Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jimi77" data-source="post: 8886306" data-attributes="member: 673702">The reality of the decision is the judge declared Trump liable for something the jury found him not liable of doing.&nbsp; Unless something has changed in the legal system, Judges can&#039;t do that. What the judge really did is twisted logic and words (much like THX does with the word &#039;in&#039;) to include **** so that people like you can run around shouting &quot;He&#039;s a ******, he&#039;s a ******.&quot;&nbsp; For anybody looking for accurate context, I think the Newsweek article does a good job deciphering the BS without being overly long.So let&#039;s put this all in proper context.&nbsp; Trump was tried by a jury of his &quot;peers&quot; and found not liable for ****.&nbsp; Trump was not found guilty (or not guilty) of or convicted (or not convicted) of anything since that can only happen in a criminal case.&nbsp; A politically motivated judge then took upon himself to play &quot;I get to define words&quot; and labeled Trump a ****** and Trump was actually never found guilty of, convicted of or found liable for ****.&nbsp; Because this wasn&#039;t a trial by judge, but a trial by jury, Trump was never found liable ****.&nbsp; Furthermore, the only reason this trial even took place is NY amended a law just so loonie bird E Jean Carroll could bring this case.&nbsp; And by loonie bird, I mean this woman is ******** insane and has no credibility what-so-ever.&nbsp; Furthermore, most people with half a brain have concluded a billionaire that spends his time covering up affairs with pornstars and trades his model wife for a newer model wife whenever it suits him, probably isn&#039;t raping or sexually abusing women department store dressing rooms.&nbsp; Additionally, I find it interesting that NY felt compelled to pass a law to recognize the ****/SA survivors, but made it a civil law, not criminal and only had a 1 year window; I smell a fish.&nbsp; What if the ****** was a broke as phuck?&nbsp; What if the victim was broke and couldn&#039;t afford legal representation?&nbsp; The law really only works in a case with the metrics of the E Jean Carroll case.&nbsp; If the alleged victim and perp aren&#039;t relatively affluent, the case just doesn&#039;t work. Looks more like the weaponization of the judicial branch than looking out for the survivors of SA.&nbsp;&nbsp; Because Trump is getting the short end of the weaponization of the legal system right now, the lefties are doing back flips without recognizing the danger of weaponizing the judiciary, restricting free speech, mandating vaccines, etc.&nbsp; And the left claims it&#039;s the right that doesn&#039;t respect the US Constitution.&nbsp; Lastly, this is one of those things that falls into there are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Trump (or Biden or whomever) that there really isn&#039;t a need to invent one out of gossamer.&nbsp; [URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-was-donald-trump-found-guilty-****-1799935[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/05/09/trump-liable-******-abuse/[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/01/29/donald-trump-****-e-jean-carroll/72295009007/[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://apnews.com/article/trump-****-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db[/URL][URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65531098[/URL]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jimi77, post: 8886306, member: 673702"] The reality of the decision is the judge declared Trump liable for something the jury found him not liable of doing. Unless something has changed in the legal system, Judges can't do that. What the judge really did is twisted logic and words (much like THX does with the word 'in') to include **** so that people like you can run around shouting "He's a ******, he's a ******." For anybody looking for accurate context, I think the Newsweek article does a good job deciphering the BS without being overly long. So let's put this all in proper context. Trump was tried by a jury of his "peers" and found [B][U]not liable[/U][/B] for ****. Trump was not found guilty (or not guilty) of or convicted (or not convicted) of anything since that can only happen in a criminal case. A politically motivated judge then took upon himself to play "I get to define words" and labeled Trump a ****** and Trump was actually never found guilty of, convicted of or found liable for ****. Because this wasn't a trial by judge, but a trial by jury, Trump was never found liable ****. Furthermore, the only reason this trial even took place is NY amended a law just so loonie bird E Jean Carroll could bring this case. And by loonie bird, I mean this woman is ******** insane and has no credibility what-so-ever. Furthermore, most people with half a brain have concluded a billionaire that spends his time covering up affairs with pornstars and trades his model wife for a newer model wife whenever it suits him, probably isn't raping or sexually abusing women department store dressing rooms. Additionally, I find it interesting that NY felt compelled to pass a law to recognize the ****/SA survivors, but made it a civil law, not criminal and only had a 1 year window; I smell a fish. What if the ****** was a broke as phuck? What if the victim was broke and couldn't afford legal representation? The law really only works in a case with the metrics of the E Jean Carroll case. If the alleged victim and perp aren't relatively affluent, the case just doesn't work. Looks more like the weaponization of the judicial branch than looking out for the survivors of SA. Because Trump is getting the short end of the weaponization of the legal system right now, the lefties are doing back flips without recognizing the danger of weaponizing the judiciary, restricting free speech, mandating vaccines, etc. And the left claims it's the right that doesn't respect the US Constitution. Lastly, this is one of those things that falls into there are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Trump (or Biden or whomever) that there really isn't a need to invent one out of gossamer. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-was-donald-trump-found-guilty-****-1799935[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/05/09/trump-liable-******-abuse/[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/01/29/donald-trump-****-e-jean-carroll/72295009007/[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://apnews.com/article/trump-****-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db[/URL] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65531098[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification