... Stephanopoulos... said Trump had been found “liable for rape.” The jury had found Trump liable for sexual abuse under New York law, but not rape....
“Indeed, the jury expressly found that Plaintiff did not commit rape and, as demonstrated below, Defendant George Stephanopoulos was aware of the jury’s finding in this regard yet still falsely stated otherwise,” [Trump’s attorney, Alejandro] Brito continued....
ADDED: The complaint quotes 12 times that Stephanopoulos said "rape," so he really leaned into what he had to know was wrong:
পোস্টগুলি
১০৭টি মন্তব্য:
Does $83,000,000 sound about right for the penalty George should pay?
Nice.
Even if it's just to be a pain in the ass. Snuffleupagus was lying. (So was E.Jean Carroll).
Good. Make them live up to the standards they demand of everyone else.
Trump should say ABC for one billion dollars, sue the braying hordes in the Rotting Apple and other Democratic chambers of horrors, then donate a portion of the proceeds to help girls at risk from immigration reform, women conned to take a knee to liberal culture, and the legal fees of persons of female sex and feminine gender who are displaced by Levine's Dreams of Herr Mengele. #HateLovesAbortion
But what are the damages? The man is on tape bragging about "grabbing them by the pussy" without asking. How is his reputation harmed? Lol. Is he really harmed by Stephanopoulos falsely accusing him of the thing he likes to brag about doing? 🤣😂😂 There's way more to defamation than saying something that isn't true.
WHERE ARE THE DAMAGES!?!
"...filed in federal court in Miami"
Groovy.
This ruling follows where NY changed the statute of limitations for one year so the accuser could file a case against Trump? That judgment stands to be set aside before too long.
Kabuki theater. Propaganda.
Out lawfare civil war ends only when after real bloodshed and death, or after we suffer economic destruction where courts and lawsuits are ignored.
Hopefully Trump is awarded Steffie's real estate holdings in lieu of cash. Unfortunately his real estate holdings consist primarily of Bill and Hilary's rectal cavities.
Describing what the cbs and nbc office suites of course stephanopolous bragged about how he shut juanita broderick down
D.D. Driver said...
"But what are the damages? The man is on tape bragging about "grabbing them by the pussy" without asking. How is his reputation harmed? Lol. Is he really harmed by Stephanopoulos falsely accusing him of the thing he likes to brag about doing? 🤣😂😂 There's way more to defamation than saying something that isn't true."
The two things you mentioned aren't equivilent. Do you need it explained to you?
What's D.D's point. Trump is fined 500,000,000 for paying banks back a loan on time and in full. Where's the damages? Carrol says rape is sexy, where's the damages?
"The two things you mentioned aren't equivalent. Do you need it explained to you?"
First, it really depends on the criminal laws in the state you reside in. In Wisconsin "grabbin' 'em by the pussy" without consent is the exact same crime as rape with your penis. Second, we are talking about damages here. The two acts don't need to be "equivalent." We are talking about Trump's reputation. He has lived a sleezy life of mistresses, affairs, porn star hush money, free flights on Lolita Express. What did Stephanopoulos's remarks actually cost Trump? Did he miss out on a big endorsement deal or something? 🤣😂🤣
You do know that there is more to defamation that someone said something untrue that hurt Donnie's feelings, right?
Last year the same Coral Gables solo filed against Michael Cohen on behalf of DJT for breach of fiduciary duty, etc. Quietly dropped the case when client ordered to deposition. This case won't last as long.
I think damages are presumed when the defamation concerns loathsome diseases or sexual relations. At least in some states.
Stephanopoulos should stop talking...
Perhaps he's the first hostage for the future prisoner exchange.
"The man is on tape bragging about "grabbing them by the pussy" without asking."
Nope never said.
Mr. Bimbo Eruptions should know about rape, having worked for Clinton.
D.D. Driver said...The man is on tape bragging about "grabbing them by the pussy" without asking.
He did no such thing. An early run at the "fine people" hoax.
THEY'LL LET YOU grab them by the pussy.
DD stands for?
Sexual abuser has a much more attractive ring to it. Not rape rape, but something more dignified apropos to the Scion of a wealthy family. I'm sure the lady Trumpers appreciate the nuance.
$83 million dollar please!!!
Twelve Times?
Let's see
$100,000,000.00 X 12
Should cover it nicely.
D.D. Driver is okay with Progressive lawfare as long as there is no pendulum swing, because he thinks Progressives are above the laws they are forcing on the rest of us....
Old Snuggleupagus is both nasty and stupid. Hope his wallet gets dinged for this.
It would be endlessly amusing if the damage were the same amount that he was ordered to pay E. Jean Carrol.
D.D. Driver said:
The man is on tape bragging about "grabbing them by the pussy" without asking.
Someone needs to review the record. Another case of lefty mis-information.
Why are the Know Nothings wasting their time posting BS on social media when they should be cutting checks to send to Trump for his bond?
Lawsuits that I hope will succeed and illuminate.
The man is on tape bragging about "grabbing them by the pussy" without asking.
Why do you continue to lie about this? You know what he said. You know exactly what he meant.
Why do you continue to lie about it?
I agree Trump should sue D. D. Driver. As with Stephanopoulos, there should be no difficulty meeting the “actual malice” standard.
DD stands for?
Dumber than dogshit?
John Henry
Godspeed Mr. Brito!
Not only did he say it, he doubled down on it in his deposition.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-defends-infamous-access-hollywood-comments-in-deposition-video-2023-5
“WHERE ARE THE DAMAGES!?!”
In yo’ brain, dee dee.
Little Georgie… enabler of a rapist POS Slick Willie.
The usua suspects show up and provide with their with their razor sharp lrgal accumen. Thanks guys. Here's a sticker.
The Trump lawsuit against ABC and Stephanopoulos is utter BS and relies on a theory already specifically rejected, correctly, by a federal court. Pure vexatious performative litigation.
How does Trump have so many lawyers willing to work for free on cases they can never put on their resumes?
Maybe the Left's de facto immunity stops with this.
Couldn't happen to a better guy than Georgie.
Serious question: Where was ABC's general counsel on this?
Mutaman, I can't figure how you got the time to waste on socials either. Palliative care helping you with that?
Nancy was playing, yes i mean playing for audience of 1, DJT. She was rude, obnoxious and downright nasty. I hope more people see how very bad she is... so that no one in their right mind will re-elect her. She is everything a person should not be, and her fealty to her god and master, DJT is nauseating.
and Trump filing a lawsuit against anyone is a joke.
Vicki from Pasadena
I thought he said "When you're rich and famous, they'll let you, etc"
I thought he said "When you're rich and famous, they'll let you, etc"
Yeah, that sounds like "actual malice" to me.
Oh, and DD, Trump said "they would let you grab them by the pussy"
He didn't say he did it, and you can't possibly be so ignorant as to not know that. So your statement sounds like "actually malice", too
"They let you grab them by the pussy" is what Trump said.
And? Is this a crime? Yo Putin-like leftists - is that a crime.
> Sexual abuser has a much more attractive ring to it. Not rape rape, but something more dignified apropos to the Scion of a wealthy family. I'm sure the lady Trumpers appreciate the nuance.
If no one else gets your humor here, just know that I appreciate you.
Prediction: this action will be dismissed on the pleadings or on summary judgment.
Trump has already litigated the issue of whether what forcible digital penetration of Ms. Carroll (which is what the jury found) could properly be called a rape, and here's the newspaper account what the judge said in his opinion (which accurately summarizes the opinion):
**The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.
He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”
Kaplan said New York’s legal definition of “rape” is “far narrower” than the word is understood in “common modern parlance.”
He added that the jury clearly found that Trump had “ ‘raped’ her in the sense of that term broader than the New York Penal Law definition.”**
If a Judge has already determined that the jury clearly found that Trump raped Carroll as that term is understood in "common modern parlance" and if Trump is bound by that finding under basic principles of non mutual issue preclusion, there is no possibility that Trump can take this case anywhere--ABC will bring a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment and it will be gone in six weeks or so.
The comments above reflect no knowledge of these decisive facts and legal rules.
Sounds like a good idea. Always counter sue these people.
Here is the interview for those that have forgotten:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/07/donald-trump-leaked-recording-women
I forgot that he was bragging about trying to fuck some other man's wife! 🤣😂🤣
He is also opening the door for a well-funded defense to really, really dig into his history. Get your popcorn ready. 🍿 Can't wait.
I wouldn't sit on a hot stove waiting for a Democrat to be convicted of anything at this point. Tribe concerns have superseded actual justice.
Who pissed in YOUR flower pot, little old lady from Pasadena!?
Stephen:
I don't know what "common parlance" for rape is in NY, but in NE it is the forcible and nonconsensual penetration of the vagina or anus by a penis.
Neb. Rev. Stat. section 28-318(6)
(6) Sexual penetration means sexual intercourse in its ordinary meaning, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any intrusion, however slight, of any part of the actor's or victim's body or any object manipulated by the actor into the genital or anal openings of the victim's body which can be reasonably construed as being for nonmedical, nonhealth, or nonlaw enforcement purposes. Sexual penetration shall not require emission of semen;
Nothing about fingers.
Decades ago, no witnesses, no forensic evidence... Another inferred indictment, creative conviction in the Rotting Apple, published in a handmade tale by ABC. Novel?
Please pay attention to the text, Class! Trump said that if you're a star "they let you" grab them by the pussy. If they "let you", it's consensual, so it's not rape. Trump's statement can't be taken as an admission that he has committed rape, how ever you define it.
Not a gentleman, surely, but not a rapist.
Stephan @ 4:33: "The comments above reflect no knowledge of these decisive facts and legal rules."
Stop pretending you're a lawyer, Stephen.
Judge Kaplan said that Trump's conduct did not constitute "rape" as that term is used in New York's criminal statutes, but did constitute rape in the broader colloquial meaning of the term. The jury was bound the legal meaning, not the colloquial one.
It was the jury's job to determine what Trump is liable for, not Judge Kaplan's. The jury found that Trump committed sexual assault but not rape.
Navarro in an orange jumpsuit starting today.Another trump soldier goes down
For the EXACT SAME OFFENSE committed by both Eric Holder and Hunter Biden, neither of whom will ever be charged by the Department of Justice, which is now nothing more than a Stasi secret-police force for the Democratic Party.
Every conservative state government should refuse all contact and cooperation with the DOJ scum until Holder and Biden are perp-walked. They're our enemies and oppressors, and should be treated as such.
Trump only stuck his fingers in her. He didn't stick his dick in her. We need to clear that up because we are talking about the next President of the United States. Okay, there was the defamation, too. And the fraud. But come on let's be clear that no criminal jury actually found Trump guilty of sticking his dick in her.
Make Amercia Great Again.
Yeah, but it’s Trump.
It’s ok to do it to Trump.
Trump's real views about women:
https://www.vox.com/2016/10/7/13205842/trump-secret-recording-women
More lawfare on both sides. It will never end.
D.D Driver seems to have a problem with the meaning of small words.
Let, for instance. Also he never said he did anything. He said that the women would let people do things. There was no "I grabbed them by the P*ssy" admission, and there was no admission that it was without consent. Those are material pieces of data when establishing sexual misconduct.
So at best you have someone being a cad and saying crude (but probably factual) things. Oh, the humanity. The question you should really ask is did he shower with them when they were 9 years old? (Without consent, of course.)
Blogger D.D. Driver said...
But what are the damages? The man is on tape bragging about "grabbing them by the pussy" without asking. How is his reputation harmed? Lol. Is he really harmed by Stephanopoulos falsely accusing him of the thing he likes to brag about doing? 🤣😂😂 There's way more to defamation than saying something that isn't true.
WHERE ARE THE DAMAGES!?!
E Jean Carroll is on tape saying "Rape is Sexy".
Apparently her reputation was damaged... somehow.
It would appear that leftist assholes are not happy when they think they might be required to play by the rules they created.
What a surprise.
How interesting that a New York JUDGE would say a rape was committed even though it does not meet the definition in New York law.
And that is defended by the usual suspects above.
If you could erase the name Trump from your thoughts I suspect most sane people would be horrified at the thought.
If I could erase the name Trump from my thoughts what a wonderful world this would be.
Imagine being old enough to vote yet not knowing what a metaphor is. "...grabbin' 'em by the pussy..." goodness. How would that even work, if one imagined it happening in the real world?
4:40 DD
What does your link prove?
Did you actually read it? You should.
Apparently, Poopalottapuss stutters.
Blogger lonejustice said...
More lawfare on both sides. It will never end.
---
Yes. It's just a simple tit for tat isn't it now.
Chuck,
I saw you rob a Royal Oaks liquor store for a case of Tanqueray. I'm not sure when, but ya gotta believe me. Its just like that episode of Cops, coincidentally.
Althouse
"The complaint quotes 12 times that Stephanopoulos said "rape," so he really leaned into what he had to know was wrong:"
“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote."
Who you gonna believe-Althouse or Judge Kaplan?
BUMBLE BEE said...
"Mutaman, I can't figure how you got the time to waste on socials either. Palliative care helping you with that?"
I sued some asshole who was smarting off to me on the internet and collected big damages. So now I can fuck around for a year or two. Maybe i'll go after you next. Except you're probably judgement proof.
He said that the women would let people do things. There was no "I grabbed them by the P*ssy" admission, and there was no admission that it was without consent.
The first rule of social liberal club...
He's been labeled with the Blue C and NOW (pun intended) they hunt him with indictments and warlock judgments.
JAORE said...
"a New York JUDGE"
Federal JUDGE (sic)
Blogger buster said...
"It was the jury's job to determine what Trump is liable for, not Judge Kaplan's. The jury found that Trump committed sexual assault but not rape."
I only committed sexual assault, not rape.
Trump 2024
readering writes, "If I could erase the name Trump from my thoughts what a wonderful world this would be."
You have successfully erased nearly everything else. What do you suppose is the problem?
readering writes, "If I could erase the name Trump from my thoughts what a wonderful world this would be."
You have successfully erased nearly everything else. What do you suppose is the problem?
cunnilingus = artful use of lamguage [James Bond Lexion]
Dave Begley said...
"Neb. Rev. Stat. section 28-318(6)
(6) Sexual penetration means sexual intercourse in its ordinary meaning, cunnilingus, fellatio, anal intercourse, or any intrusion, however slight, of any part of the actor's or victim's body or any object manipulated by the actor into the genital or anal openings of the victim's body which can be reasonably construed as being for nonmedical, nonhealth, or nonlaw enforcement purposes. Sexual penetration shall not require emission of semen;
Nothing about fingers. "
What does the law in Nebraska have to do with anything?
readering said...
If I could erase the name Trump from my thoughts what a wonderful world this would be.
Then simply stop paying attention to politics, you pathetic neurotic moron
Pretend you're an adult
Dave Begley said...
" Stephen:
I don't know what "common parlance" for rape is in NY,"
Dave: Free advice-There's this thing called google, its really amazing. Also something called google scholar where you can look up NY statutes and case law.
Also check out West law. It will really help your practice.
Hassayamper said...
Navarro in an orange jumpsuit starting today.Another trump soldier goes down
For the EXACT SAME OFFENSE committed by both Eric Holder and Hunter Biden,"
Its so unfair. But I seem to recall that Bidden actually obeyed the subpoena and showed up and testified.
Be that as it may, when the Know Nothings controlled the White House and both branches of congress, why didn't they go after Holder.? My theory- Trump's lawyers are to incompetent to know how to enforce a subpoena.
buster said...
Judge Kaplan said that Trump's conduct did not constitute "rape" as that term is used in New York's criminal statutes, but did constitute rape in the broader colloquial meaning of the term. The jury was bound the legal meaning, not the colloquial one.
So, worthless piece of shit asshole "judge" Kaplan said "don't bother me with the facts! I hate Trump, therefore I will justify and support people lying about him."
How about both you and "judge" Kaplan FOAD?
"Trump's conduct did not constitute "rape" as that term is used in New York's criminal statutes". Full stop, we're done.
Even the horribly left wing, dishonest, and pathetically biased NY "jury" jury did NOT find that Trump "raped" E.
So if you claim he did, you are lying, and libeling, and you deserve to be utterly destroyed
D.D. Driver said...
"Here is the interview for those that have forgotten:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/07/donald-trump-leaked-recording-women
I forgot that he was bragging about trying to fuck some other man's wife! 🤣😂🤣
He is also opening the door for a well-funded defense to really, really dig into his history. Get your popcorn ready. 🍿 Can't wait."
Jaysus bay, yer tick.
Rusty said...
" The usua suspects show up and provide with their with their razor sharp lrgal accumen. Thanks guys. Here's a sticker." (sic)
hey rusty we couldn't all afford to attend Trump University Law school like you.
Althouse missed an important quotation from the E. Jean Carroll case judge:
U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan, an appointee of former President Clinton who oversaw the litigation, rejected Trump’s counterclaims, ruling that describing it as a rape was still substantially true.
“The difference between Ms. Carroll’s allegedly defamatory statements — that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as defined in the New York Penal Law — and the ‘truth’ — that Mr. Trump forcibly digitally penetrated Ms. Carroll — is minimal. Both are felonious sex crimes,” Kaplan ruled.
Carroll won two cases claiming rape, amounting to $100 million - so what more does Dumb Donald need to know?
I don't find her credible. She changed her story dramatically, but her first recorded response was zipless fuck excitement her newspaper beat, as it were. Later she made up yet another story about bringing Trump into a woman's dressing room so she could get column material about making him put on the lingerie. How? It wouldn't nearly fit him. Were they going to shred it then return it? Shoplift? Her story makes no sense.
My rapist used household tools and a honey bear to violently penetrate and terrorize me. At one point he flirted with a knife. He also used his penis, which, at the time, was the only definition of rape-rape. He could have used a chainsaw and it wouldn't count as rape.
Can all of you please shut the fuck up? He either sexually assaulted her or he didn't. Her career was to be a cocktease; she did nothing afterwards but keep being a cocktease, while I have spent my life redefining rape to better serve male victims -- who are raped at least as often as female ones -- and eliminating distinctions between what someone shoves in you.
I don't believe her. The rest of you, please shut the fuck up. It's about her credibility, and she has none.
Tina - agreed.
She has no credibility. (SHE = E-Jean)
But her story fits the narrative. Just like Baseless-Ford. The left need a narrative, a BS story and someone to sell it and make false accusations.
E-Jean can't get her story straight - or a dates right - or any actual proof.
When it comes to destroying opposition - the chi Com Virus big-plan manipulative power-obsessed mob structured democrats - will find anyone with a BS story to sell.
So the corrupt left can do what they do best. DESTROY.
The collective left are actual rapists.
They take the collective lie and they force and shove it in, against our will.
Howard said...
Sexual abuser has a much more attractive ring to it. Not rape rape, but something more dignified apropos to the Scion of a wealthy family. I'm sure the lady Trumpers appreciate the nuance.
The Jury had rape in front of them and voted not liable.
Uncomfortable Facts, now become nuance to the TDS afflicted.
Stephen;
The Judges dicta aside, the only FACTS are the Jury refused to vote he was liable for Rape.
You are using the legal system to punish Trump, than ignore the legal findings.
Bill Clinton actually used a cigar to penetrate an intern - while president. He also spooged all over Monica's blue dress.
The collective hivemind DD Driver left are cool with it.
But if Trump said something stupid once, as a private citizen - he should be destroyed. Sent to the gulag for life, and all his assets seized.
however slight, of any part of the actor's or victim's body or any object manipulated by the actor into the genital or anal openings of the victim's body which can be reasonably construed as being for nonmedical, nonhealth, or nonlaw enforcement purposes.
Looks like this clause covers penetration with fingers.
And you claim to be a lawyer!
Does E-Jean have proof?
If so - where is the proof?
Why didn't she report this decades ago?
Freder Frederson said...
"however slight, of any part of the actor's or victim's body or any object manipulated by the actor into the genital or anal openings of the victim's body which can be reasonably construed as being for nonmedical, nonhealth, or nonlaw enforcement purposes.
Looks like this clause covers penetration with fingers.
And you claim to be a lawyer!"
" iowan2 said...
Howard said...
Sexual abuser has a much more attractive ring to it. Not rape rape, but something more dignified apropos to the Scion of a wealthy family. I'm sure the lady Trumpers appreciate the nuance.
The Jury had rape in front of them and voted not liable.
Uncomfortable Facts, now become nuance to the TDS afflicted."
Freder. We're slowly coming to the conclusion you ain't very bright.
Freder. We're slowly coming to the conclusion you ain't very bright.
I was merely pointing out that Ed Begley must be a crappy lawyer if he reads that statute and believes that digital penetration is not covered.
Freder Frederson said...
Freder. We're slowly coming to the conclusion you ain't very bright.
I was merely pointing out that Ed Begley must be a crappy lawyer if he reads that statute and believes that digital penetration is not covered.
3/20/24, 8:45 AM
Did you read what Tina Trent wrote?? Maybe YOU have the problem....not "Ed" Begley, whomever that is. (I think he was a pretend lawyer on TV)
He is also opening the door for a well-funded defense to really, really dig into his history.
You mean when they bring up George’s role during Bill Clinton’s campaign? The internet wasn’t really a thing back then, but many of us were alive to remember. Clinton sure seemed to think he could grab women, and many of them complained immediately and long before Bill ran for President, but George was there to defend Bill’s actions.
Did you read what Tina Trent wrote??
What does that have to do with whether Dave Begley (sorry about getting the first name incorrect) understands a Nebraska statute?
Actually, Buster, I am a lawyer, licensed in California and, until I retired there, in New York as well.
You are correct that the jury was bound by the legal meaning of rape, and that they did not find that the legal definition of rape had been proven.
But they did find forcible digital penetration, and in subsequent proceedings in the case, Judge Kaplan expressly found that the legal and ordinary person understandings of rape were different, and that the jury's finding of forcible digital penetration was in substance a finding of rape as that term is understood by ordinary people--rejecting Trump's argument to the contrary. Under normal principles of issue preclusion, that finding will be binding on Trump in any subsequent litigation.
So if the gist of Trump's complaint is that Stephanopoulos' use of the term rape was knowingly and maliciously false, Stephanopoulos can respond that Trump has already lost that issue, because Kaplan's ruling establishes that use is fully consistent with the practical, ordinary person understanding of what the jury found. Even if the subsequent court were to find that Judge Kaplan's ruling was not binding, the defendants could still argue that his basic reasoning is correct and that under it, their use of the term was neither false nor malicious. I am surprised that Professor Althouse does not appear to have considered this analysis.
Professor Althouse suggests that Stephanopoulos must have known that what he was doing was wrong. I am guessing just the opposite, which is that ABC's lawyers told him that, especially given Judge Kaplan's ruling, he was on solid ground in using the term rape, since Judge Kaplan had already determined that the use of the term was fully justified, and that Trump was likely bound by that finding.
Dave Begley, I don't think Nebraska law is relevant here. But you are correct that if Nebraska law applied, the underlying issue is whether the jury's failure to find that the statutory definition was met would control the question of whether ordinary Americans, and news organizations, can properly characterize forcible digital penetration effected by a candidate for President as rape. I wouldn't be surprised if Judge Kaplan would have reached the same result under Nebraska law, but that is pure speculation.
Stephen, you're overlooking one key point - Stephanopoulos used these exact words multiple times - "found liable for rape."
That simply is not true and GS knew it.
His multiple uses of "liable for" rather than "guilty of" indicate that he understood this was a civil trial and the judgement was based on a preponderance of evidence standard, not guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Thus he had a clear understanding of the nature of the case and the ruling by the jury and lied knowingly and repeatedly about the facts.
Can't wait for Trump to expound on how it wasn't 'rape rape' at his rallies.
Certainly nothing about this could be misspoken in front of cameras.
Greg the class traitor is off his meds again. But these comments attract such.
Readering said...
Greg the class traitor is off his meds again
Readering is lying, and knows it. His position is such crap that even he knows it's indefensible
Mark said...
Can't wait for Trump to expound on how it wasn't 'rape rape' at his rallies.
He's going to quite correctly point out hat she's a lying sack of shit, and that absolutely nothing happened.
The fact that left wing scumbags from Manhattan were willing to lie for her doesn't make her lie true.
To recap: Sh elcaimed she contemporaneously told MULTIPLE friends about this "rape".
But NONE of them can remember what day, week, month, or even YEAR that it "happened".
The ONLY possible reason for that is that they are all lying.
And they're afraid that if they give a time period when teh attack supposedly happened, Trump will be able to pull up his calendar and prove he wasn't even IN NY when the event supposedly took place.
We saw the exact same thing with CBF vs Kavanaugh, where she refused to give ANY sort of reasonable time period when the event took place.
And where she refused to release her psych notes to the Senate committee, after sharing them with a WaPo "reporter", because the story she told her shrink had the event happening years after Kavanaugh graduated from high school
Stephen: "But they [the jury] did find forcible digital penetration,..."
They "found" no such thing.
As democratical partisans they simply went along with the New Soviet Democratial lawfare lie.
As with Kavanaugh, the New Soviet Democratical party has just about perfected the Zero-Evidence Blue-Jurisdiction Vague-Smear-Based Conviction Pipeline.
The beginning of a gulag archipelago one might argue...and should.
Doesn’t Trump owe the New York Times for one of his lolsuits?
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন