and calls Kaitlan Collins a nasty person. Rupars feed has clips of other parts of it. Its a lot of speaking without actually saying anything. https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1656465794526584833
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 06:51
|
|
|
OgNar posted:The CNN Trump Town Hall went as well as could be expected. Isn't one of the main things that Trump is repeating the remarks that were found to be liable on Tuesday. Like regardless of his intention to appeal, by repeating those remarks it's essentially another case of Defamation and should in theory result in another hefty fine. With the proviso that CNN could be liable for broadcasting this, knowing that he was likely to say it on air.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 08:24
|
|
|
OgNar posted:Spouts racist poo poo like people in Chinatown dont speak English These enclaves do exist, although Trump assuredly meant this in the most racist way possible. I don't know about elsewhere, but the Bay Area has a sizable population of Chinese immigrants and even Chinese-Americans who speak little or no English. I've done business with them through interpreters and intermediaries, and a friend made his entire (quite lucrative) livelihood out of tutoring their kids - but only because he'd lived in China for several years and was fluent in the language, married a Chinese national, and had other folks in that community who would vouch for him. Insular immigrant communities that actively resist being assimilated into the wider culture have been a thing pretty much forever, and America has a long history of them. This spooks the hell out of some people, and those people tend to vote Republican.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 10:42
|
|
|
Kestral posted:Insular immigrant communities that actively resist being assimilated into the wider culture have been a thing pretty much forever, and America has a long history of them. Starting from the Europeans! *that meme of muscular hands grasping eachother with European immigrants to United States and smallpox*
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 11:07
|
|
|
The Question IRL posted:Isn't one of the main things that Trump is repeating the remarks that were found to be liable on Tuesday. It's an interesting problem. Because on the one hand, yeah, this is exactly what Fox did that led to Dominion's suit: invite guests on who would predictably make defamatory statements and then ask them questions to elicit those statements. On the other hand, I'd be pretty uncomfortable with a liability regime that didn't allow direct broadcasting of the words of a leading presidential candidate. Would need to think long and hard about the lines to draw, because it can't just be "anyone running for President" given all the crazies, but it's not not a problem.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 11:15
|
|
|
JohnCompany posted:It's an interesting problem. Because on the one hand, yeah, this is exactly what Fox did that led to Dominion's suit: invite guests on who would predictably make defamatory statements and then ask them questions to elicit those statements. On the other hand, I'd be pretty uncomfortable with a liability regime that didn't allow direct broadcasting of the words of a leading presidential candidate. How about we just let the crimes matter and not care if it's a presidential candidate?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 11:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
Yeah we should just hold everyone to the same standards, regardless of how much Republicans worship them
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2023 11:36
|
|
