Sometimes we have to take a step back from all the craziness and try to gain a little perspective around Donald Trump.
Let's pretend ALL the other insanity didn't occur and it was ONLY this case.
Donald Trump has been found liable in a court of law by a jury of his peers for sexual abuse, battery, and defamation.
She has taken him back to court because he continues to publicly defame her.
Trump tried to countersue and that was thrown out of court because a Judge ruled that E. Jean Carroll's rape claim against Trump was "substantially true".
If any other person in America was going through this, could they be 2 for 2 on GOP Primary wins?
He somehow benefits by the fact that he commits so many heinous acts that 1 incident like this gets drowned out by the cumulative noise. It's such a strange phenomenon we are witnessing in American history.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2024 04:26 PM by BroncoMinor.)
A book I read about people that have dealt with psychopaths (or sociopaths) mentioned that they seem to almost always get away with their schemes, so of course they keep doing them.
A sociopath with lots of money is about the worst situation we can find ourselves in.
(01-27-2024 12:58 PM)NIU007 Wrote: A book I read about people that have dealt with psychopaths (or sociopaths) mentioned that they seem to almost always get away with their schemes, so of course they keep doing them.
A sociopath with lots of money is about the worst situation we can find ourselves in.
(01-27-2024 12:58 PM)NIU007 Wrote: A book I read about people that have dealt with psychopaths (or sociopaths) mentioned that they seem to almost always get away with their schemes, so of course they keep doing them.
A sociopath with lots of money is about the worst situation we can find ourselves in.
How much money does she have?
It's funny how you portray yourself to not be a Trump supporter and then defend him at every turn.
You've asked me how to define MAGA. In some ways it can be defined & I've tried my best. But, in other ways, it's a little like our old Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and how to define obscenity: "I know it when I see it".
Anyone attempting to defend Trump on this specific issue is as MAGA as it gets. I know it when I see it.
(01-27-2024 12:58 PM)NIU007 Wrote: A book I read about people that have dealt with psychopaths (or sociopaths) mentioned that they seem to almost always get away with their schemes, so of course they keep doing them.
A sociopath with lots of money is about the worst situation we can find ourselves in.
How much money does she have?
It's funny how you portray yourself to not be a Trump supporter and then defend him at every turn.
You've asked me how to define MAGA. In some ways it can be defined & I've tried my best. But, in other ways, it's a little like our old Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and how to define obscenity: "I know it when I see it".
Anyone attempting to defend Trump on this specific issue is as MAGA as it gets. I know it when I see it.
Light up, Francis.
Nothing in that post "defended Trump".
It was a f-ing joke.
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 01:52 PM by ess.)
(01-27-2024 12:58 PM)NIU007 Wrote: A book I read about people that have dealt with psychopaths (or sociopaths) mentioned that they seem to almost always get away with their schemes, so of course they keep doing them.
A sociopath with lots of money is about the worst situation we can find ourselves in.
How much money does she have?
It's funny how you portray yourself to not be a Trump supporter and then defend him at every turn.
You've asked me how to define MAGA. In some ways it can be defined & I've tried my best. But, in other ways, it's a little like our old Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and how to define obscenity: "I know it when I see it".
Anyone attempting to defend Trump on this specific issue is as MAGA as it gets. I know it when I see it.
Light up, Francis.
Nothing in that post "defended Trump".
It was a f-ing joke.
So, the joke is a woman, who was once only publicly known as a respected journalist, had her life turned upside down by 1) Donald Trump sexually assaulting her and 2) Donald Trump attempting to publicly destroy her, is the real sociopath.
Is that the joke we're going for?
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 02:09 PM by BroncoMinor.)
(01-27-2024 12:58 PM)NIU007 Wrote: A book I read about people that have dealt with psychopaths (or sociopaths) mentioned that they seem to almost always get away with their schemes, so of course they keep doing them.
A sociopath with lots of money is about the worst situation we can find ourselves in.
How much money does she have?
It's funny how you portray yourself to not be a Trump supporter and then defend him at every turn.
You've asked me how to define MAGA. In some ways it can be defined & I've tried my best. But, in other ways, it's a little like our old Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and how to define obscenity: "I know it when I see it".
Anyone attempting to defend Trump on this specific issue is as MAGA as it gets. I know it when I see it.
Light up, Francis.
Nothing in that post "defended Trump".
It was a f-ing joke.
So, the joke is a woman, who was once only publicly known as a respected journalist, had her life turned upside down by 1) Donald Trump sexually assaulting her and 2) Donald Trump attempting to publicly destroy her, is the real sociopath.
Is that the joke we're going for?
No, not quite.
I was "going for" making a joke about a clown.
There are 2 of them (actually a lot more) involved with this story.
Including folks observing this spectacle that don't understand that.
(01-27-2024 01:25 PM)ess Wrote: How much money does she have?
It's funny how you portray yourself to not be a Trump supporter and then defend him at every turn.
You've asked me how to define MAGA. In some ways it can be defined & I've tried my best. But, in other ways, it's a little like our old Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and how to define obscenity: "I know it when I see it".
Anyone attempting to defend Trump on this specific issue is as MAGA as it gets. I know it when I see it.
Light up, Francis.
Nothing in that post "defended Trump".
It was a f-ing joke.
So, the joke is a woman, who was once only publicly known as a respected journalist, had her life turned upside down by 1) Donald Trump sexually assaulting her and 2) Donald Trump attempting to publicly destroy her, is the real sociopath.
Is that the joke we're going for?
No, not quite.
I was "going for" making a joke about a clown.
There are 2 of them (actually a lot more) involved with this story.
Including folks observing this spectacle that don't understand that.
I guess if one of your go to dipwhads on Twitter edits a 24 minute interview down to 2 mins choosing the words they like, she can be perceived to be a clown.
If you actually want the entire context of the situation & her life experiences, here is the full interview. I think you'd reach a very different conclusion if this isn't just a victim shaming exercise for you.
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 04:23 PM by BroncoMinor.)
(01-27-2024 01:46 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote: It's funny how you portray yourself to not be a Trump supporter and then defend him at every turn.
You've asked me how to define MAGA. In some ways it can be defined & I've tried my best. But, in other ways, it's a little like our old Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart and how to define obscenity: "I know it when I see it".
Anyone attempting to defend Trump on this specific issue is as MAGA as it gets. I know it when I see it.
Light up, Francis.
Nothing in that post "defended Trump".
It was a f-ing joke.
So, the joke is a woman, who was once only publicly known as a respected journalist, had her life turned upside down by 1) Donald Trump sexually assaulting her and 2) Donald Trump attempting to publicly destroy her, is the real sociopath.
Is that the joke we're going for?
No, not quite.
I was "going for" making a joke about a clown.
There are 2 of them (actually a lot more) involved with this story.
Including folks observing this spectacle that don't understand that.
I guess if one of your go to dipwhads on Twitter edits a 24 minute interview down to 2 mins choosing the words they like, she can be perceived to be a clown.
If you actually want the entire context of the situation & her life experiences, here is the full interview. I think you'd reach a very different conclusion if this isn't just a victim shaming exercise for you.
You're wrong.
This is a spectacle, and a clown show.
Most people recognize it for what it is (though many don't like to admit it) and why it's occurring now.
It's the same playbook that gets used over and over and over again.
Somehow you seem to think that saying this ^^^ is "defending Trump".
It's not.
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 05:38 PM by ess.)
So, the joke is a woman, who was once only publicly known as a respected journalist, had her life turned upside down by 1) Donald Trump sexually assaulting her and 2) Donald Trump attempting to publicly destroy her, is the real sociopath.
Is that the joke we're going for?
No, not quite.
I was "going for" making a joke about a clown.
There are 2 of them (actually a lot more) involved with this story.
Including folks observing this spectacle that don't understand that.
I guess if one of your go to dipwhads on Twitter edits a 24 minute interview down to 2 mins choosing the words they like, she can be perceived to be a clown.
If you actually want the entire context of the situation & her life experiences, here is the full interview. I think you'd reach a very different conclusion if this isn't just a victim shaming exercise for you.
You're wrong.
This is a spectacle, and a clown show.
Most people recognize it for what it is (though many don't like to admit it) and why it's occurring now.
It's the same playbook that gets used over and over and over again.
Somehow you seem to think that saying this ^^^ is "defending Trump".
It's not.
How is a sexual assault victim sharing her story a clown show?
Generally, it's pretty easy to blow your nonsense off.
But, I think what you're trying to do here is pretty despicable and I'd like you to actually defend your words.
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 06:17 PM by BroncoMinor.)
(01-27-2024 02:05 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote: So, the joke is a woman, who was once only publicly known as a respected journalist, had her life turned upside down by 1) Donald Trump sexually assaulting her and 2) Donald Trump attempting to publicly destroy her, is the real sociopath.
Is that the joke we're going for?
No, not quite.
I was "going for" making a joke about a clown.
There are 2 of them (actually a lot more) involved with this story.
Including folks observing this spectacle that don't understand that.
I guess if one of your go to dipwhads on Twitter edits a 24 minute interview down to 2 mins choosing the words they like, she can be perceived to be a clown.
If you actually want the entire context of the situation & her life experiences, here is the full interview. I think you'd reach a very different conclusion if this isn't just a victim shaming exercise for you.
You're wrong.
This is a spectacle, and a clown show.
Most people recognize it for what it is (though many don't like to admit it) and why it's occurring now.
It's the same playbook that gets used over and over and over again.
Somehow you seem to think that saying this ^^^ is "defending Trump".
It's not.
How is a sexual assault victim sharing her story a clown show?
Generally, it's pretty easy to blow your nonsense off.
But, I think what you're trying to do here is pretty despicable and I'd like you to actually defend your words.
What is it that you think I'm "trying to do" (that you think "is despicable")?
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 06:57 PM by ess.)
I guess if one of your go to dipwhads on Twitter edits a 24 minute interview down to 2 mins choosing the words they like, she can be perceived to be a clown.
If you actually want the entire context of the situation & her life experiences, here is the full interview. I think you'd reach a very different conclusion if this isn't just a victim shaming exercise for you.
You're wrong.
This is a spectacle, and a clown show.
Most people recognize it for what it is (though many don't like to admit it) and why it's occurring now.
It's the same playbook that gets used over and over and over again.
Somehow you seem to think that saying this ^^^ is "defending Trump".
It's not.
How is a sexual assault victim sharing her story a clown show?
Generally, it's pretty easy to blow your nonsense off.
But, I think what you're trying to do here is pretty despicable and I'd like you to actually defend your words.
What is it that you think I'm "trying to do" (that you think "is despicable")?
You're either calling E. Jean Carroll a clown or claiming she is staging a clown show. Do I have it wrong?
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 07:05 PM by BroncoMinor.)
(01-27-2024 04:10 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote: I guess if one of your go to dipwhads on Twitter edits a 24 minute interview down to 2 mins choosing the words they like, she can be perceived to be a clown.
If you actually want the entire context of the situation & her life experiences, here is the full interview. I think you'd reach a very different conclusion if this isn't just a victim shaming exercise for you.
You're wrong.
This is a spectacle, and a clown show.
Most people recognize it for what it is (though many don't like to admit it) and why it's occurring now.
It's the same playbook that gets used over and over and over again.
Somehow you seem to think that saying this ^^^ is "defending Trump".
It's not.
How is a sexual assault victim sharing her story a clown show?
Generally, it's pretty easy to blow your nonsense off.
But, I think what you're trying to do here is pretty despicable and I'd like you to actually defend your words.
What is it that you think I'm "trying to do" (that you think "is despicable")?
You're either calling E. Jean Carroll a clown or claiming she is staging a clown show. Do I have it wrong?
Her claims of "defamation" to the tune of $83,000,000 are clownish.
(01-27-2024 06:53 PM)ess Wrote: What is it that you think I'm "trying to do" (that you think "is despicable")?
You're either calling E. Jean Carroll a clown or claiming she is staging a clown show. Do I have it wrong?
Her claims of "defamation" to the tune of $83,000,000 are clownish.
That's what this trial is/was about.
If I'm wrong - let's hear your case.
That's how much a jury of Donald Trump's peers (7 men & 2 women) have decided she is owed due to Donald Trump's actions. She didn't ask for $83M.
The $$ amount could be considered ridiculous, but it does not make her a clown or this trial a clown show.
Donald Trump needs to be held accountable for his actions no matter how difficult that task as.
What were "his actions" (that this trial was about)?
And
How was Jean Carroll "defamed"?
It's comical that you have come this far in this discussion, made all these accusations about her, and have no idea what happened.
She was interviewing him years ago (1995) for a story. He took her to a high end department store in NYC. Then he took her into a dressing room and closed the door behind her. He held her against the wall, pulled her pantyhose down, and stuck fingers into places he shouldn't. This fits the definition of rape.
She wrote about this in a 2019 article for New York Magazine.
In typical Trump mob fashion, he has attempted to defame her ever since. The defamation lawsuit comes from that.
On May 9, 2023, a jury of six men and three women found Trump liable for sexual abuse, battery and defamation. E. Jean Carroll was awarded $5M.
Trump has continued to use his platform both as President and former President to lie about her and defame her. So, they went back to court.
This past Friday, a jury of seven men and two women found Trump liable for $83M in defamation.
See if those actions by Trump in the dressing room rings a bell.
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 07:54 PM by BroncoMinor.)
(01-27-2024 07:01 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote: You're either calling E. Jean Carroll a clown or claiming she is staging a clown show. Do I have it wrong?
Her claims of "defamation" to the tune of $83,000,000 are clownish.
That's what this trial is/was about.
If I'm wrong - let's hear your case.
That's how much a jury of Donald Trump's peers (7 men & 2 women) have decided she is owed due to Donald Trump's actions. She didn't ask for $83M.
The $$ amount could be considered ridiculous, but it does not make her a clown or this trial a clown show.
Donald Trump needs to be held accountable for his actions no matter how difficult that task as.
What were "his actions" (that this trial was about)?
And
How was Jean Carroll "defamed"?
It's comical that you have come this far in this discussion, made all these accusations about her, and have no idea what happened.
She was interviewing him years ago (1995) for a story. He took her to a high end department store in NYC. Then he took her into a dressing room and closed the door behind her. He held her against the wall, pulled her pantyhose down, and stuck fingers into places he shouldn't. This fits the definition of rape.
She wrote about this in a 2019 article for New York Magazine.
In typical Trump mob fashion, he has attempted to defame her ever since. The defamation lawsuit comes from that.
On May 9, 2023, a jury of six men and three women found Trump liable for sexual abuse, battery and defamation. E. Jean Carroll was awarded $5M.
Trump continues to use his platform to lie about her and defame her. So, they have gone back to court.
This past Friday, a jury of seven men and two women found Trump liable for $83M in defamation.
That's not an argument.
That's a timeline/rehash of what has happened.
DJT was never legally/criminally charged of rape, or of sexual assault.
"Liable"...OK. 17 or 18 years later. SMH.
Again
This trial was about "defamation".
I don't know if you are purposefully avoiding my question(s), or if you don't understand what I'm asking you.
How was she defamed?
She's a clown, he's a clown, and this is a clown show.
But
Let's (you, I, and everyone else) hope.
Maybe we can keep DJT off the ballot?
Yes?
To "save our democracy"?
LMFAO!!!
I look back at the thread - and you've now added a youtube that has nothing to do with this case?
Why?
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 08:00 PM by ess.)
(01-27-2024 07:09 PM)ess Wrote: Her claims of "defamation" to the tune of $83,000,000 are clownish.
That's what this trial is/was about.
If I'm wrong - let's hear your case.
That's how much a jury of Donald Trump's peers (7 men & 2 women) have decided she is owed due to Donald Trump's actions. She didn't ask for $83M.
The $$ amount could be considered ridiculous, but it does not make her a clown or this trial a clown show.
Donald Trump needs to be held accountable for his actions no matter how difficult that task as.
What were "his actions" (that this trial was about)?
And
How was Jean Carroll "defamed"?
It's comical that you have come this far in this discussion, made all these accusations about her, and have no idea what happened.
She was interviewing him years ago (1995) for a story. He took her to a high end department store in NYC. Then he took her into a dressing room and closed the door behind her. He held her against the wall, pulled her pantyhose down, and stuck fingers into places he shouldn't. This fits the definition of rape.
She wrote about this in a 2019 article for New York Magazine.
In typical Trump mob fashion, he has attempted to defame her ever since. The defamation lawsuit comes from that.
On May 9, 2023, a jury of six men and three women found Trump liable for sexual abuse, battery and defamation. E. Jean Carroll was awarded $5M.
Trump continues to use his platform to lie about her and defame her. So, they have gone back to court.
This past Friday, a jury of seven men and two women found Trump liable for $83M in defamation.
That's not an argument.
DJT was never legally/criminally charged of rape, or of sexual assault.
"Liable"...OK. SMH.
Again
This trial was about "defamation".
I don't know if you are purposefully avoiding my question(s), or if you don't understand what I'm asking you.
How was she defamed?
She's a clown, he's a clown, and this is a clown show.
But
Let's (you, I, and everyone else) hope.
Maybe we can keep DJT off the ballot?
Yes?
To "save our democracy"?
LMFAO!!!
I look back at the thread - and you've added a youtube that has nothing to do with this case?
Why?
I give up. You clearly have no interest in having a reasonable back and forth. You just ignore the things I say that don't support your theories and pivot to something I'm not even talking about.
(01-27-2024 07:16 PM)BroncoMinor Wrote: That's how much a jury of Donald Trump's peers (7 men & 2 women) have decided she is owed due to Donald Trump's actions. She didn't ask for $83M.
The $$ amount could be considered ridiculous, but it does not make her a clown or this trial a clown show.
Donald Trump needs to be held accountable for his actions no matter how difficult that task as.
What were "his actions" (that this trial was about)?
And
How was Jean Carroll "defamed"?
It's comical that you have come this far in this discussion, made all these accusations about her, and have no idea what happened.
She was interviewing him years ago (1995) for a story. He took her to a high end department store in NYC. Then he took her into a dressing room and closed the door behind her. He held her against the wall, pulled her pantyhose down, and stuck fingers into places he shouldn't. This fits the definition of rape.
She wrote about this in a 2019 article for New York Magazine.
In typical Trump mob fashion, he has attempted to defame her ever since. The defamation lawsuit comes from that.
On May 9, 2023, a jury of six men and three women found Trump liable for sexual abuse, battery and defamation. E. Jean Carroll was awarded $5M.
Trump continues to use his platform to lie about her and defame her. So, they have gone back to court.
This past Friday, a jury of seven men and two women found Trump liable for $83M in defamation.
That's not an argument.
DJT was never legally/criminally charged of rape, or of sexual assault.
"Liable"...OK. SMH.
Again
This trial was about "defamation".
I don't know if you are purposefully avoiding my question(s), or if you don't understand what I'm asking you.
How was she defamed?
She's a clown, he's a clown, and this is a clown show.
But
Let's (you, I, and everyone else) hope.
Maybe we can keep DJT off the ballot?
Yes?
To "save our democracy"?
LMFAO!!!
I look back at the thread - and you've added a youtube that has nothing to do with this case?
Why?
I give up. You clearly have no interest in having a reasonable back and forth. You just ignore the things I say that don't support your theories and pivot to something I'm not even talking about.
You aren't, and haven't made any case.
Your position is basically "Donald Trump is an *******, and I don't like him".
I agree with you.
A MUCH MUCH bigger threat to "our democracy" (our country) is the weaponization of the legal system to limit political opposition.
It wreaks of authoritarianism.
I'm anti-authoritarian to the core.
You (and people like you) are OK with it now, because you hate DJT.
If Trump (or worse) were in power, and used these methods, you'd have no defense.
I can't understand why Trump haters don't get this.
The "left" used to care about these types of things.
This is bigger that DJT or "MAGA".
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2024 08:14 PM by ess.)
/
The E. Jean Carroll Case
