Australian Politics Forum - Trump loses in court ... again!

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 46530 Gender:	Re: Trump loses in court ... again! Reply #15 - Dec 31^st, 2024 at 6:29pm Why not charge him with rape then?
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137833
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #16 - Dec 31^st, 2024 at 6:33pm

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 6:29pm:

Why not charge him with rape then?

As you've been told a hundred times before, the statute of limitations.

"Carroll’s lawyers have sought Trump’s DNA for three years to compare it with stains found on the dress Carroll wore the day she says Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in late 1995 or early 1996. Analysis of DNA on the dress concluded it did contain traces of an unknown man’s DNA."

... ... ... ...

"Traces of DNA are often used in rape and sexual assault cases to identify an attacker, and Ms. Carroll’s lawyers have said in court papers that the dress in question has such evidence.

"Ms. Carroll first requested in early 2020 that Mr. Trump provide a sample of his DNA for comparison. Mr. Trump repeatedly refused."

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 58629
Here
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #17 - Dec 31^st, 2024 at 8:15pm

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:05pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No, dear boy, all those women came out of the woodwork when the big fella lied.

E Jean, Karen McDougal, Stormy Daniels. Stormy, a Republican all her life, was literally forced to tell her side of the story and defend herself. What did she get?

Detailed death threats, going into how many stab wounds they'd give her and which friends' cocks they'd use to plug her with.

So cute. Kind of makes calls to rip off little old ladies' hijabs sound tame, eh? So 2014. You've come a long way over the past decade, dear boy, but do you know?

Back then, you were such a zealot. Muselman this, Muselman that. Now you just do whatever your DL says.

Much easier, no?

Nonsense.

Then there was the audio tape (Access Hollywood tapes) with Trump proudly bragging about sexually assaulting women. How odd Trump brags about sexual assault and women confirm that Trump is telling the truth. Yes totally unbelievable just like 1+1=3

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46530
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #18 - Dec 31^st, 2024 at 9:31pm

Dnarever wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 8:15pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:05pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No, dear boy, all those women came out of the woodwork when the big fella lied.

E Jean, Karen McDougal, Stormy Daniels. Stormy, a Republican all her life, was literally forced to tell her side of the story and defend herself. What did she get?

Detailed death threats, going into how many stab wounds they'd give her and which friends' cocks they'd use to plug her with.

So cute. Kind of makes calls to rip off little old ladies' hijabs sound tame, eh? So 2014. You've come a long way over the past decade, dear boy, but do you know?

Back then, you were such a zealot. Muselman this, Muselman that. Now you just do whatever your DL says.

Much easier, no?

Nonsense.

Then there was the audio tape (Access Hollywood tapes) with Trump proudly bragging about sexually assaulting women. How odd Trump brags about sexual assault and women confirm that Trump is telling the truth. Yes totally unbelievable just like 1+1=3

Not rape.

We have all grabbed pussies in our time - not the pussyphobic gays here but the rest, including even the women.

And had our wedding tackle grabbed by women. Not a court case - unless you run for office and they want to destroy you.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 95909 Gender:	Re: Trump loses in court ... again! Reply #19 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 12:24am Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 6:29pm: Why not charge him with rape then? Ooh! Methinks the old boy protests a little too hard. Honk if you're horny, dear chap. We'll have you properly inseminated. Ever get the feeling you've been bred? Great replacement, innit.
Back to top	IP Logged

scope

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1303
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #20 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 7:29am

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 9:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 8:15pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:05pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No, dear boy, all those women came out of the woodwork when the big fella lied.

E Jean, Karen McDougal, Stormy Daniels. Stormy, a Republican all her life, was literally forced to tell her side of the story and defend herself. What did she get?

Detailed death threats, going into how many stab wounds they'd give her and which friends' cocks they'd use to plug her with.

So cute. Kind of makes calls to rip off little old ladies' hijabs sound tame, eh? So 2014. You've come a long way over the past decade, dear boy, but do you know?

Back then, you were such a zealot. Muselman this, Muselman that. Now you just do whatever your DL says.

Much easier, no?

Nonsense.

Then there was the audio tape (Access Hollywood tapes) with Trump proudly bragging about sexually assaulting women. How odd Trump brags about sexual assault and women confirm that Trump is telling the truth. Yes totally unbelievable just like 1+1=3

Not rape.

We have all grabbed pussies in our time - not the pussyphobic gays here but the rest, including even the women.

And had our wedding tackle grabbed by women. Not a court case - unless you run for office and they want to destroy you.

Here is frank openly admitting to sexual assault, just so he can defend his dear leader.

frank,you are a scumbag.

Back to top

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20401
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #21 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 8:02am

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 9:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 8:15pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:05pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No, dear boy, all those women came out of the woodwork when the big fella lied.

E Jean, Karen McDougal, Stormy Daniels. Stormy, a Republican all her life, was literally forced to tell her side of the story and defend herself. What did she get?

Detailed death threats, going into how many stab wounds they'd give her and which friends' cocks they'd use to plug her with.

So cute. Kind of makes calls to rip off little old ladies' hijabs sound tame, eh? So 2014. You've come a long way over the past decade, dear boy, but do you know?

Back then, you were such a zealot. Muselman this, Muselman that. Now you just do whatever your DL says.

Much easier, no?

Nonsense.

Then there was the audio tape (Access Hollywood tapes) with Trump proudly bragging about sexually assaulting women. How odd Trump brags about sexual assault and women confirm that Trump is telling the truth. Yes totally unbelievable just like 1+1=3

Not rape.

We have all grabbed pussies in our time - not the pussyphobic gays here but the rest, including even the women.

And had our wedding tackle grabbed by women. Not a court case - unless you run for office and they want to destroy you.

That explains why you condone sexual assault and defend rapists....You are too stupid to even understand what sexual assault is ya dickhead....You fat disgusting pig!!!

Roll Eyes

Not ignorance, but ignorance of ignorance, is the death of knowledge.
Alfred North Whitehead (1861 - 1947)

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

philperth2010 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20401 Perth Gender:	Re: Trump loses in court ... again! Reply #22 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 8:08am Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 6:29pm: Why not charge him with rape then? Trump pays them off and threatens the woman he sexualy assaults....Watch out Fwank, you don't have enough money to rape anyone!!!
Back to top	If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992) IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29670
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #23 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 8:53am

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 6:20pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 5:56pm:

scope wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 5:53pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No frank, just truth.
I know you cant handle the truth frank so here's another truth for you.
trump fought for 3 yrs to not have dna evidence admitted in court. Now tell me frank why would somebody who in his words "I never met the women,I dont know her" not want dna admitted in evidence, now theres a question.
will you answer or just do a scoot,that is run away and not answer.
you cant handle the truth frank,you and horseboy are so pathetic Grin

What DNA evidence? From 1996?

Yes, dear.

"Carroll’s lawyers have sought Trump’s DNA for three years to compare it with stains found on the dress Carroll wore the day she says Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in late 1995 or early 1996. Analysis of DNA on the dress concluded it did contain traces of an unknown man’s DNA."

... ... ... ...

"Traces of DNA are often used in rape and sexual assault cases to identify an attacker, and Ms. Carroll’s lawyers have said in court papers that the dress in question has such evidence.

"Ms. Carroll first requested in early 2020 that Mr. Trump provide a sample of his DNA for comparison. Mr. Trump repeatedly refused."

So this woman has kept a cum stained dress since 1995/96?

Ridiculous.

BTW why are you still here?

And continually ranting against Trump?

He won twice - you lost twice.

Still reneging.

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

Gnads

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 29670
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #24 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 8:54am

scope wrote on Jan 1^st, 2025 at 7:29am:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 9:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 8:15pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:05pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No, dear boy, all those women came out of the woodwork when the big fella lied.

E Jean, Karen McDougal, Stormy Daniels. Stormy, a Republican all her life, was literally forced to tell her side of the story and defend herself. What did she get?

Detailed death threats, going into how many stab wounds they'd give her and which friends' cocks they'd use to plug her with.

So cute. Kind of makes calls to rip off little old ladies' hijabs sound tame, eh? So 2014. You've come a long way over the past decade, dear boy, but do you know?

Back then, you were such a zealot. Muselman this, Muselman that. Now you just do whatever your DL says.

Much easier, no?

Nonsense.

Then there was the audio tape (Access Hollywood tapes) with Trump proudly bragging about sexually assaulting women. How odd Trump brags about sexual assault and women confirm that Trump is telling the truth. Yes totally unbelievable just like 1+1=3

Not rape.

We have all grabbed pussies in our time - not the pussyphobic gays here but the rest, including even the women.

And had our wedding tackle grabbed by women. Not a court case - unless you run for office and they want to destroy you.

Here is frank openly admitting to sexual assault, just so he can defend his dear leader.

frank,you are a scumbag.

And you're deluded.

Back to top

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137833
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #25 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 10:35am

scope wrote on Jan 1^st, 2025 at 7:29am:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 9:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 8:15pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 12:05pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No, dear boy, all those women came out of the woodwork when the big fella lied.

E Jean, Karen McDougal, Stormy Daniels. Stormy, a Republican all her life, was literally forced to tell her side of the story and defend herself. What did she get?

Detailed death threats, going into how many stab wounds they'd give her and which friends' cocks they'd use to plug her with.

So cute. Kind of makes calls to rip off little old ladies' hijabs sound tame, eh? So 2014. You've come a long way over the past decade, dear boy, but do you know?

Back then, you were such a zealot. Muselman this, Muselman that. Now you just do whatever your DL says.

Much easier, no?

Nonsense.

Then there was the audio tape (Access Hollywood tapes) with Trump proudly bragging about sexually assaulting women. How odd Trump brags about sexual assault and women confirm that Trump is telling the truth. Yes totally unbelievable just like 1+1=3

Not rape.

We have all grabbed pussies in our time - not the pussyphobic gays here but the rest, including even the women.

And had our wedding tackle grabbed by women. Not a court case - unless you run for office and they want to destroy you.

Here is frank openly admitting to sexual assault, just so he can defend his dear leader.

frank,you are a scumbag.

It seems that Frank thinks sexual assault is alright, as long as you don't call it rape.

Oh dear.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137833
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #26 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 10:39am

Gnads wrote on Jan 1^st, 2025 at 8:53am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 6:20pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 5:56pm:

scope wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 5:53pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 31^st, 2024 at 10:44am:

All these women came out of the woodwork only after he ran and won in 2016.
The Caroll incident supposedly happened in 1996, ie 20 YEARS earlier.
She never said anything about it publicly until she had a book to sell, and then only sued Trump for denying it, ie a civil case of supposed defamation.

The helpful NY Dem machine introduced a law to extend the statute of limitation so they - yes, the Dems, not Carroll - could add battery to her defamation case.

Ludicrous.

No frank, just truth.
I know you cant handle the truth frank so here's another truth for you.
trump fought for 3 yrs to not have dna evidence admitted in court. Now tell me frank why would somebody who in his words "I never met the women,I dont know her" not want dna admitted in evidence, now theres a question.
will you answer or just do a scoot,that is run away and not answer.
you cant handle the truth frank,you and horseboy are so pathetic Grin

What DNA evidence? From 1996?

Yes, dear.

"Carroll’s lawyers have sought Trump’s DNA for three years to compare it with stains found on the dress Carroll wore the day she says Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in late 1995 or early 1996. Analysis of DNA on the dress concluded it did contain traces of an unknown man’s DNA."

... ... ... ...

"Traces of DNA are often used in rape and sexual assault cases to identify an attacker, and Ms. Carroll’s lawyers have said in court papers that the dress in question has such evidence.

"Ms. Carroll first requested in early 2020 that Mr. Trump provide a sample of his DNA for comparison. Mr. Trump repeatedly refused."

So this woman has kept a cum stained dress since 1995/96?

Ridiculous.

So why did Trump refuse to give a DNA sample?

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46530
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #27 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 11:41am

The judge, Lewis A Kaplan, rejected the 11th-hour offer by Trump’s legal team to provide a DNA sample to rebut claims Carroll first made publicly in a 2019 book.

The judge also noted that the report did not find evidence of sperm cells and that reopening the dispute would raise a “complicated new subject into this case that both sides elected not to pursue over a period of years”.

He said a positive match of Trump’s DNA to that on the dress would prove only that there had been an encounter between Trump and Carroll on a day when she wore the dress, but would not prove or disprove that a rape occurred and might prove entirely inconclusive.

Granuiad

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137833
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #28 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 11:45am

Frank wrote on Jan 1^st, 2025 at 11:41am:

The judge, Lewis A Kaplan, rejected the 11th-hour offer by Trump’s legal team to provide a DNA sample to rebut claims Carroll first made publicly in a 2019 book.

The judge also noted that the report did not find evidence of sperm cells and that reopening the dispute would raise a “complicated new subject into this case that both sides elected not to pursue over a period of years”.

He said a positive match of Trump’s DNA to that on the dress would prove only that there had been an encounter between Trump and Carroll on a day when she wore the dress, but would not prove or disprove that a rape occurred and might prove entirely inconclusive.

Granuiad

The sexual abuse was eventually proven without the DNA anyway.

So, all good Smiley

A US federal appeals court has upheld a $8-million verdict that E Jean Carroll won against Donald Trump when a jury found the US president-elect liable for sexually abusing and later defaming the former magazine columnist.

A unanimous three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit in Manhattan rejected Trump's argument that the trial judge should not have let jurors hear evidence about the Republican's alleged past sexual misconduct, making the trial and verdict unfair.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46530
Gender: male

Re: Trump loses in court ... again!
Reply #29 - Jan 1^st, 2025 at 11:52am

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 1^st, 2025 at 11:45am:

Frank wrote on Jan 1^st, 2025 at 11:41am:

The judge, Lewis A Kaplan, rejected the 11th-hour offer by Trump’s legal team to provide a DNA sample to rebut claims Carroll first made publicly in a 2019 book.

The judge also noted that the report did not find evidence of sperm cells and that reopening the dispute would raise a “complicated new subject into this case that both sides elected not to pursue over a period of years”.

He said a positive match of Trump’s DNA to that on the dress would prove only that there had been an encounter between Trump and Carroll on a day when she wore the dress, but would not prove or disprove that a rape occurred and might prove entirely inconclusive.

Granuiad

The sexual abuse was eventually proven without the DNA anyway.

So, all good Smiley

A US federal appeals court has upheld a $8-million verdict that E Jean Carroll won against Donald Trump when a jury found the US president-elect liable for sexually abusing and later defaming the former magazine columnist.

A unanimous three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit in Manhattan rejected Trump's argument that the trial judge should not have let jurors hear evidence about the Republican's alleged past sexual misconduct, making the trial and verdict unfair.

Not proven. Declared.

Not the same thing.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged