How can someone establish the expiry if they can't even remember the year it happened?
Elon Musk to head Trump's Gestapo.
- Thread starter Ceiling Cat
- Start date
she got 80 M ??
yikes
right or wrong that's a massive payday for defamation
I do not know about you but I am sure there is a lot of Canadians who feel they have been violated and insulted in public by Trudeau
How much coin does Justin have ?
Last edited:
It was long past it so it was irrelevant.
I mean, if she wanted to lie, she could have claimed a different date to get it in under the statute.
The verdict said rape, they just weren't sure if it was by finger or dick.
Stop with your lying.
She hasn't gotten it yet, but rump had to to put $90 million in bond in order to file the appeal.
When he loses, she gets the cash.
decided by the jury of his peers...
If you don't recognize this I guess we shouldn't recognize the bookkeepping verdict that convicted Trump then?
You realize that you are confirming my argument, don't you?decided by the jury of his peers...
If you don't recognize this I guess we shouldn't recognize the bookkeepping verdict that convicted Trump then?
[URL
Trump is a rapist and your court documents prove it.
Provide the link where it came from and I'll show you.
Incorrect, the verdict did NOT say "rape" (or rather, the only place it did was rejected) because of the way the legal definitions at play worked.
#1. What did you have in mind ?
#2 I hope they are gentle with you.
The verdict in the trial over Carroll calling trump a rapist did say that its legally correct to say that trump is a rapist.
That's the one I've been posting while rich goes back to the first trial.
Lol Johnny LaRue you jokes remind me of what Oscar Madison said during the poker game, " It's either very new cheese or very old meat".
Which is not the jury verdict richaceg has been talking about.
There was no jury verdict of rape.
There was a lawsuit by Trump that because there was no jury verdict of rape, Carroll was defaming Trump by calling him a rapist.
The judge rendered a decision that the jury did, in fact, determine that he had committed rape in the general sense of the word.
So no, the verdict didn't say rape.
It meant rape.
i do not get the connection, however Oscar was pretty funny
Earlier in his career (probably late 1950s early 1960s) Walter Matthau played some really nasty, mean, down right evil characters.
slapping women around, calculating favourable casualty ratios in a first strike nuclear war scenario or taking a bull whip to the good guy in a frontier movie
He was really convincing.
it was quite the contrast to see him as the evil bad guy after knowing him as the unkempt but likeable smart ass Oscar Madison
I posted the judges defamation ruling saying that its legally correct to say trump is a rapist.
rich replied with the jury decision.
If you're going to jump in, be accurate.
Damn, you low IQ liberals are still at with the made up BS. You'd figure with landslide losses your team has taken worldwide the last few years that your rhetoric would get better.
I guess they won't be happy until Canada sees a realignment
I guess they won't be happy until Canada sees a realignment
From Frankfooter's link:do you know how to read?
You'll notice the part about "written with the help of AI" and this is not from an official court website...it's lawyer-for-hire site.
Thank goodness the justice system goes by verdicts and not perceived opinions, subjective definitions and grey areas in general.
No verdict of rape, means he can not be called a rapist.
btw I say that with the belief that the entire case was a sham to begin with of course and would have been thrown out if it wasn't based on lawfare against Trump.
But in the end, no one really cares as evident by the election win. The majority of American voters obviously saw through all of this and it backfired on the Dems.
If the Dems spent more time governing rather than persecuting, they would have another term.
Exactly wrong, at least as determined by the justice system you claim to value so well.
(Also, if you think the justice system doesn't include "perceived opinions, subjective definitions and grey areas in general", I'm not sure how to break the news to you about Santa Claus.)
I am aware of your fantasy narrative, yes.
This I agree with.
Not that "no one really cares", but that it was not something that mattered much to many voters.
Since a majority of American voter didn't vote for Trump, I'm not sure where you're getting this, but let's just assume you misspoke.
No real evidence of that, either.
"I'm voting against the lawfare" doesn't seem to have been much of a motivating factor, as you acknowledged above, and many people voted against the Democrats because they governed too much, in their view.
Remember that Trump has promised to roll back many of the things the Democrats did.
