Donald Trump - MAGAtwat news and discussion

[not-bono-ever]

First time I have ever looked at his site. It’s very poor

 

[two sheds]

He's virtually admitted it ... but no doubt:

I WASN'T ALLOWED TO DEFEND THE CASE THEY WOULDN'T LET ME TESTIFY THIS IS A WITCH HUNT

A CONTINUATION OF THE GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF ALL TIME!

 

[Yossarian]

Not happy

 

[steveo87]

Not happy View attachment 374034

Cry more.

 

[marty21]

Wonder if she'll ever see any of it.

Sadly , this won't stop him running for President. We live in different times , pre-Trump this verdict would have destroyed a political career , but his supporters will ignore this . Boris benefitted (for a while) from Trump just ploughing on through endless scandals, until his own MPs realised (belatedly) that he was taking the piss out of them.

 

[agricola]

TBF that is on the face of it a very strange decision. Surely you either believe the evidence presented in court proves what the complainant said (and find against him for everything) or you don't (and find against her for everything).

 

[hash tag]

There was a charge against him, when if found guilty, he could pardon himself. Not sure if it was this charge or one of the many others. Pleased he has been found guilty for assault. Shame the guilty verdict wasn't for rape.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

TBF that is on the face of it a very strange decision. Surely you either believe the evidence presented in court proves what the complainant said (and find against him for everything) or you don't (and find against her for everything).

I wonder if they had some doubt about her testimony, but recognized that he has such an abysmal track record regarding women that they figured he did something appalling.

 

[Yossarian]

TBF that is on the face of it a very strange decision. Surely you either believe the evidence presented in court proves what the complainant said (and find against him for everything) or you don't (and find against her for everything).

The evidence included a lot of people, including Donald Trump, saying Donald Trump has a history of sexually assaulting women, he'd probably have been found liable for rape as well if they'd had any witnesses who said Trump raped them.

 

[agricola]

I wonder if they had some doubt about her testimony, but recognized that he has such an abysmal track record regarding women that they figured he did something appalling.

That is what I'd imagine, but if that is the case I think any appeal would be likely to succeed.

 

[agricola]

The evidence included a lot of people, including Donald Trump, saying Donald Trump has a history of sexually assaulting women, he'd probably have been found liable for rape as well if they'd had any witnesses who said Trump raped them.

Indeed, and if that was what Carroll alleged (and her friends backed up) then it would make sense. That wasn't what she said happened though, she said he'd raped her and the evidence was meant to support that.

 

[petee]

some trumpist reactions from various comboxes:

• it was in new york, they're all liberals who hate trump
• why is it only republicans who get prosecuted for this?
• i've seen no evidence of rape (an odious piece of rhetoric in a number of ways)
• funny that this is only happening now when it's politically expedient
• as a woman, i find her story doesn't add up

 

[emanymton]

TBF that is on the face of it a very strange decision. Surely you either believe the evidence presented in court proves what the complainant said (and find against him for everything) or you don't (and find against her for everything).

Isn't it going to be about the legal definition of rape vs sexual assault?

 

[Raheem]

Isn't it going to be about the legal definition of rape vs sexual assault?

It could be that they felt sexual assault would be safer in an appeal.

 

[Ax^]

can a civil court find someone guilty of rape or would it be sexual abuse in the american court system


and tbf with trump history he be fighting it till the day he dies and not giving a penny

just how he operates


and will be spinning this all as the lefties trying to hinder his reelection so give me more money to fight it ...

 

[Yossarian]

Indeed, and if that was what Carroll alleged (and her friends backed up) then it would make sense. That wasn't what she said happened though, she said he'd raped her and the evidence was meant to support that.

Would be interesting to hear the instructions the judge gave the jury, which apparently lasted an hour - the relatively narrow definition of rape may have led at least one juror to answer no to the first question, but I don't know if Trump would do any better on appeal

 

[agricola]

Isn't it going to be about the legal definition of rape vs sexual assault?

so it seems - the federal definition of rape is quite clear, but the NY one seems to be of the older kind and its not clear what standard the judge gave the jury

 

[teqniq]

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Pleased he has been found guilty for assault. Shame the guilty verdict wasn't for rape.

can a civil court find someone guilty of rape or would it be sexual abuse in the american court system

I'm no lawyer, and understand the american legal system less than the english one, but think they said on the news this was a civil claim for damages, not a criminal trial, so even though the court has found against him, trump has technically not been 'found guilty' of anything and won't get a criminal sentence.

 

[two sheds]

You'd think repeated contempt of court at the very least

 

[Ax^]

does he not already have a court case of appeal trying to get around his last contempt of court costs

 

[gosub]

Especially given his tiny hands

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

He is facing criminal charges relating to his paying off a porn actress.

 

[Yossarian]

I'm no lawyer, and understand the american legal system less than the english one, but think they said on the news this was a civil claim for damages, not a criminal trial, so even though the court has found against him, trump has technically not been 'found guilty' of anything and won't get a criminal sentence.

Yep, the civil lawsuit was brought under a New York state law that temporarily suspended the statute of limitations for sexual abuse victim - Prince Andrew was sued under the same law

 

[Ax^]

aye that still ongoing the judge in that case had to abolish him and his family

 

[two sheds]

aye that still ongoing the judge in that case had to abolish him and his family

if only

 

[Ax^]

well shit

 

[Ax^]

hmm think he has more than one case on the go with him against Daniels

 

[Humberto]

Fucker should be castrated.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

I'm no lawyer, and understand the american legal system less than the english one, but think they said on the news this was a civil claim for damages, not a criminal trial, so even though the court has found against him, trump has technically not been 'found guilty' of anything and won't get a criminal sentence.

Yep. He was in no danger of going to prison here. The standard of proof is different too. In a criminal trial, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." In a civil trial, its "the preponderance of evidence."