My thoughts on Trump
- Thread starter Zoot Allures
- Start date
This post was taxing for anyone reading it. I want to give you some credit for mixing in criminal court and guilt, but not a lot.
This is why words matter especially legal matters.
He was not found guilty. The jury ruled in favour of the plaintiff in a sham of a case about something that allegedly happened years before he was president.
Acquitted in every impeachment witch hunt brought forward by the Dems.
It's funny when everything that you throw at him was nothing to do with him being in office.
What you should be more concerned about is what the current administration has done to fool the American people about their leader's mental state and how they asked him to (ahem...) "step aside".
That is far more sinister than bookkeeping errors.
Smart move by Harris?
By fooling the American people into thinking she's qualified? (she did assist in keeping Biden's mental state hidden for a few years so looks like a play she is familiar with: i.e. don't let the public see what's really going on)
Electing the person to run for office didn't happen. It was a coup.
Just because it was done behind closed doors doesn't mean it wasn't a coup.
What does any of that have to do with that I'm saying?
Sexual Assault is not a defined crime in New York.
It is a category. Everything in Article 130 is a sex offense.
You complained that he wasn't found liable of sexual assault and it was inappropriate to say he was.
I am just pointing out he was - it is totally appropriate to say it.
Unless - again - you are the kind of person who wants to say that no one can commit rape in Canada because there is no criminal charge called rape here.
If someone is found guilty of manslaughter, do you complain when someone says they were found guilty of homicide?
Making things up about why New York defines things the way they do to suit some narrative you want isn't something you normally do.
Again, that you (and indeed the people on TERB) are generally unsympathetic to Carrol has nothing to do with what I said.
That Harris, as a former lawyer, uses the exact term also has nothing to do with it.
You complained that it was wrong to say he was found liable of sexual assault because that isn't the exact term.
Sexual abuse is sexual assault in New York.
I don't understand why you feel compelled to play word games about this.
You are FULL OF SHIT!!!
Here, enjoy Dana Bash BASH ass kissing Twat Tim Scott, a typical lying POS Repug.
Which has nothing to do with the issue because he wasn't tried criminally due to the statute of limitations.
Unless you are trying to make the argument that if a crime was committed but not prosecuted within the statute of limitations it means it never happened.
Which would be insane.
You do realize that "don't define rape as penis in vagina" only had nothing to do with Carroll?
That's a move that's been happening across the US (and in the general consciousness) for decades.
That law in New York had been passed and then stalled in the Senate for over a decade.
The FBI changed it's definition over a decade ago.
Whole states are like Canada and don't have the word on the books at all. (You can't get convicted of rape in Michigan and a few other states if I recall.)
The Statute of limitations issue on those civil cases has already expired. (Both the child and adult bills each had a one-year lookback window only).
He was found liable by a properly selected jury in a case that you didn't watch, but you're still more of an expert on - apparently - than any jury member. At least according to you. Mr Expert.
From my understanding, the case is still under appeal.
Everyone should calm down and allow themselves some room to retreat from rigid stances.
Earpy. The presumption of innocence has been displaced by the jury finding.
And he appeals everything. And this is his weakest appeal.
The way to impress people that you're innocent is to show the fuck up to the trial, look the jury in the eye, tell your truth and respectfully thank the panel when they acquit you. None of that happened with this bullshit defendant.
I find myself in a quibbling match with the master quibbler.
I stand by my initial words below which in my opinion are factual. If you and others want to add on information or whatever, that's fine. I personally have a hard time superimposing what the jury was thinking in this situation beyond the decision.
After the incident occurred somewhere around twenty-seven years prior, "Nine jurors found him liable of sexual abuse. The jury only needed to find a preponderance of liability. As is commonly required in U.S. and Canada criminal law, the jury did not find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on any matter." As is customary in civil suits, the plaintiff was awarded money.
If you read up on the topic from economists, you will find that trade balances and ensuing treasury debt do not follow the relationship of banker and borrower. Essentially chronic trade surplus countries like China and Germany, structurally suppress domestic demand. In the case of China, SOEs (State Owned Enterprises) still control an enormous part of the economy and it doesn't find it's way to consumers. Instead, State money is funneled over and over again into redundant infrastructure, overinvestment in real estate and surplus production capacity.
The excess production has to or at least try to find a home abroad. North America and Europe have essentially now put a limit on Chinese overproduction finding its way to their markets.
Jumping back to banker/borrower and why it doesn't apply. Basically, if you are a chronic trade surplus country you have to park your excess funds into other countries. I assure you Japan and Germany don't want the Chinese buying up their debt and wouldn't allow it. The reason is in this game of tag Japan and Germany would have to spend the new Chinese money thus driving up their imports. Japan and Germany have a historical aversion to imports.
The U.S. is the only economy large enough and willing to date to absorb Chinese exports by also allowing China access to our treasury markets. It all seems abstract until you follow where the money has to go to balance out.
Quoting Yale University economist Thomas Palley:
There is a third unrecognized theory that can be labeled the “buyer of last resort” theory of reserve currencies. Put bluntly, the tribute other countries pay the US through their trade surpluses is the result of their failure to generate adequate consumption spending in their own markets, be it due to poor income distribution or bad domestic economic policies. This forces other countries to rely on the American consumer.
The only civil war is the drama that plays out on 24/7 cable news.
Last edited:
Is that what you have to tell yourself so its ok to support a rapist?
Please remember that trump took Carroll to court when she called him a rapist and the judge ruled that it is legally correct to call trump a rapist.
Of course they are they will be until he's dead which at his age and lifestyle probably is a matter of a few years. If he keeps appealingl he doesn't have to pay the hundreds of millions of dollars he owes for his crimes. The bonus is his feeble minded followers somehow think this exonerate him. Certainly you are more intelligent than someone who doesn't see this Wyatt? Don't let your emotions get in the way of your judgement
Says the guy who posts a youtube video from CNN. No bias there Lol!
In civil court...where there has to be 51% in favour...with a Democrat judge and a prosecutor whom he worked with and mentored about a plaintiff who was willfully alone with him fooling around in a dept store change room and trying to sell books years later.
Yeah, open & shut case! Lol!
If it was anyone other than Trump, this would have been laughed out of court...you know that's true.
No, they are a legit news organization that calls it like it is and will retract a story when they are in the wrong. . You should try getting out of your bubble and not listen to Trump who attacks CNN and other REAL news networks because he doesn't like being called out.
