Trump - Criminal Prosecution

[felter]

He did do nothing wrong to be disbarred in the Carroll case, but he is also Trump's lawyer in the Stormy Daniels case and in that case he lied to the court saying he didn't know Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford (Stormy Daniels) spoke to her or had dealings with her when it turns out he had all of those things as he did a consultation with her in the past for the Trump case when Trump was still president, and lying to the court for a lawyer is a big fat no, no.

The problem with the DNA is Carroll still has the clothes she wore when the assault happened, but Trump refused to be DNA tested, so she refused to hand over those clothes until Trump had a DNA test. I kind of back her with that one too.

As I have said before, the defence could have at the very least introduced a character witness on Trumps behalf, say someone who knew him personally at or around the time of the alleged attack preferably a woman, one that would be willing to take the stand and at the very least say, "yeah I know Donald back then, and he wouldn't do such a thing he was a nice guy treated everyone especially women with the utmost respect," but they didn't. Or they could have introduced some members of Trump's personal staff to vouch for him, especially as Carroll's team made it look like his staff knew what he was like, and that for him taking women into a room and closing the door was a bad sign, but they didn't. Trump himself while he didn't have to take the stand, he could have at the very least turned up for the trial and faced down his accuser, but he didn't instead he went to Scotland and Ireland to play golf.

I mean seriously, they could have introduced some kind of defence, but they didn't, as I said he went and played golf on another country instead.

[matthewfarmery]

Trump was going to submit some DNA, but it had conditions attached, so the judge rejected the offer. As it would have delayed the trial until goodness knows when.

as for the disbarment remark, I was sort of joking, but then again, quite a few of Trump's lawyers have wide up like that. So it might just happen with him, even if its not right at this moment.

[matthewfarmery]

verdict is in

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/live-jury ... 3712965527

[Vertigo 7]

your link is no good but yeah, diaper don found liable for defamation and sexual assault, but not rape. several million awarded to Carroll in damages.

[Observe]

In closing arguments, Ms Carroll's attorney said “In order to find for him you have to find that Donald Trump, the nonstop liar, is the only one in this court telling the truth”.

So they believed her story about sexual assault, but they didn't believe her story about rape? Rather odd, because her story of sexual assault involved rape. Probably this won't have much of an impact on his base, but I think he'll need more than the 'always Trump' lot to regain the Presidency and this judgement may chip away at some of the more moderate 'principled' conservatives.

[Gavrushka]

So will it be legal for so-minded news channels, whenever discussing Trump, to introduce him as 'The former president who sexually assaulted Ms Carroll'? - I can just imagine he'd be in a constant state of apoplexy...

And I was surprised just how many court cases he is still facing...

[matthewfarmery]

Sorry about the link, as that was a live news feed

Anyway, here are the completed questions

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... -jury.html

So the jury didn't find that he raped her, but did find that he sexually assaulted her, I would have thought that was the same thing? But for the rest, I would agree with.

And Trump will appeal this, but I doubt he will be successful. So while he probably can't be called a rapist, but he still a sexual predator.

[Vertigo 7]

Rape does have a pretty strict legal definition where sexual assault is more broad, kind of like the difference between manslaughter and murder.

[matthewfarmery]

Understood, and makes sense in a way. I guess because of the real lack of evidence of rape, then the jury dismissed that. But there was evidence enough to say that he sexually assault her. Still, By hitting back at the judge and the jury etc in his latest social media platform, he not helping his case.

looks like another former WH staffer has spoken out against Trump

https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityar ... 96f3544727

So his misconduct with women was present in the WH as well. Which doesn't surprise me in the least.

[matthewfarmery]

I think CNN is going to get some major flack for its town hall event still. From what I been reading, the hall will be packed with 400 sympathetic' voters (which I call bias)

And that CNN is only doing this for the ratings. (so basically to try and steal Fox viewers) I still think this is going too blow up in CNN face. Any bets that the questions will be easy peasy and won't be talking about the recent events or court cases?

The issue is, even with the most recent court case, by allowing this man on, CNN is still turning another cheek to his wrong doings, and previous history, and his embrace of fascism and he still wants to be a dictator. See that is the problem, easy to say, by allowing him on is democracy, but this is a man who has no regard FOR democracy.

So I really hope this blows up in CNN face. This thing should have been pulled, especially now.

[Chips]

As I have said before, the defence could have at the very least introduced a character witness on Trumps behalf, say someone who knew him personally at or around the time of the alleged attack preferably a woman, one that would be willing to take the stand and at the very least say, "yeah I know Donald back then, and he wouldn't do such a thing he was a nice guy treated everyone especially women with the utmost respect," but they didn't.

From what I read, in very very brief looks at news sites to check, they could only call 2 witness for Trump as that's all they'd put forward; 1 is Trump, the other is a psychiatrist who later was apparently unable to take the stand due to medical issues.

Trump can't complain about the outcome to be fair, as his arrogance over the entire thing is borderline ridiculous. There wasn't, really, a defence. So you can't really expect much else to happen in a civil case as they don't have to *prove* anything.

The worrying thing is if the outcome of this has no impact upon his ability to run, or the public's willingness to support, his attempt for presidency. Now there's a scary thought (bear in mind, they've already elected him once despite publicly claiming he grabbed women by the pussy because he could!).

Is this why the Florida chap has kept out the running/shut, because entering prior to Trump hopefully being thrown aside would result in Trump attacking him - whereas if he waits, bides his time until Trump's out due to legal cases and public opinion turning, that he can have a run without the Trump-machine's endless claptrap via social media and news. Hate him or like him, can't deny somehow people keep on supporting the Orange carbuncle. However, I'm not sure the Florida alternative is remotely *any* better.

[matthewfarmery]

As I have said before, the defence could have at the very least introduced a character witness on Trumps behalf, say someone who knew him personally at or around the time of the alleged attack preferably a woman, one that would be willing to take the stand and at the very least say, "yeah I know Donald back then, and he wouldn't do such a thing he was a nice guy treated everyone especially women with the utmost respect," but they didn't.

From what I read, in very very brief looks at news sites to check, they could only call 2 witness for Trump as that's all they'd put forward; 1 is Trump, the other is a psychiatrist who later was apparently unable to take the stand due to medical issues.

Trump can't complain about the outcome to be fair, as his arrogance over the entire thing is borderline ridiculous. There wasn't, really, a defence. So you can't really expect much else to happen in a civil case as they don't have to *prove* anything.

The worrying thing is if the outcome of this has no impact upon his ability to run, or the public's willingness to support, his attempt for presidency. Now there's a scary thought (bear in mind, they've already elected him once despite publicly claiming he grabbed women by the pussy because he could!).

Is this why the Florida chap has kept out the running/shut, because entering prior to Trump hopefully being thrown aside would result in Trump attacking him - whereas if he waits, bides his time until Trump's out due to legal cases and public opinion turning, that he can have a run without the Trump-machine's endless claptrap via social media and news. Hate him or like him, can't deny somehow people keep on supporting the Orange carbuncle. However, I'm not sure the Florida alternative is remotely *any* better.

And its certainly not helping his case by doing an all triad posts on his social media platform, against the judge and jury etc, I think that will only hurt his chances more, and maybe grounds to sue him for more. Trump just can't keep his mouth shut. the other problem is, even Mike Pence hasn't really condemned Trump over this, he pretty much soft footed, and quite a few of the GOP still will embrace him. Even one who said that he will double vote for Trump if he had the chance.

Its little things like this, that sadly doesn't help, and still shows that America might still embrace fascism in the near future.

[Observe]

I don't see Trump putting much energy into appealing this sexual assault case. He doesn't have anything to add that would change the verdict and he already has a precarious list of other litigation ahead of him.

1. Manhattan criminal case regarding hush-money to the porn star.
2. Classified Documents criminal investigation into handling of classified documents.
3. New York State civil inquiry into Trump's lying to lenders and insurers by overstating his financial strength.
4. Georgia Criminal inquiry over Trumps attempt to interfere with the 2020 results.
5. January 6 investigation into Trump inciting the insurrection.

For his attorneys, Trump is the goose that keeps on laying golden eggs.

[matthewfarmery]

Seems I was right, and also, why CNN should never have gone through with the town hall, it wasn't that, but just one of his rallies. Trump kept on spewing lies, left, right and centre. Even took a swipe at E Carroll, that will certainly give her legal team the chance to sue him again. What is more, the audience laughed, So sexually assault is funny now? I am just mortified that CNN didn't end it.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-attacks- ... er-1799576

I hope they get crushed. I bet there will be a lot of suing. Because Trump was allowed to say whatever he wanted, the same BS that comes from his mouth, every time he speaks. The same BS that has been debunked.

Well, if Trump gets into the WH, American democracy will be finished. America will become a fascist country and that vile SOB will crown himself emperor.

This why, CNN should have pulled the plug on this, I just hope they fall as a result.

Chris Licht has defended last night

“You do not have to like the former president’s answers, but you can’t say that we didn’t get them,” Licht said during an editorial call, according to tweets from media insider/Reliable Sources vet Brian Stelter. “Kaitlan pressed him again and again and made news. Made a LOT of news.” He added: “That is our job.”

I don't think he understands the difference of reporting news and making news. From little I seen, Kaitlan did a poor job of trying to control Trump. in fact she failed. And too allow Trump to say whatever he liked, including insulting E Carroll, CNN crossed a very bad line. The who of the senior staff should be put to pasture over this. I do hope heads will roll. Supporting a fascist like trump should not be on their agenda, because it basically says, they support him and will support him if democracy falls.

I don't think he realises that at all. I hope that other CNN staff stage a protest, or a walkout, as CNN crossed the line.

[felter]

He never learns does he, even after just being found guilty of defamation he verbally attacks her and the judge, he is just going to end up on a criminal charge if eh keeps it up. As for his, I'm going to appeal the decision with the reason being, the judge didn't like me, it will cost him money and his reason for an appeal will just be laughed out of court, it is doomed to fail without any evidence, which he never used during his trial.

[Observe]

Trump has now filed an appeal.

After the trial, Trump's lawyer Joe Tacopina told reporters outside the courtroom on Tuesday that it was "a strange verdict". "They rejected her rape claim and she always claimed this was a rape case, so it's a little perplexing," he said.

This could backfire on him big time. On appeal he could indeed be found guilty of rape, not just sexual assault.

[felter]

Don't know how it would work, for starters an appeal is normally decided by judges and not a Jury, but normally you have to also have a reason for an appeal like some new missed evidence, for Trump it's the Judge did not like me, to be honest he never did anything to get on the Judges good side out of the two of them Trump was the nasty one and the Judge gave Trump as much leeway as he could, he even went beyond what the law said he had to do. So I doubt any kind of appeal will get anywhere, I can't even see it getting to trial.

[matthewfarmery]

Thing is, E Carroll is also suing Trump again, and I think she has every right too. and on top of that, she should also sue CNN. Because they did nothing to intervene at the time. I think she has already done the paper work. I say, "Go and get them, and bleed them dry!!!"

Edit, this is very interesting, from one report I read, the town hall, was rigged in Trump's favour, as the audience wasn't allowed to boo, only applaud. In that case, CNN should be utter ashamed on themselves. I still hope that heads will roll.

Also not everyone was cheering, quite a few were looking uncomfortable, and unhappy. But still, CNN did rig this for trump, and that is just so wrong.

[Gavrushka]

Thing is, E Carroll is also suing Trump again, and I think she has every right too. and on top of that, she should also sue CNN. Because they did nothing to intervene at the time. I think she has already done the paper work. I say, "Go and get them, and bleed them dry!!!"

It's staggering that someone who claims to be such an intellectual leviathan can't open his mouth without slandering somebody, can't lift a pen without being libellous. - Thing is, it seems there's a large enough 'fanbase' who will default label him the victim, whatever happens, even though he's the instigator in every damnable instance.

I just find it incredible that in 'the greatest democracy on the planet' you have two of the most inappropriate people imaginable leading the parties which dominate US politics.

[Warenwolf]

I just find it incredible that in 'the greatest democracy on the planet' you have two of the most inappropriate people imaginable leading the parties which dominate US politics.

Two party systems are always vulnerable to polarization, allowing for disproportionate influence to fringe elements than typically multiparty systems do. Granted - multiparty systems are not immune to this effect either (eg when ALL political parties are weak) but it is weird seeing a nation of 330 millions (=pool of competent people significantly higher than say...Canada) reduced to a political freakshow.