Trump's lawyer said in his opening statement, quoted in "Jury in Carroll's civil case against Trump to hear closing statements" (WaPo). Closing statements are expected to begin today.
On Thursday, even after his attorney had said Trump would not testify, he made comments to reporters in Ireland suggesting he might make a surprise appearance at the trial after all.
His attorneys did not call witnesses to testify — instead opting to put on a case through cross-examination of Carroll and others who did testify. Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly said the story was made up by Carroll and a pair of her friends.
Elsewhere in today's Washington Post, we see news of a new poll — "Biden faces broad negative ratings at start of campaign, Post-ABC poll finds" — that shows Trump enduring:
When asked who they would support in 2024, 44 percent of voting-age adults say they would “definitely” or “probably” vote for Trump while 38 percent would definitely or probably vote for Biden. The remaining 18 percent are either undecided or gave another answer.
Trump haters can say, yeah, but the whole 18% in the middle is going to have to go for Biden in the end. Trump is stuck with his 44% diehards, but nobody else can stand him. Right? Isn't that how they have to keep from going crazy?
Posts
143 comments:
while 38 percent would definitely or probably vote for Biden. THERE are your diehards.
But, NONE of that matters. It Doesn't Matter who votes.. It ONLY Matters who counts votes.
We live in East Germany
Trump leads by 7 percent over Biden according to the poll. Creative language buries the lede…
I hope Trump wins this case. Something may have happened, but I read her columns for many years. She is a bit nutty, IMO.
The idea that a person cannot prove a negative is obviously wrong. To take this case as an example, Trump in theory could prove that he was in Europe or was physically unable to achieve penetration when the rape was alleged to occur. I understand that, in this case, the accuser won't specify a date or even a year when this supposedly happened; but as a general matter, it's incorrect to say that someone cannot prove a negative.
Trump has a ceiling. Biden does not have a ceiling - because loyal democrats will always show up to vote against Trump. These mob numbers are to aid Trump - and give his supporters a false security of confidence.
Nothing more important that abortion to the collective left. Economy? inflation? the rich white left do not care. They will come thru for Biden (with lots of votes *wink wink* )
Do they want to keep from going crazy? I think they like it. It feels good. It feels like righteousness. It feels like status. It feels like meaning. Trump hate is a helluva drug.
Serious Question
Has there Ever been a President more deeply involved in crime; than our current resident?
"I want to make something clear. If something happens to me, all roads lead to Joe Biden," Reade wrote Sunday afternoon. "Joe Biden and DNC political machine threats, bullying and intimidation over the last three years will not work."
Dr. Gal Luft, a co-director of a Washington D.C.-based think tank, claimed he was arrested in an effort to stop him from revealing information about the Biden family.
"I’ve been arrested in Cyprus on a politically motivated extradition request by the U.S. The U.S., claiming I’m an arms dealer. It would be funny if it weren’t tragic. I’ve never been an arms dealer," Luft tweeted on Feb. 18.
He added: "DOJ is trying to bury me to protect Joe, Jim, and Hunter Biden. Shall I name names?"
Give Trump's penis a polygraph.
Vivek, as far as I know, has never been sued for sexual assault.
So this is one of the polls that Trump and the Trumpists tell us that we should believe? After years of telling us that we should not believe polls anymore? (And after the TrumpWing's favorite pollster Trafalgar got hosed in two consecutive election cycles.)
Do it. Make Trump your nominee, Trumpers. Lock him in now. Before a summer and fall of Trump indictments.
Althouse; Trump is a guy who wouldn't be allowed on the board of any major corporation. He couldn't be named as a Chief Executive officer for any major, mainstream institution. He'd have been removed as a member of any large law firm. He could not pass a security clearance as an ordinary federal employee.
I am looking ahead to two particular criminal cases. One is the January 6 insurrection case which just might solidify Trump's popularity with the extremist Trump Wing. And the other is the Mar-a-Lago classified documents scandal, which just might kill Trump's viability as a general election candidate when it is understood how deep was Trump's lying pathology about important national security concerns.
Oh; and after this week, Trump will be a "rapist." The GOP is not sending their best; they're sending rapists.
That just sounds like a bunch of fancy lawyer talk. And it's not even true. Witnesses get introduced all the time to "prove a negative" by establishing positive facts, if nothing more than the fact of a statement from the witness, "I didn't do it."
"Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" I dread the next several months of the lefty media and the Trump-ites pushing the inevitability of a Trump nomination.
And therein lies the problem.
44% is not "diehards." It is a significant proportion that has to be considered in a democratic country. But that is not the way either side behaves, despite their paeans and professed dedication to our 'sacred democracy.' Once their crew has power, the 45-50% that didn't vote for them can fuck off and die until the next national elections, be they midterm or presidential. We get everything, you get nothing. And your face will be rubbed in you getting nothing, how you deserve to get nothing. That is not the way the Republic functioned until recently, and it is unsustainable.
Like the Anti Trump would change their minds anyways?? This man has been hounded for over 7 years by the left, the Intel agencies and the Congress, and yet they need to put him away to stop him from stopping the Corruption they are shitting on all of us with.
Witnesses? Evidence? Jury instructions? Common sense? Not applicable in this trial.
NYC is lawless. Clay Travis (Rush's replacement) said 11 people killed in the NYC subway so far this year.
They will find him liable. It's New York. He's Trump and a Republican. Democrats are scofflaws. End of story.
Trump is not my preferred candidate, but if he is ultimately the Republican on the ballot, I’m a solid vote. I like him, although I often wish he’d keep his yap shut and think about it carefully before speaking or tweeting. He’s been treated horribly and is getting the full MONTE Kavanaugh.
I had a blowout the other day that rattled the porcelain. During the cleanup and the flush, I was reminded yet again that the lefties are nasty little shits.
- Krumhorn
"Isn't that how they have to keep from going crazy?"
Chuck, Althouse is asking you a question.
Why would Trump testify when he can be confident his diehard supporters will pay the judgement? But only definitelies count as diehards. There is still hope for the probablies.
He's a witch... uh, a warlock... a baby, a fetal-baby evolved from egg to larva to pupa to adult in the modern model. Witnesses, be damned.
It’s a race between the Trump Haters and the Biden Haters…. Probably more Biden Haters at this point, though that won’t be telegraphed. We’re way worse off now than we were under Trump.
However, Biden wasn’t able to recall Trump’s name in a recent interview. He won’t be the D nominee, so there’s that. It will be even harder to convince half the population that Biden could actually win any election.
A bare "they didn't prove their case" is VERY risky. Especially when they HAVE presented a prima facie case. And if that's all the jury has to go on, if they don't have an in-court denial, then they quite reasonably can and probably will decide for the party that did put on evidence.
And the trial court and appellate court will uphold such a verdict.
Seriously -- Trump's worst enemy is Donald Trump.
Why would Trump testify when he can't possibly win.
IFTFY, Charles.
Same judge presided over Kevin Spacey civil trial. He testified he didn't do it. Jury believed him. Not exactly the most beloved celebrity.
David Begley wrote:
"Vivek, as far as I know, has never been sued for sexual assault."
And he won't be until he is the nominee, David.
Carroll had no contempory evidence she was attacked. She couldn't remember the day, year, or month it happened. For some reason, people don't care about that. Sure. Its perfectly normal for people to be "traumatized" by an event and they don't remember what day, month, year it happened.
People are so DUMB!
Breezy.
Kennedy will probably be the Dems candidate of choice. He's making all the right sounds to capture the right and the middle of the socialist Dems. Academics will vote for him and claim he's the new messiah of American Politics and then will govern like a lefty once elected.
Trump will run against Kennedy.
We've had enough of the corrupt political establishment.
Why would Trump testify when he can't possibly win.
A built-in, ready-made excuse when he loses - "I wouldn't have won anyway."
Maybe that's why he so often self-destructs. To give himself an excuse.
I, for one, wonder if the Proud Boys have been asked to implicate Trump in return for lesser sentences. Well, no, I don't wonder. I suspect.
Carroll had no contempory evidence she was attacked...For some reason, people don't care about that
Because corroboration is NEVER required (except in rare cases not applicable here).
Lots of cases are nothing more than she-said, he-said. But when the case is just she-said, without he saying anything, then he loses.
The standard of proof in a civil case is a mere preponderance. Trump didn't testify and she did. He's going down.
The only question is how much will the perp pay. All who raised their hand that trump would show up at the trial after Kaplan called out his Con, please put your hands down and wake up, he was never going to court ever! The MAGA nominee a 2x impeached,1x indicted 1st former president ever (so far) head of the criminal trump organization and now a civilly convicted sexual abuser, early call (will he have to file papers to stay 500 feet from schools?) is who the GOP wants .Brilliant!! Gluttons for punishment I guess. At least 2 more indictments coming (one may be RICO) soon. MAGAS have no choice but to back him again into the abyss. :(
he already gave a deposition, i don't think humoring this third rate kangaroo tribunal is necessary,
Trump might be able to give evidence of a negative if Carroll could say when it happened (as one might expect if it actually happened). If she did that, Trump could canvass the employees who worked there at that time. They would be able to say whether say sex in the dressing rooms is unusual and they would remember if Trump brought a woman in for a tumble.
The biggest hurdle Trump faces in his defense is Carroll's failure to give key details.
Witnesses ?? Witnesses ?? We don' have any witnesses. We ain' got no witnesses ! We don' need no stinkin' witnessess !!!
LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck: "He could not pass a security clearance as an ordinary federal employee."
No doubt 51 former heads of US intelligence agencies would be happy to sign a letter "attesting" to just that........assuming they weren't too busy crafting another hoaxed up dossier to fool the democratical rubes like Chuck....or too busy consulting with the ChiComs or checking their swiss bank accounts for some of that sweet Ukraine funding that managed to "fall thru the cracks".
rcocean: "Carroll had no contempory evidence she was attacked."
That's why its the perfect Lawfare type attack.
Readering: "Same judge presided over Kevin Spacey civil trial. He testified he didn't do it. Jury believed him. Not exactly the most beloved celebrity."
LOL
It was inevitable that lefties like readering and LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck will continue to pretend there is some sort of even handed application of "the law" in these fully Sovietized political/"legal" bastion jurisdictions.
Chuck - Now do The Biden family.
Dogma and Pony Show said...
The idea that a person cannot prove a negative is obviously wrong. To take this case as an example, Trump in theory could prove that he was in Europe or was physically unable to achieve penetration when the rape was alleged to occur. I understand that, in this case, the accuser won't specify a date or even a year when this supposedly happened; but as a general matter, it's incorrect to say that someone cannot prove a negative.
In some cases- not this one. For one thing- what day was she raped? She can't recall. Well, what month? She can't recall. Well, for heaven's sake, what year? She can't recall.
But she remembers clearly where it was and that it was TRUMP! What more evidence is needed?
Dogma and Pony Show said: "The idea that a person cannot prove a negative is obviously wrong. To take this case as an example, Trump in theory could prove that he was in Europe..."
Really? How can you prove you were out of town when she can't tell you when the alleged sexual assault occurred?
I'm writing about a wrongful conviction of a man accused by two girls whose families conspired to fabricate molestations claims from nearly twenty years earlier in a money play (civil case pending). Zero evidence. Of course. But the high-priced lawyer not only didn't go with "how to you prove something didn't happen?" defense by resting after the prosecution's case, he put on a memory expert, which had the effect of telling the jury not that the girls were lying, which his cross of her did a reasonable job of, but that they misremembered.
The crime here is not just the wrongful conviction but the prosecutor who saw that the preliminary hearing was not going to go her way, so he pulled it and secretly took the case to the grand jury, during which she suborned perjury by her two complaining witnesses.
Bidens’s numbers only include people alive enough to respond to a poll, right?
Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly said the story was made up by Carroll and a pair of her friends.
Which it obviously was. we know this from the fact that they won't give dates.
Three people experienced / discussed a tragic event with each other, repeatedly, and NONE of them can figure out what year it was?
Carroll claims she couldn't have ANY sex post the attack. Well, when was the last time she had sex before the attack? She can't remember?
Three people, and not one of them left a shred of contemporaneous evidence.
That's because they're all lying
Sally327 said...
That just sounds like a bunch of fancy lawyer talk. And it's not even true. Witnesses get introduced all the time to "prove a negative" by establishing positive facts
Cool, Sally, so tell us what "positive facts" Trump or his lawyers could provide that would prove the negative that the attack never happened.
"Trump was with me on the day in question". Nope, can't use that, because lying Carroll refuses to provide a day, a week, a month, or even a year where the attack supposedly happened.
Thank you for your entry in the "I'm a dishonest moron or ignoramus" contest. We'll let you know later if you won
I'm beginning to believe that the polls that say Trump beats Biden by 7 or so points are complete fabrications- like the Steele Dossier and the 51 CIA letter.
Why? To get us to nominate a candidate who they believe has no chance of beating anyone, not even Biden, in the "election" that they have planned.
What I don't get is the hatred for Desantis by some on the right. While there may have been some squishiness in his early career, he's crushing the wokies in FL and telling his enemies in the press to go die in a fire. For perspective, Trump was a former Democrat, in action if not by registration, and donated to Hillary and others of her ilk (not a criticism, as he had to do evil stuff like that to succeed in NYC).
I know that if/when Desantis is nominated, he'll be accused of raping transgender Girl Scouts with Hillary's dick, but at some point even Low Info voters will catch on to their tricks at some point, and I'd see D as a major improvement over the current guy.
But, yes, if Trump is nominated, he'll get my enthusiastic vote.
Readering said...
"Same judge presided over Kevin Spacey civil trial. He testified he didn't do it. Jury believed him. Not exactly the most beloved celebrity."
Spacey was also a big, well known lefty, Readering- you left that part out.
Left Bank of the Charles said...
Why would Trump testify when he can be confident his diehard supporters will pay the judgement?
So, tell us Lefty, what could Trump testify that would matter to a jury of NY Leftists?
What could he testify that would actually make a difference to the kind of delusional lunatic who's willing to believe 3 people who claim that this massively, horribly dramatic event occurred, and they all talked about it together, but none of them have ANY IDEA when it happened?
Oh, I'm sorry. I know it's rude to try to inject facts, reason, and / or licc when you're having a hatefest
Why? To get us to nominate a candidate who they believe has no chance of beating anyone, not even Biden, in the "election" that they have planned.
More to the point they’ll use his history of impeachment and recent convictions to keep Trump off the ballot in controlled states but they are not going to let you know this until it is too late to pick someone else…
11 people killed in the NYC subway so far this year.
Defund the police! Take a knee, beg, good boy, dead boy.
Mark: "Lots of cases are nothing more than she-said, he-said. But when the case is just she-said, without he saying anything, then he loses."
Trump didn't say anything?
Does the deposition where Trump denied all these transparently fake charges not count?
How many times would Trump have to testify/give testimony under oath before it would "count" as "saying" something?
Mark said...
A bare "they didn't prove their case" is VERY risky. Especially when they HAVE presented a prima facie case.
"I assert that at some point in the past, this person I hate for political reasons did something bad to me. But I didn't tell the police, didn't do ANYTHING that would provide later evidence of this horrible crime.
"Other than discuss it with my two close friends. Who would of course never lie to help me destroy the hate object.
"What year did it happen? Despite the incredibly traumatic effects it had on me, none of us can remember that. Because if we did, Trump might be able to prove we're lying."
Which they are
But you're a monster, so you dont' care about that
The only polls that matter are state by state polls. You don’t get to be President by winning a popular vote.
STOP PAYING ATTENTION TO THAT CRAP.
tim maguire: "The biggest hurdle Trump faces in his defense is Carroll's failure to give key details."
The democraticals, like LLR-democratical Chuck, after 7+ years of having their lies and smears exposed, have learned that the best way to proceed is simply to launch a transparently corrupt effort within a completely corrupted democratical controlled jurisdiction with as few details as possible and then simply get the 100% activist partisan soviet democratical "Jury" to pronounce guilt.
Readering said...
Same judge presided over Kevin Spacey civil trial. He testified he didn't do it. Jury believed him. Not exactly the most beloved celebrity.
--
He's a good actor with the correct politics. 1 or 2 on the jury likely committed the same acts.
Will the Law and Order writers get some credit?
Do people actually still listen to this blowhard? He stands for nothing, except complaining, and engenders no sympathy from any thinking individual. A man of the People? Please, a man out only for himself. Now, i will be attacked for supporting the left, which i don't, but people, please.... He is the last person you should be looking to for moral guidance.
Vicki from Pasadena
Rusty said...
Breezy.
Kennedy will probably be the Dems candidate of choice. He's making all the right sounds to capture the right and the middle of the socialist Dems. Academics will vote for him and claim he's the new messiah of American Politics and then will govern like a lefty once elected.
Trump will run against Kennedy.
We've had enough of the corrupt political establishment.
I think you and I should have a bet on who the Democratic nominee will be.
What do you say?
"Same judge presided over Kevin Spacey civil trial. He testified he didn't do it. Jury believed him. Not exactly the most beloved celebrity."
The accuser in the Spacey case alleged a specific date, a specific location, and a reason for the two of them to have been in the same place - a party at Spacey's apartment. Way more than Carroll has, yet was not believed.
gilbar said...
Serious Question
Has there Ever been a President more deeply involved in crime; than our current resident?
=========
all Presidents who have engaged in Wars without specific Resolutions / declarations by Congress
Left Bank of the Charles said...
Why would Trump testify when he can be confident his diehard supporters will pay the judgement? But only definitelies count as diehards. There is still hope for the probablies.
More mush from the wimp. Trump will write a check if, as expected, this New York jury ignores the absence of a date or even a year of the allegation. This is a duplicate of the Kavanaugh allegation.
Dave Begley said...
Vivek, as far as I know, has never been sued for sexual assault.
YET.. the key word is: YET
What I don't get is the hatred for Desantis by some on the right. While there may have been some squishiness in his early career, he's crushing the wokies in FL and telling his enemies in the press to go die in a fire.
I kind of like DeSantis but so far all I see from him is culture war 24/7. Let's talk about foreign policy. He questioned the Ukraine war and was quickly slapped down by Karl Rove and the usual suspects. You may be a 100% Ukraine war enthusiast but why the quick gag on him?
The fact this case even made it to trial is a sign of how far our "justice system" has fallen.
The accuser can't even remember what year it happened? Can't provide corroborating evidence? Has zero physical evidence, or other witnesses to the act? Has a history of making things up?
Yeah; color me unsurprised it's NYC, the city where you can have a criminal history spanning pages of printout, and walk the streets with no bail after your latest criminal endeavor.
Yes, preponderance of evidence, means Trump loses, in Civil.
But, because nobody trusts the courts, because this is politically motivated, and because this is Trump, a loss is actually a win.
I believe she is making up the story, but Trump's defense is non-existent. Is he really going to rely on a Manhattan jury to rule in his favor when he didn't present a single witness or even bother showing up to deny it? There's no evidence contradicting her story. Of course, the jury is going to reward her and then we get to listen over and over how a jury found that Trump is a rapist. Is that a good campaign strategy going forward? I don't think so.
The problem with the polls is that Trump hasn't really been out there campaigning in public, so he seems OK when we're not hearing directly from him that often. When he is more public, his numbers will drop because everyone will remember that he's unfit for the office (for different reasons than Biden is unfit). Anyway, he has a cap on who will vote for him. While Biden does too, his number is bigger than Trump's and Trump's strategy of alienating his potential voters is dumb.
Frankly, I think Trump would rather lose so he can be a victim, than win and actually have to do the job.
Reported that a Reid Hoffman entity is paying her legal fees. If you’re reporting this trial as anything but a political hit job you’re a part of the problem…
So it looks like Trump was just once again shooting off his big mouth. So he says he’s going to “confront” this. The judge even gave him extra time, did he testify, is he sitting in the courtroom at least?
Trump’s negatives are enough to return a verdict for the plaintiff.
He appointed the judges needed to overturn Roe. What more do those jurors need?
Copy pasta to your browser 👉🏽 https://staging.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/thumbs_down_gladiator.gif
Tara Reade’s mother called Larry King after being assaulted by Joe Biden and that means nothing, so guilty of breathing while Republican it is.
How can the state possibly allow this case to get this far, if they can't even say when the "incident" happened?
Mark said...
Carroll had no contempory evidence she was attacked...For some reason, people don't care about that
Because corroboration is NEVER required (except in rare cases not applicable here).
Bullshit
Lots of cases are nothing more than she-said, he-said.
She said "we were at X together, seen by multiple people, then we went to Y, and he raped me."
You can then talk to those people, and confirm that they were together.
She goes to the ER after her rape, and gets a rape kit collection with his DNA. It's he said - she said as to rape vs consent, but there's proof they had sex.
She has NOTHING.
There can be no possible corroborating witnesses that they were there at the same time, because she refuses to state the YEAR that it supposedly happened.
There's no rape kit, because she didn't do ANYTHING to report this "horribly traumatic" "rape" at the time.
Straight up and simple: in no sane world would a man ever be convicted of rape based on a story like hers
in no sane world would any woman ever win a defamation lawsuit on facts like this case's facts.
I note that even dishonest piece of shit Lefty Mark doesn't try to offer up ANY similar cases, despite claiming there's "lots of cases" like this.
And that's because the only actual cases like this appear in books like To Kill a Mockingbird
Meanwhile, there are 9 traitors that consider themselves Intel officers who ALSO signed the fake letter with the 51 traitors to get Biden elected. What are they afraid of?? Why hide?? We know you are all liars, and will do anything to entrap Trump and make the Bidens look like Saint Obama. This country is SO fucked.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/05/who-are-the-9-secret-intel-officials-who-signed-on-to-hunter-biden-laptop-disinfo-letter-who-cannot-be-named-publicly/
You can't prove a negative. Why do people have such a problem with such a simple concept. All that can happen is prove a counter positive.
Trump has nothing to testify "to". He never had sex with this women. He has already testified to that through his deposition.
Why the court system allowed this civil suit, to get into a court room, is itself a crime.
shereen said...
How can the state possibly allow this case to get this far, if they can't even say when the "incident" happened?
Just a reminder to any lurkers and occasional posters out there that are only getting their news from the MSM. Despite the headlines and constant references to Trump needing to prove he didn't rape Carroll - THIS IS NOT A CRIMINAL TRIAL. This is a civil suit brought by Carroll claiming that Trump's loud objections to the claim in her book that he raped her constituted defamation of her character.
What I don't get is the hatred for Desantis by some on the right.
Its not hatred, at least for me.
There are serious doubts about his choice of people he has surrounded himself with. A stable of 100% GOPe, uni party apparatchiks.
Give Trump's penis a polygraph.
If the penis didn't fit, yo must return a verdict for the defendant.
Monday spent on summations. Jury charge in the morning followed by deliberations. Predicting a decision before the end of the day.
Several people had running summaries on Twitter. Try Inner City Twitter.
If Trump loses and the amount more than nominal (she did not give a $ amount), how long will his law firm remain on the criminal defense team?
Someone contact Chuck!'s G.A. sponsor.
Joe is out as a candidate. He can no longer, literally, find his ass with both hands.
Kennedy? Nobody is taking him serious
The only one the media can install?
Michelle, We only thought Bari was an empty suit (nice crease you got there...for a clean articulate Black, anyway), blank canvas...Michelle says "hold my Bud Lite."
Greg, that isn't 'Lefty Mark' you are attacking.
Wipe the spittle off your monitor, pull your head out of your ass, and get a grip.
Signed, Lefty Mark
I assume you're talking about me, Greg. You're as bad as MK. You know, if you all stopped with your childish ad hominem approach to other people's comments, and simply responded to the substance of others' remarks instead of personal insults, you all would not constantly prove yourselves an ass.
You all can play in your politics sandbox with ridicule and snark if you want. Or you can look at this with some measure of seriousness.
As for me, a one-time trial attorney who twice voted for Trump, any objective view of this case, if you take the parties' names off the story, will lead you to conclude that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the plaintiff on the evidence presented. And with the evidence that was NOT presented in rebuttal, it is more than likely the jury will return a verdict for the plaintiff in this case.
And get it straight - this is not a rape trial. It is a civil defamation trial. One that Trump could have avoided if he exercised just sliver of self-discipline and kept his big mouth shut.
60 yr/old Law & Order fan sex columnist with history of sexual abuse enters dressing room with known young thing chasing playboy and freezes, doesn't document.
Sounds legit.
Trump may be hated by the cautious and quiet types that think bold and loud people are the defective ones. But masculine leadership and command presence ain’t their real problem. It’s jealousy fed by a secret legalism. We need Trump’s style desperately.
And like General Patton in 1944 who elicited the exact same dedicated enemies, we will not win this war without him.
60 yr/old Law & Order fan sex columnist with history of sexual abuse enters dressing room with known young thing chasing playboy and freezes, doesn't document.
Sounds legit.
If I were Trump's lawyer I'd put him on the stand and ask him "Where were you the day it allegedly happened?"
Trump: "What day was that?"
Lawyer, turning to the jury: "Good question."
How is someone supposed to defend themself when you're not even given a day? What bullshit. It's Blassey-Ford all over again.
Blogger Inga said...
So it looks like Trump was just once again shooting off his big mouth. So he says he’s going to “confront” this. The judge even gave him extra time, did he testify, is he sitting in the courtroom at least?
The resident Dullard, plus lefty Mark are fine with a jury deciding a case with no facts as long as it is Trump.
Brian Banks could not be reached for comment.
Russia Collusion Truther and Hillary/FBI Hoax Dossier Dead Ender Inga: "So it looks like Trump was just once again shooting off his big mouth. So he says he’s going to “confront” this. The judge even gave him extra time, did he testify, is he sitting in the courtroom at least?"
Trump gave sat for a deposition under oath.
How many times should he testify under oath that the latest lefty lies are not true?
rehajm: "Reported that a Reid Hoffman entity is paying her legal fees. If you’re reporting this trial as anything but a political hit job you’re a part of the problem…"
Correct.
And the "judge" did not allow the Trump defense team to raise that point or ask how much Carroll was being paid by this known fraudster Hoffman.
Everyone, especially the dolt Inga, will remember Hoffman is the democratical who was caught setting up fake conservative websites and narratives in the Alabama senate race that caused Inga to embarrass herself again, as always. Hoffman admitted to that at trial under oath
Real American: "I believe she is making up the story, but Trump's defense is non-existent."
Just let the stupidity of that statement wash over you.
It reads like something LLR-democratical Chuck or his mini-me lonejustice would write.
victoria: "Now, i will be attacked for supporting the left, which i don't, but people, please.... He is the last person you should be looking to for moral guidance.
Vicki from Pasadena"
Note: victoria, along with Inga and gadfly, argued on this very blog that it was perfectly "normal" for Joe Biden to shower with his adolescent daughter.
Inga decided that position was no longer tenable and so has walked it back...but victoria and gadfly never have.
So tell us more about morality....
It’s a race between the Trump Haters and the Biden Haters
Only speaking for myself, but I don't hate Biden. His voters? Yes. But not him. He's a stupid piece of shit not worthy of my hate.
I'm beginning to believe that the polls that say Trump beats Biden by 7 or so points are complete fabrications- like the Steele Dossier and the 51 CIA letter.
Why? To get us to nominate a candidate who they believe has no chance of beating anyone, not even Biden, in the "election" that they have planned.
Oh, I'd say it's insurance in case Hunter is actually indicted.
Then they can dump old Joe, telling themselves he was probably going to lose anyway.
Michael K: "The resident Dullard, plus lefty Mark are fine with a jury deciding a case with no facts as long as it is Trump."
They've been doing it non-stop for 7+ years now. Those kinds of habits are hard to break.
This woman needs help. Another mental case in NYC.
https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/05/08/e-jean-carrolls-facebook-history-is-truly-bizarre/
“Inga decided that position was no longer tenable and so has walked it back...but victoria and gadfly never have.
So tell us more about morality....”
So tell us about LYING Drag Queen. Explain how it’s an integral aspect of propaganda that might be taught in Moscow based propagandist training.
He's a witch, burn him anyway.
He's a warlock, dunk him and see if he floats.
He's a baby, abort him, cannibalize his profitable parts, sequester his carbon.
victoria said...
He is the last person you should be looking to for moral guidance.
You think we're looking to Trump for moral guidance because we're pointing out the woman accusing him is likely to be lying? Exactly the same way you liberals reacted to the women who accused Bill Clinton and Joe Biden of similar acts, with much less justification.
Note: victoria, along with Inga and gadfly, argued on this very blog that it was perfectly "normal" for Joe Biden to shower with his adolescent daughter.
The elites' dreams of daughters with "benefits" is a hallmark of social progress, thus far loved in privacy, but the performance of human rites were once taboo, too.
walter said...
Someone contact Chuck!'s G.A. sponsor.
I’m 3-for-3 in public Althouse Blog wagers. There’d be a lot bigger sample size if I weren’t so respectful of Althouse’s occasionally-expressed disfavoring of using her blog’s comments pages for commenters’ wagering.
In my defense, I use the technique exclusively as a conversational device. To draw a line under a particularly foolish pronouncement by one of my detractors. To call attention to stray examples of careless trash talk. (Something I always presumed that Althouse would actually appreciate. She knows trash talk; and, except for Trump, she is good at sussing it out. And dispensing with it.)
But I also really like winning 1L bottles of Tanqueray.
And you wanna know what I like best of all?!? It is the integrity of Althouse commenters — who do not like my views — who pay up. I respect those guys. I really do. The people who bet me and lose? I respect them a thousand times more than the people who slink away.
A penis polygraph would prove Trump isn't interested.
Mark wrote:
"It is a civil defamation trial. One that Trump could have avoided if he exercised just sliver of self-discipline and kept his big mouth shut."
What would you do, Mark, were someone to publicly claim you raped them in a book? Would you really bite your tongue when asked about it? I am not saying that silence isn't the best policy even if the claim is an outright lie, but how many men would really take that route if falsely accused? I wouldn't, and I doubt you would either. I can't imagine any man not answering a false claim of that nature.
As for which Mark is which, you can put the cursor on the name- Lefty Mark's ID# starts with a 10, Righty Mark starts with 07. I always check to make sure which one I am addressing, even if I think I can tell from the comment itself. One deserves respect and has earned it in these threads, the other doesn't.
Mark: "And get it straight - this is not a rape trial. It is a civil defamation trial. One that Trump could have avoided if he exercised just sliver of self-discipline and kept his big mouth shut."
According to LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck and other democraticals across the fruited plain, this is absolutely a rape trial.
And if I understand VA lawyer Mark's assertion properly Trump could have avoided this "trial" simply by keeping quiet....even though George Conway and the usual suspects were behind it and a lefty tech billionaire is funding the entire effort!
And if Trump had NOT said anything publicly the entire media would have reported it to be a tacit admission of guilt.
LOL
Yeah, Trump brought this on himself...just like russia collusion, right Mark?
LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck: "I’m 3-for-3 in public Althouse Blog wagers. There’d be a lot bigger sample size if I weren’t so respectful of Althouse’s occasionally-expressed disfavoring of using her blog’s comments pages for commenters’ wagering."
Nothing says "respectful of Althouse" more than a banned LLR-democratical Chuck refusing to abide by Althouse's explicitly articulated wishes!
Blogger Chuck said...
But I also really like winning 1L bottles of Tanqueray.
--
Call Chuck's A.A. sponsor too.
"In my defense, I use the technique exclusively as a conversational device. To draw a line under a particularly foolish pronouncement by one of my detractors. To call attention to stray examples of careless trash talk. (Something I always presumed that Althouse would actually appreciate. She knows trash talk; and, except for Trump, she is good at sussing it out. And dispensing with it.)"
Ann Althouse said...
Chuck, you're doing clutter. You're causing me (and I presume others) to just have to scroll to get past your long and repetitive stuff. You need to change what you are doing or you will become one of the small group of people I call bad faith commenters, whose posts I delete without reading whenever I see them. I'm quite serious. You need to cut way back and keep it short. Stop repeating yourself. Everyone is bored and you are not cute. And don't argue with me in the comments. Stop doing clutter.
8/3/17, 2:16 PM
Russia Collusion Truther and Hillary/FBI Hoax Dossier Dead Ender Inga: "So tell us about LYING Drag Queen."
Simple: you've spent 7+ years advancing one moronic lie after another and unfortunately for you those lies have veen demolished.
You're welcome.
Russia Collusion Truther and Hillary/FBI Hoax Dossier Dead Ender Inga: "Explain how it’s an integral aspect of propaganda that might be taught in Moscow based propagandist training."
LOL
Nope, definitely not a psycho conspiracy theorist there!
Is Putin in the room with you and LLR-democratical Chuck right now?
“Nope, definitely not a psycho conspiracy theorist there!”
Drag Queen, here’s a tip for you. If you don’t want to be likened to a Moscow Trained Propagandist, don’t try so hard to imitate one.
To be fair, you have had moments of incredibly concise brevity:
Chuck: "Fraudulent or not, if Trump loses, it's a win for me."
https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/05/08/e-jean-carrolls-facebook-history-is-truly-bizarre/
Carroll, 79, first alleged that she was raped by Trump in a book released in 2019. Her story is extremely similar to the sub plot of a Law and Order episode which aired in late 2012, a few months after she posted a sex question about Trump to her Facebook followers. Carroll has admitted to being both a Law and Order and an Apprentice fan, the latter hosted by Trump for almost two decades.
“Would you have sex with Donald Trump for $17,000?” she asked her followers, before going on to suggest that in her fantasy scenario, Trump may not be able to speak.
Trump’s defense lawyer Joseph Tacopina is believed to have shown the jury the unearthed Facebook post from August 2012. Carroll alleges she was raped by Trump in the dressing room of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in New York in the mid-1990s.
--
Brian Williams was there.
Drago has 13 comments just on this one thread, and hundreds and hundreds of more comments on other threads here. It's like he wants this blog to be HIS blog. And so many of his posts refer to his opponents as "Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist (fill in the blank)".
I wish Drago would start his own blog, where he may be able to get 2 other followers, instead of trying to hijack this blog with his drivel.
Fortunately!
“But I also really like winning 1L bottles of Tanqueray.”
Your debilitation is both striking and undeniable, Chuck.
LLR-democratical Chuck mini-me, lonejustice: "Drago has 13 comments just on this one thread, and hundreds and hundreds of more comments on other threads here."
Interestingly, LLR-democratical Chuck mini-me, lonejustice, never provides a post count for lefties/LLR-democraticals. Its probably just an oversight.
LLR-democratical Chuck mini-me, lonejustice: "It's like he wants this blog to be HIS blog. And so many of his posts refer to his opponents as "Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist (fill in the blank)"."
As our lying lonejustice knows well, the ONLY poster at Althouse Blog for whom the well deserved moniker "Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist" is applied is, of course, LLR-democratical Chuck...for the simple reason that psycho chose, of his own free will (and perhaps of the will of the demons in his head) to post an explicit, violent, homosexual, rage rape fantasy re: Rod Dreher at Althouse blog.
It appears our LLR-democratical mini-me, lonejustice, is once again, as always, running some pathetically ineffective interference for his LLR teammate.
Tsk tsk tsk
Good help is so hard to find, no?
LLR-democratical Chuck mini-me, lonejustice: "I wish Drago would start his own blog, where he may be able to get 2 other followers, instead of trying to hijack this blog with his drivel."
I must say, lonejustice certainly writes in a manner and tone quite reminiscent of one LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck.....
.....almost as if it were a coordinated effort in the run up to the 2024 election....
Russia Collusion Truther and Hillary/FBI Hoax Dossier Dead Ender Inga: "Drag Queen, here’s a tip for you. If you don’t want to be likened to a Moscow Trained Propagandist, don’t try so hard to imitate one."
So you ARE going to continue pretending you have deep insight into the machinations of foreign intelligence and propaganda services!
Yep, nothing psycho about some retired nurse chick thinking she's the "Jane Bond" of Wisconsin!
And what makes you think I want you to stop with your latest psychosis? With every post you drive home even harder just what a conspiracy shmuck you've been for 7+ years!
"I wish Drago would start his own blog, where he may be able to get 2 other followers, instead of trying to hijack this blog with his drivel."
In your mind, other people care what you wish?
Althouse blog posters should keep an eye to the sky as everytime LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck finds himself in difficult rhetorical/logical circumstances, the lonejustice-Bat Signal is illuminated and our LLR-White-Knightin' "hero" lonejustice pops in to try and save the day!
Hilarious....and hilariously transparent.
Someone ought to do an IP check on those 2 cats just to confirm they are different people...though clearly joined by a common goal and "strategy", such as it is.
"I wish Drago would start his own blog, where he may be able to get 2 other followers, instead of trying to hijack this blog with his drivel."
Anybody who wants to, can skip over posts from people who they don't believe add any value to the conversation. Of course, that takes self-control. Well, that, and it doesn't stop others from reading those comments.
I'm guessing it's the second thing that's the perceived problem here.
lonejustice said...
Drago has 13 comments just on this one thread, and hundreds and hundreds of more comments on other threads here. It's like he wants this blog to be HIS blog. And so many of his posts refer to his opponents as "Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist (fill in the blank)".
I wish Drago would start his own blog, where he may be able to get 2 other followers, instead of trying to hijack this blog with his drivel.
5/8/23, 6:43 PM
Funny, how you have nothing better to do, than to count people's comments.
I have to admit, of all of lonejustice's moronic attempts to deflect for his pal Chuck, this one was guffaw-inducing:
lonejustice: "And so many of his posts refer to his opponents as "Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist (fill in the blank)"."
LOL
Can you imagine trying to convince the Althouse blog commentariat that there is more than 1 Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist (Chuck, of course) flitting and galavanting and traipsing about Althouse blog?
In some ways you kinda have to feel bad for Chuckles. Gadfly, The Poor Man's LLR-democratical Chuck, does his best to emulate Chuck's Adam Schiff-level mendacity, but there's only so much "talent" there to work with. So that wont do.
And now the lonejustice "LLR cavalry" has been exposed as equally inept.
I mean, just what the heck is a LLR-democratical abd Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist supposed to do in his explicitly stated mission to smear Trump and conservatives AND drivea wedge between Althouse and her readers?
Chuckles just can't buy a break and there ain't enough gin to drown...er...to deaden those..uncomfortable..."images" that must fill Chuck's cranium.
I think Drago and Chuck should get a room, or maybe a sitcom, together.
The tension is palpable.
gilbar said...
Serious Question
Has there Ever been a President more deeply involved in crime; than our current resident?
You cannot possibly be serious, gilbar. We once had President Whats-His-Name from Queens, who has been charged and convicted of money laundering, grifting money from students, stealing funds from his own charity, and directing his company to cheat on taxes . . . but stay tuned, there is more crime coming down the tracks.
It’s a good thing this comments page is moderated.
Otherwise we might be seeing just a few commenters cluttering the page with repetitive and obsessive personal attacks having no relation to the blog post itself.
If either of the two Marks really wants to be taken seriously and not confused with the other, they could solve the problem by taking the major step of changing the moniker they use to comment.
But apparently they are both so pigheaded that neither will. So they blame other commenters for not distinguishing between them because of the identical name they use to comment.
Which is apparently so unique and original that neither one can bear to alter it in the slightest.
Ann Althouse said...
"Chuck, you're doing clutter. You're causing me (and I presume others) to just have to scroll to get past your long and repetitive stuff. You need to change what you are doing or you will become one of the small group of people I call bad faith commenters, whose posts I delete without reading whenever I see them. I'm quite serious. You need to cut way back and keep it short. Stop repeating yourself. Everyone is bored and you are not cute. And don't argue with me in the comments. Stop doing clutter."
Your forbearance is saint like. I wish my patience were thus. Alas. I have none for liars frauds and grifters.
Hey Chuck, fuck you and Drago too. You are both boring as shit.
Now, Gadfly. Do that again, but while Trump was in office. Biden, they guy you voted for, is a 47 year grifter. Trump seems to have put all that on hold while in office.
Let put this in a way you can understand.
Biden has been picking your pocket for 47 years. Trump hasn't.
Old and slow: "Hey Chuck, fuck you and Drago too. You are both boring as shit."
Well, perhaps on this particular topic. Mea culpa.
Banned Commenter Chuck: "It’s a good thing this comments page is moderated.
Otherwise we might be seeing just a few commenters cluttering the page with repetitive and obsessive personal attacks having no relation to the blog post itself."
Banned commenter comments are always the most self-aware...and by "most" I of course do mean "least".
Chuck said...
It’s a good thing this comments page is moderated.
Otherwise we might be seeing just a few commenters cluttering the page with repetitive and obsessive personal attacks having no relation to the blog post itself.
5/9/23, 6:43 AM
Look in the mirror Chucky.
Twilight faith, ethical religion, mortal gods, goddesses, and experts to trade bennies for leverage.
”NYC is lawless. Clay Travis (Rush's replacement) said 11 people killed in the NYC subway so far this year.“
Any number of persons killed in the subway is tragic, but at a daily subway ridership of about 2.4 million and an annual ridership of about 640 million, that is an infinitesimal percentage of persons killed in the subways. That doesn’t make riding the subway particularly dangerous at all, much less NYC “lawless.” Such ill-informed and, frankly, hysterical statements invalidate your credibility. NYC is among the safest cities in the nation.
”Why would Trump testify when he can't possibly win.“
ANY defendant in a criminal and probably civil trial situation probably should not testify. Trump would be very smart to keep silent.
“So, tell us Lefty, what could Trump testify that would matter to a jury of NY Leftists?“
You reveal your ignorance of NYC’s habitants (and jury pool). Juries are typically comprised of middle- and working-class citizens, and among this population you will find persons of every (or NO) political perspectives. They are not “leftists” and they render their decisions based on the facts presented, in my experience of serving on many juries (civil, criminal, and grand) in 40 years of living in NYC.
Told you.
Verdict inb4 hours including lunch.If I understand verdict reporting right
No rape
Sex abuse. Comp damage $2m, punitive $20k
Defamation. comp $1m+$1.7m (to repair reputation)
Punitive $280k
Adds up to a round $5m.
Did jury work backwards from that total? I think part that might be vulnerable on appeal is the $1.7m for reputation repair based on expert testimony.
Ratio of compensatory to punitive seems unusual. Signals they did not have it in for Trump. Thought Carroll genuinely harmed.
Costs will be added by judge. And possibly prejudgment interest on defamation. Sex abuse maybe from date complaint filed. Matter of state law.
Would think he has to file bond to avoid collection efforts pending appeal.
Does Tacopino take fall?
Defendants in criminal cases often don't testify because it tends to lower standard from beyond reasonable doubt to whether or not one believes the defendant. Civil cases defendants testify. Many jurisdictions allow plaintiff to comment if civil defendant elects not to testify. Which happened here oer NY law. Which is why if sued and prosecuted for same thing civil case generally gets stayed until criminal case resolved.
Look Drago, I don't mean to be rude by including you with my message to Chuck, but Jesus fucking Christ, he's not worth the effort.
Calm down, Readering. There is going to be an appeal.
"Althouse; Trump is a guy who wouldn't be allowed on the board of any major corporation. He couldn't be named as a Chief Executive officer for any major, mainstream institution. He'd have been removed as a member of any large law firm. He could not pass a security clearance as an ordinary federal employee."
--
Sounds more like your bud Joementia.
But as you say:
ck said...
"I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."
3/4/16, 4:46 PM
Conserving Cuckservatism.
Calm down, Readering. There is going to be an appeal.
“There are no witnesses to call to prove a negative.”
What in the crackhead pseudo-legal sentence is this? The plaintiff has the burden of proof. The defendant can rebut the proof by presenting their own evidence (e.g. the defendant testifying). Trump didn’t want to put a up a defense to rebut their proof. Why? Because he didn’t want to be cross examined and questioned about some pretty awful conduct he did. I knew he would do this. Rather than man up and actually take this head on, the lying coward is just acting like this is smoke and mirrors or “fake news” similar to all other truths he finds inconvenient. You guys are cult members of an authoritarian. You’re brain washed. Get help.
Post a Comment