Reverie

E Jean Carroll woman of the year!

Previous Thread Next Thread
Dutch Oven

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
7,007
2,473
113
mandrill said:
They've both figured out that the best way to make a LOT of money is to give a point of view - that neither of them genuinely believes - that appeals to a far right audience. It's a pablum of lies for childish, easily fooled people feeding their simple-minded confirmation bias.
Click to expand...
Easy to say but a lot harder to back up. Everyone on either side of a political issue is "opinionated", and yes, having interesting opinions gets you an audience and makes money. Kelly is hardly the darling of the "far right" (even Trump is no fan of hers) and neither is Greenwald (he's a regular guest on Jimmy Dore, whose audience is primarily left leaning). Not unless you define "far right" as anyone right of Anderson Cooper!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mitchell76
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
96,034
24,613
113
Skoob said:
Maybe you can put some effort into finding sources that instruct you on how to win arguments. You're failing miserably. Invest in yourself.
Click to expand...
You keep on defending rape culture, skoob.
Defend rapists.
Tell us all how the world needs more born rich, rapists to lead the world to......

Don't forget to study the wise words of one of rump's disbarred lawyers.
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1751079058933514602
 
Y

y2kmark

Class of 69...
May 19, 2002
18,995
5,409
113
Lewiston, NY
Dutch Oven said:
Easy to say but a lot harder to back up. Everyone on either side of a political issue is "opinionated", and yes, having interesting opinions gets you an audience and makes money. Kelly is hardly the darling of the "far right" (even Trump is no fan of hers) and neither is Greenwald (he's a regular guest on Jimmy Dore, whose audience is primarily left leaning). Not unless you define "far right" as anyone right of Anderson Cooper!
Click to expand...
OK, let's do a compilation of far righties. I'll leave some of the easier ones for others:
Kenneth Copeland - Hahahaha...
 
S

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
7,623
4,690
113
Frankfooter said:
You keep on defending rape culture, skoob.
Defend rapists.
Tell us all how the world needs more born rich, rapists to lead the world to......

Don't forget to study the wise words of one of rump's disbarred lawyers.
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1751079058933514602
Click to expand...
He's no rapist...he's the person that's going to replace the genocidal president currently sitting in the Whitehouse.
Unless of course you prefer that?
If not, you should be supporting him to save countless lives.

So? Who do you support?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer and mitchell76
F

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
96,034
24,613
113
Skoob said:
He's no rapist...he's the person that's going to replace the genocidal president currently sitting in the Whitehouse.
Unless of course you prefer that?
If not, you should be supporting him to save countless lives.

So? Who do you support?
Click to expand...
Your defence of rape culture is based on denial of court decisions and verdicts, a personal admission of guilt and multiple accusations.
You're still defending rape culture.

Why?
 
T

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,877
6,017
113
mitchell76 said:
This whole Carroll case was a joke. Thank goodness, Trump has the resources to appeal this fiasco of a case!!
Click to expand...
Notwithstanding your position as resident legal scholar it is clear that you have no idea about the facts or the law. Trying to recharacterize the facts does not change anything other than to appease you and other maga people. You all would be better off working on your Taylor Swift conspiracies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer
mandrill

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,828
102,791
113
mitchell76 said:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1752429824474304559
Click to expand...
That would be denied and likely cost Habba her law licence.

Members of the Bar have personal contact all the time. They meet at Bench and Bar social events. They attend educationals together. They sometimes work at the same law firms or act as co counsel at the same trial. It takes a significant personal association to raise any presumption of impropriety.

Being in the same 1,000 partner NYC law firm 30 years ago isn't close to cutting it. The motion will be perceived as malpractice and unethical and an unwarranted personal attack on the judge.

Habba is probably on professional thin ice already. She was massively sanctioned for $900k in another Trump debacle. She clowned her way through both the Engoron and Kaplan trials, making numerous mistakes and running her mouth like a 2-bit punk during recess.

The next fuck-up she creates will likely be her last.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squeezer and mitchell76
K

K Douglas

Half Man Half Amazing
Jan 5, 2005
28,254
9,305
113
Room 112
toguy5252 said:
I say this respectfully and the appellate court may agree with you but you do not understand legal procedure. The defence wanted to relitigate the issue about eherth he has assaulted her. That issue had already been decided and this was just an assessment of damages. His remedy if he didn’t like the previous decision was to appeal which I believe he has. But it is not open to any litigant to relitigate the issue of liability in an assessment trial. Her statements are just legally wrong and she is playing to him and his base. If she is right the appellate court will set it aside. Time will tell. I do think they will reduce the award.
Click to expand...
This was actually damages in relation to Trump defending himself in 2019 from the allegations she went public with. Defending your name is now punishable by tens of millions of dollars in damages. What a farce.
The civil trial back in the spring concluded that Trump was liable for sexual abuse and not the rape that she claimed. That judgement is currently under appeal. And will likely be overturned.
This woman is an utter disgrace. You see her on the talk shows gloating. Sure sounds like a victim of rape to me :rolleyes:
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar, squeezer and mitchell76
mandrill

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,828
102,791
113
K Douglas said:
This was actually damages in relation to Trump defending himself in 2019 from the allegations she went public with. Defending your name is now punishable by tens of millions of dollars in damages. What a farce.
The civil trial back in the spring concluded that Trump was liable for sexual abuse and not the rape that she claimed. That judgement is currently under appeal. And will likely be overturned.
This woman is an utter disgrace. You see her on the talk shows gloating. Sure sounds like a victim of rape to me :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Guess the jury didn't agree with you, huh?... Either time.

That's the crazy thing about our justice system. We go with what the jury says, not with what randos say. Strange, huh?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar and squeezer
K

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,672
8,344
113
Again, djt had an attorney. They were allowed to dismiss biased jurors. He was able to put on a defence. He lost. Thus his inability to put on a defense thats being passed around is just not true. He did. He lost. He wants to put on a defense during the penalty phase. Not allowed, except relevant to the damages, not the factual finding. But he won't do that under oath because he'd rather flood the zone with shit not under oath.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar, squeezer and mandrill
T

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,877
6,017
113
K Douglas said:
This was actually damages in relation to Trump defending himself in 2019 from the allegations she went public with. Defending your name is now punishable by tens of millions of dollars in damages. What a farce.
The civil trial back in the spring concluded that Trump was liable for sexual abuse and not the rape that she claimed. That judgement is currently under appeal. And will likely be overturned.
This woman is an utter disgrace. You see her on the talk shows gloating. Sure sounds like a victim of rape to me :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
There is no problem defending one’s name as long as you do it without defaming someone else. You are just repeating the narrative the former sexual abuser in chief would like you to believe which of course has nothing to do with the facts or the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar, squeezer and mandrill
mandrill

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
79,828
102,791
113
  • Haha
Reactions: squeezer and mitchell76
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ashley Madison
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom