Trump - 4 more years of this at least...

[TheDemonLord]

The judge in the case brought against Trump by DA Bragg in New York has issued a gag order against Trump.

The order is in three parts:
Trump will be permitted to access some evidence. He is not to publicly discuss or disseminate any evidence in public.
Other categories of evidence Trump is permitted to see only under supervision of his legal team, he is not permitted to retain it in his possession.
Trump is not permitted any access to any evidence obtained from cellphones.

Such orders are normally only issued against crime bosses, great company he's keeping. In this case it's designed primarily to prevent further stochastic terrorism, interfering with witnesses, and polluting of the jury pool.

I mean, that's one view.

There's another view that goes something like:

"Should the general public see the evidence for themselves, they'd see how corrupt the NY Legal system is"

[Pursang]

I've seen fairer show trials in the Soviet Union.
You want me to believe that this lady was sexually assaulted in 1996 by Trump has waited this long, not for Justice, but for a payout... And before a presidential cycle.
On the face of it, the claim is dubious at best - when all the other circumstances are added to it, it smells.

Soviet Union?? WTF?? A jury of his Peers, selected with the assistance of his defense team, exposed to all the Evidence, provided by the prosecution AND the defense, UNANIMOUSLY agreed that Donald Trump is a Sexual Abuser.

If anything Smells, it's because your nose is so far up his arse!

[sugilite:Me]

Lots of celebrating...

So when the inevitable revenge comes (and it will be revenge).

The celebrating has not begun to start in earnest yet. This is but an hors d'oeuvre, and this is set for at least a 6 course meal! Though I understand your keenness to get the party started
Bring on the gop revengefest, the more pollies held accountable the better.

I've seen fairer show trials in the Soviet Union.

You want me to believe that this lady was sexually assaulted in 1996 by Trump has waited this long, not for Justice, but for a payout... And before a presidential cycle.

On the face of it, the claim is dubious at best - when all the other circumstances are added to it, it smells.

I'm asuming those other circumstances you mention are the facts of the voice recording of him boasting about forcing himself on woman, then the video of him saying she aint his type, then mistaking her in a photo for his wife, then he and his team not even mounting a defense?
You are right about Russia though, a much fairer trial result would of been a firing squad.

I mean, that's one view.

There's another view that goes something like:

"Should the general public see the evidence for themselves, they'd see how corrupt the NY Legal system is"

I love how you quasi frame trumps truth social posts as being "evidence"

Trump has already corrupted faith in free and fair elections, it is no surprise the courts slap the duct tape over his big yap.

But really mate - Big Props to you! I now know first hand how just plain exhausting it is being a trump apologist! For the last month I've been across at fox news comments section being a trump apologist (doing my bit for democracy by doing my best to get votes for him in the primary) and yeah, it is bloody exhausting, so many code 9's to clean up!!!
But I'm becoming a bit of a pro now at defending him by spouting absolute twaddle just like you do here. The magas lap it up!

Yep, you can rest assured that over at Fox - @RealDemonLord is doing great work to protect America from another Trump presidency

[R650R]

Soviet Union?? WTF?? A jury of his Peers, selected with the assistance of his defense team, exposed to all the Evidence, provided by the prosecution AND the defense, UNANIMOUSLY agreed that Donald Trump is a Sexual Abuser.

If anything Smells, it's because your nose is so far up his arse!

Well if you read the judge and lawyers comments it seems they operate different over there

“US judge Lewis A Kaplan told jurors they first needed to decide whether they thought there was more than a 50% chance that Trump raped Carroll. If they answered yes, they would then decide whether damages should be awarded.

If they answered no on the rape question, they could then decide if Trump subjected her to lesser forms of assault involving sexual contact without her consent or forcible touching to degrade her or gratify his sexual desire.

If they answered yes on either of those questions, they would decide if damages were appropriate. The jury ultimately found Trump liable on the lesser charge of sexual abuse.

On defamation claims stemming from a Trump’s dismissal of Carroll’s claims in October 2022, Kaplan said jurors needed to be guided by a higher legal standard – clear and convincing evidence.

He said they would have to agree it was “highly probable” that Trump’s statement was false and was made maliciously with deliberate intent to injure or out of hatred or ill will with reckless disregard for Carroll’s rights.

Carroll, 79, testified that she had a chance encounter with Trump at the Bergdorf Goodman store across the street from Trump Tower. She said it was a lighthearted interaction in which they teased each other about trying on a piece of lingerie before Trump became violent inside a dressing room.

Tacopina told jurors there was no reason to call Trump as a witness when Carroll couldn’t even recall when her encounter with Trump happened.

[pete376403]

And now federal prosecutors have charged George Santos - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/09/n...541db8cf28bb3d

[Grumph]

Yep, you can rest assured that over at Fox - @RealDemonLord is doing great work to protect America from another Trump presidency

You're doing god's work my son, keep it up.

[TheDemonLord]

Soviet Union?? WTF?? A jury of his Peers, selected with the assistance of his defense team, exposed to all the Evidence, provided by the prosecution AND the defense, UNANIMOUSLY agreed that Donald Trump is a Sexual Abuser.

If anything Smells, it's because your nose is so far up his arse!

Yeah... I mean - I watched the Derek Chauvin trial - and he was found guilty, when it was clear from the evidence that he didn't kill George Floyd (especially the alternate camera angles where you can see his knee isn't on his neck) - but we all know how that trial went.

[TheDemonLord]

The celebrating has not begun to start in earnest yet. This is but an hors d'oeuvre, and this is set for at least a 6 course meal! Though I understand your keenness to get the party started
Bring on the gop revengefest, the more pollies held accountable the better.

I don't think it will go the way you want it to.

I'm asuming those other circumstances you mention are the facts of the voice recording of him boasting about forcing himself on woman, then the video of him saying she aint his type, then mistaking her in a photo for his wife, then he and his team not even mounting a defense?
You are right about Russia though, a much fairer trial result would of been a firing squad.

Groupies exist. I don't know how else to explain this. What is acceptable behavior towards a woman often changes when you have enough ones and zeroes in your bank balance.

Is it 'good' behavior? No. But there's a difference between forcing yourself onto someone and someone 'letting you grab 'em by the pussy'. Key word being 'let' - which implies a degree of consent.

I love how you quasi frame trumps truth social posts as being "evidence"

I've said nothing of the sort. I'm saying that if the public saw the Evidence from the prosecution, they might realise how transparent the motivations of the case is. Hence why the judge had a Gag order placed on it.

Trump has already corrupted faith in free and fair elections, it is no surprise the courts slap the duct tape over his big yap.

What's the old phrase? If you tear out a mans tongue, then something about being afraid of what they say.

But really mate - Big Props to you! I now know first hand how just plain exhausting it is being a trump apologist! For the last month I've been across at fox news comments section being a trump apologist (doing my bit for democracy by doing my best to get votes for him in the primary) and yeah, it is bloody exhausting, so many code 9's to clean up!!!
But I'm becoming a bit of a pro now at defending him by spouting absolute twaddle just like you do here. The magas lap it up!

Yep, you can rest assured that over at Fox - @RealDemonLord is doing great work to protect America from another Trump presidency

It would be a right shame if it backfired and you help to get him elected in 2024...

That would be levels of Karmic hilarity that even I don't think I could comprehend.

[pritch]

Well if you read the judge and lawyers comments it seems they operate different over there

As has been pointed out here more than once this case was a civil case not a criminal case. The standard of proof was not 'beyond doubt' but was "on the balance of probability."

It was basically a defamation case, not a criminal rape case. Trump could not be jailed. Damages could be awarded against him, so it was only his money and reputation at risk.
On second thoughts it was only his money.

[husaberg]

And now federal prosecutors have charged George Santos - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/09/n...541db8cf28bb3d

i checked up what was recent about him the other day it turns out the republican's consider him to be a suitable representative of their party and its ideals/..

[pritch]

i checked up what was recent about him the other day it turns out the republican's consider him to be a suitable representative of their party and its ideals/..

It's not so much that as with their razor thin majority they don't want ot lose him.

[Laava]

i checked up what was recent about him the other day it turns out the republican's consider him to be a suitable representative of their party and its ideals/..

Hahaha, he sounds ideal for their party! Maybe TDL should go join up? He has the right mindset and boy does he love Trump! How hard can it be?
Pretend to be a Christian
Make noise about stopping Abortions
claim “witch-hunt “ every time someone pulls you up on your red neck bullshit or past stunts
Be ok with hypocrisy when you are rigging the election yet blaming it on the opposition
Be comfortable with acting out all your locker room talk
Get used to lying about everything to the point you no longer recognise the truth

[TheDemonLord]

Just a question for those who oppose Trump:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...on-lawsuit-dna

When you have both legal teams agreeing (eventually) on the terms of doing a DNA test - and the Judge refusing the evidence, does that sound like normal jurisprudence?

I mean if Trump is lying (as you are all oft to claim) then DNA would prove at the very least he was there, with the Jean and he came.
If Trump isn't lying then the DNA would prove it's not him.

It is an awfully curious set of reasons the Judge has given for not allowing it - and I quote:

He said a positive match of Trump’s DNA to that on the dress would prove only that there had been an encounter between Trump and Carroll on a day when she wore the dress, but would not prove or disprove that a rape occurred and might prove entirely inconclusive.

Considering one of the parties denies there was an encounter, it would seem rather pertinent. If the DNA is inconclusive, that would also seem rather pertinent.

And then you wonder why people like me call this a witch-hunt.

[neels]

Just a question for those who oppose Trump:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...on-lawsuit-dna

When you have both legal teams agreeing (eventually) on the terms of doing a DNA test - and the Judge refusing the evidence, does that sound like normal jurisprudence?

I mean if Trump is lying (as you are all oft to claim) then DNA would prove at the very least he was there, with the Jean and he came.
If Trump isn't lying then the DNA would prove it's not him.

It is an awfully curious set of reasons the Judge has given for not allowing it - and I quote:



Considering one of the parties denies there was an encounter, it would seem rather pertinent. If the DNA is inconclusive, that would also seem rather pertinent.

And then you wonder why people like me call this a witch-hunt.

Interesting take on the article, even allowing for confirmation bias.

Of course what is obvious is that despite being asked 3 years earlier, they waited until after the deadline for evidence to agree, thus hoping to further delay the trial and inevitably create grounds to challenge any findings or decision that results from it. It's a pretty obvious ploy that when you know you can't win, you go looking for other ways to prevent it getting to trial.

It's the judge's job to keep everyone involved working within the legal process, hence the ability to appeal to a higher court if one of the parties considers this is not the case, if judges allowed every last minute request to bugger about preparing more evidence nothing would ever get to court.

The judge, Lewis A Kaplan, rejected the 11th-hour offer by Trump’s legal team to provide a DNA sample to rebut claims Carroll first made publicly in a 2019 book.

Kaplan said lawyers for Trump and Carroll had more than three years to make DNA an issue in the case and both chose not to do so.

He said it would almost surely delay the trial scheduled to start on 25 April to reopen the DNA issue four months after the deadline passed to litigate concerns over trial evidence and weeks before trial.

Trump’s lawyers did not immediately comment. Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, declined to comment.

Carroll’s lawyers have sought Trump’s DNA for three years to compare it with stains found on the dress Carroll wore the day she says Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in late 1995 or early 1996. Analysis of DNA on the dress concluded it did contain traces of an unknown man’s DNA.

[TheDemonLord]

Interesting take on the article, even allowing for confirmation bias.

Of course what is obvious is that despite being asked 3 years earlier, they waited until after the deadline for evidence to agree, thus hoping to further delay the trial and inevitably create grounds to challenge any findings or decision that results from it. It's a pretty obvious ploy that when you know you can't win, you go looking for other ways to prevent it getting to trial.

It's the judge's job to keep everyone involved working within the legal process, hence the ability to appeal to a higher court if one of the parties considers this is not the case, if judges allowed every last minute request to bugger about preparing more evidence nothing would ever get to court.

Sure - the Lawyers are lawyering - I get that. Gamesmanship on both sides.

It still doesn't address the fundamental question:

We have evidence that can prove that the encounter took place (not the crime, just the encounter) between the 2 individuals - and the Judge didn't allow it.

If you want me to believe this was a totally fair trial, you have to admit - that's a pretty big hill to overcome.