U.S. Politics - Thread

[Hacky McAxe]

In the first civil sexual assault case against Trump, the jury found him not guilty of rape but guilty of sexual assault. He has been ordered to pay $5 million in damages.

This probably won't reduce his popularity, but I guarantee you that his opponents will bring it up every chance they get.

 

[Flanagun]

In the first civil sexual assault case against Trump, the jury found him not guilty of rape but guilty of sexual assault. He has been ordered to pay $5 million in damages.

This probably won't reduce his popularity, but I guarantee you that his opponents will bring it up every chance they get.

He has already announced he will appeal, so get ready for more the justice system is rigged social media posts.

In other news, the democrats want to show the world they are not a deadbeat county and pay their debts by raising the debt ceiling so they can borrow more money.

Clown country.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

He has already announced he will appeal, so get ready for more the justice system is rigged social media posts.

In other news, the democrats want to show the world they are not a deadbeat county and pay their debts by raising the debt ceiling so they can borrow more money.

Clown country.

I think they're pretty screwed right now. They can either raise the debt ceiling and cause problems later on, or not raise the debt ceiling and have the economy collapse.

So the Republicans are making it harder to raise the debt ceiling. Not because they think it's a bad thing though. It's because they can use it to hold Biden hostage. Either he complies with their demands or the economy collapses while a Democrat is in charge. It's a win-win for the Republicans.

 

[The DoggFather]

I think they're pretty screwed right now. They can either raise the debt ceiling and cause problems later on, or not raise the debt ceiling and have the economy collapse.

So the Republicans are making it harder to raise the debt ceiling. Not because they think it's a bad thing though. It's because they can use it to hold Biden hostage. Either he complies with their demands or the economy collapses while a Democrat is in charge. It's a win-win for the Republicans.

And lose-lose for the people.

 

[Flanagun]

I think they're pretty screwed right now. They can either raise the debt ceiling and cause problems later on, or not raise the debt ceiling and have the economy collapse.

So the Republicans are making it harder to raise the debt ceiling. Not because they think it's a bad thing though. It's because they can use it to hold Biden hostage. Either he complies with their demands or the economy collapses while a Democrat is in charge. It's a win-win for the Republicans.

Yeah, they are well and truly screwed. I just found it funny how the Treasury Secretary tried to spin it as showing the world they aren't a deadbeat country by borrowing more money to pay off debts. That actually sounds like something deadbeats would do lol

 

[Flanagun]

@Hacky McAxe

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655734247632560128

 

[Mr 95%]

Different day same channel..always happens, always threatens to collapse the world’s economy, always resolved..

 

[Natboy]

So this bird Trump apparently raped said it was “the best day of her life” being awarded 5 million “but it wasn’t about the money” hahahahaha

 

[Flanagun]

So this bird Trump apparently raped said it was “the best day of her life” being awarded 5 million “but it wasn’t about the money” hahahahaha

If he didn't do it, why did he and his legal team balk at providing a DNA test for three years?

 

[Disposable Hero]

If he didn't do it, why did he and his legal team balk at providing a DNA test for three years?

If he did do it why was he allowed to pay money instead of going to jail like all the other Rapists?

 

[Natboy]

If he didn't do it, why did he and his legal team balk at providing a DNA test for three years?

I didn’t mention whether he did it or not but I would never provide a DNA test either. Civil claims should only be able to follow criminal trial convictions where the available evidence is actually tested

 

[Philistine]

If he did do it why was he allowed to pay money instead of going to jail like all the other Rapists?

Because it was a civil case, brought by the woman and her attorneys, not by the Department of Justice. In a civil case - which anybody can file if they have the money - you ask the court to award you damages (money) in order to make you "whole" again. It's always about money and nothing but money.

Also in a civil case the burden of proof shifts from "beyond reasonable doubt" to the much more easily satisfied "balance of probability". If the jury believed the woman was more likely than Trump to be telling the truth, that is all they would need to bring in a guilty verdict.

 

[Flanagun]

If he did do it why was he allowed to pay money instead of going to jail like all the other Rapists?

Because that's the law that was passed... it's a temporary law allowing people to file civil cases for historic alleged rape cases, but not criminal ones.

That question was easy enough to answer, so let's get back to my question about the DNA test. One simple test and he could have gotten this thrown out of court, if he were truly innocent. Instead his legal team balked until the deadline for new evidence passed, then offered to supply the sample after the deadline, knowing full well the judge would reject it at that point because it would delay the case. Then he falsely claimed it was the alleged victim who didn't want the DNA test to be admissible, despite the fact her legal team had been pushing for it for years.

So why didn't he agree to the test prior to the deadline? Could have saved himself millions of bucks and a lot of bad press. But then gain, that gutter rat thrives on bad press, because his supporters lap up his feeble minded victim narratives like ice cream.

 

[Flanagun]

I didn’t mention whether he did it or not but I would never provide a DNA test either. Civil claims should only be able to follow criminal trial convictions where the available evidence is actually tested

You wouldn't provide a DNA sample knowing you're innocent and it would probably save you 5 million? That makes no sense. All refusing to provide a sample was going to do was cost him money and make him look guilty.

The law is what it is... but the reality is, if he is truly innocent he had a pretty compelling way to prove it and refused to do so.

Maybe after he loses his appeal he can start a pay Donald Trump's rape damages campaign on GoFundMe and fleece his supporters for some more money.

 

[lukedog]

You wouldn't provide a DNA sample knowing you're innocent and it would probably save you 5 million? That makes no sense. All refusing to provide a sample was going to do was cost him money and make him look guilty.

The law is what it is... but the reality is, if he is truly innocent he had a pretty compelling way to prove it and refused to do so.

Maybe after he loses his appeal he can start a pay Donald Trump's rape damages campaign on GoFundMe and fleece his supporters for some more money.

he probably did blow his load on her then dipped, so she pulled the "i was raped" routine. providing dna could only establish sexual business took place, not that it was non-consensual. Similar to the Higgins situation, the bruce fat fuck had a missus so pretends he never did anything, but of course he shagged her. Doesn't mean he raped her if it turns out he left cum there, only that he is a bounder and a cad.

 

[Philistine]

You wouldn't provide a DNA sample knowing you're innocent and it would probably save you 5 million? That makes no sense. All refusing to provide a sample was going to do was cost him money and make him look guilty.

The law is what it is... but the reality is, if he is truly innocent he had a pretty compelling way to prove it and refused to do so.

Maybe after he loses his appeal he can start a pay Donald Trump's rape damages campaign on GoFundMe and fleece his supporters for some more money.

There is a lot to dislike about the USA but, the last time I checked, they hadn't embraced a Soviet Union style justice system. If you are accused of a crime you don't have to prove you didn't do it, it is up to the accuser to provide proof that you did.

Why didn't Trump supply a DNA test? You could equally ask why someone accused of a serious crime doesn't give evidence in the witness Box under oath? He must have something to hide - right? WRONG! Your lawyers will almost always advise against giving any evidence that you are not compelled to give, whether it be DNA or direct evidence subject to cross-examination. Your lawyer does not actually care if you did it or not, his job is to get you acquitted, and defendants in the witness box are more likely to talk their way into a conviction than out of one.

 

[Flanagun]

he probably did blow his load on her then dipped, so she pulled the "i was raped" routine. providing dna could only establish sexual business took place, not that it was non-consensual. Similar to the Higgins situation, the bruce fat fuck had a missus so pretends he never did anything, but of course he shagged her. Doesn't mean he raped her if it turns out he left cum there, only that he is a bounder and a cad.

No, it doesn't 100 percent prove guilt... but it could 100 percent prove his innocence if his claim that he never met her (which he has made repeatedly and continues to make) is not complete BS.

Lying and then refusing to provide a sample until after the deadline for evidence submissions, only to offer himself up for testing after the deadline had passed does not exactly add credibility to his claims. It makes him seem like a bullshit artist. He would have seemed more credible if he had just admitted something happened but claimed it was consensual.

I think he was guilty, tbh. He has openly boasted about thinking he can just have his way with women in the past and the number of women who have come forward with allegations against him are too numerous to ignore. But even if he is innocent, he has not helped his own case.

 

[Doogie]

TBF - this was a civil case so the burden of proof is much lower. I'd also add that the Trumpster has made himself a likely candidate for this kind of trial with his behaviour over the years. Similarly, with Clinton and Paula - that case didn't fly until the Lewinksy stuff hit the press. Then their was evidence that Clinton bullshitted with the best of them. Trump and his actions and statements didn't do him any favours.

So you get a jury who probably doesn't need a high standard of proof (and the fact it was assault rather than rape shows the standard wasn't great) to ping the 'grab em on the pussy' guy and again tbf - he was probably right that everyone did it it back in the day.

So no idea if he did it or not but definitely his modus operandi. Too many women with similar stories.

Had to chuckle though when he identified the woman in the photo as his ex-wife. You cannot script that stuff.

Anyways - no big deal. $5m is brekkie money for the Trumpster. He can just take that out of the ashtray in the roller....

 

[Flanagun]

There is a lot to dislike about the USA but, the last time I checked, they hadn't embraced a Soviet Union style justice system. If you are accused of a crime you don't have to prove you didn't do it, it is up to the accuser to provide proof that you did.

Why didn't Trump supply a DNA test? You could equally ask why someone accused of a serious crime doesn't give evidence in the witness Box under oath? He must have something to hide - right? WRONG! Your lawyers will almost always advise against giving any evidence that you are not compelled to give, whether it be DNA or direct evidence subject to cross-examination. Your lawyer does not actually care if you did it or not, his job is to get you acquitted, and defendants in the witness box are more likely to talk their way into a conviction than out of one.

That's still the way it works in criminal court, it's different in civil cases. Whether that is or isn't right is a completely different discussion.

If Trump had been telling the truth about never having met her, there is no compelling legal reason to not provide the sample. If they had never met, there's no way she would have his DNA on her dress, so how exactly could providing a sample hurt him? Let's not confuse providing evidence which could have 100 per cent backed up his version of events if he was telling the truth with getting up on the stand. Two completely different things.

PS if his lawyer's job is to get him a not guilty verdict, he did a terrible job of it. He didn't even lodge an official defence and floated nonsense theories like the complainant concocting a scheme to get Trump based on the plot of law and Order SVU during cross examination. I don't know where Trump finds such terrible lawyers lol

 

[Roger the alien]

So this bird Trump apparently raped said it was “the best day of her life” being awarded 5 million “but it wasn’t about the money” hahahahaha

Bingo, if Trump wasn't who he is now (president/running for president) I doubt she would have even made these claims.... 20 years ago, or however long it was she slept with an ugly pig of a man just because he was a billionaire, something many women do for their own ridiculous reasons and now because he's running for president again she suddenly regrets it and calls it rape.
I'm sorry but the way I see the situation, it's about nothing more than money and an agenda.
By the way I'm not right wing or left wing but I'm sure lefties will hate this post.