Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Matt Gaetz says his GOP colleagues pushing the now indicted "highly credible confidential" source were a little "over-sauced".
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 22, 2024 10:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (5 comments) [78 views]


So we're in the market for a house...
Nonprofit by Ponderer     February 4, 2024 6:09 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (39 comments) [476 views]


The infamous FD-1023 form: Biden $10M bribe file released: Burisma chief said he was ‘coerced’ to pay Joe, ‘stupid’ Hunter in bombshell allegations
Crime by HatetheSwamp     July 20, 2023 3:47 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (32 comments) [559 views]


Clueless Sen. Tuberville 'running in circles' in response to IVF question
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 23, 2024 12:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [10 views]


Tulsi Gabbard is a transformative political leader... speaking at EFFIN CPAC
Politics by HatetheSwamp     February 23, 2024 10:04 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (5 comments) [38 views]


Joe Manchin interview: Electing Trump would be very detrimental to US, world. Biden too liberal now.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 22, 2024 12:48 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [61 views]


THE DRINKS ARE ON ME, BOYS!!!
Alcoholic Beverages by Ponderer     February 21, 2024 6:50 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (7 comments) [145 views]


What to expect from Jim Biden's testimony before the House Oversight Committee...
Government by HatetheSwamp     February 21, 2024 8:24 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (32 comments) [299 views]


To set the record straight, GOPs are stoked for impeachment after Jim Biden's lies under oath
Crime by HatetheSwamp     February 22, 2024 6:57 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [25 views]


The truth about Alexander Smirnov and the GOP push to impeach the Doddering Old Fool
Politics by HatetheSwamp     February 22, 2024 6:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [13 views]


Law selectors, pages, etc.
E Jean Carroll awarded $5 million
By Curt_Anderson
May 9, 2023 12:21 pm
Category: Law

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

Jury decides Trump sexually assaulted Carroll and defamed her.

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "E Jean Carroll awarded $5 million":

  1. by islander on May 9, 2023 12:57 pm

    Very good decision by the jury ! 👍

    I have to wonder if Trump will try to appeal. Civil suits are harder to appeal than a criminal case and by appealing he will just be keeping it in the public eye longer.


  2. by HatetheSwamp on May 9, 2023 1:21 pm

    I'm guessing that Trump will lose this trial for two reasons.

    1. He's generally despicable.
    2. It's a New York jury. (New York is filled with TDS people.)

    But, c'mon man. E. Jean Carroll can't say what effin YEAR this alleged encounter took place in. Hers is not a credible claim.

    But, she'll win.
    -pb


  3. by Ponderer on May 9, 2023 3:53 pm

    So you're insinuating, Bill, that Carroll made everything all up and is lying while Trump, who never showed up in his own defense, is telling the truth through his lawyer when he says it never happened? And that even though he's really telling the truth, he still lost because any New Yorker who could have been on the jury found him liable because they hate him and he's just generally despicable?

    The possibility that the jury found him liable because thy unanimously believed that more likely than not he did it doesn't rank anything of a likelihood in your estimation?

    You're still willing to trust, believe in, and defend your Mango Messiah to such an obsequious degree are you...?


  4. by HatetheSwamp on May 9, 2023 4:06 pm

    po, no. Retrace the exchange isle and I had. I'd'a been the perfectly neutral and open minded juror.


  5. by Curt_Anderson on May 9, 2023 4:39 pm
    According to a report I heard, the jury decided "no" on rape but "yes" on sexual abuse is because E. Jean couldn't see below while pinned against the wall to know if Trump inserted his penis or his finger. How embarrassing for Trump if Carroll mistook his penis for finger.


  6. by Ponderer on May 9, 2023 6:58 pm

    Right, Curt.

    No on rape
    Yes on sexual abuse
    Yes on slander
    $5,000,000

    And I think there's still some punitive damages coming yet.

    Watch how Trump does nothing but blurt on about "They found there was no rape! I was found innocent of any rape! Completely exonerated...! No rape!"


  7. by Curt_Anderson on May 9, 2023 7:22 pm
    It was a verdict Tacopina called "perplexing."

    "They rejected her rape claim, and she'd always claimed this was a rape case," he said, speaking to reporters outside the courthouse. "Part of me was obviously very happy that Donald Trump was not branded a rapist."

    Ladies and gentleman, your leading GOP presidential candidate, and ladies, a jury said he's not a rapist, just a sexual assaulter!


  8. by Ponderer on May 9, 2023 7:47 pm

    I think the jury did an excellent job. The performed their civil duties excellently and patriotically.


  9. by HatetheSwamp on May 10, 2023 3:30 am

    ...from the person who thinks Rachel is a journalist.


  10. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 6:07 am

    • 2017 Emmy Award in the Outstanding Live Interview category for The Rachel Maddow Show segment "One-on-One with Kellyanne Conway".

    • 2017 Emmy Award in the Outstanding News Discussion & Analysis category for The Rachel Maddow Show story "An American Disaster: The Crisis in Flint".

    • 2011 Emmy Award in the Outstanding News Discussion & Analysis category for The Rachel Maddow Show segments "Good Morning Landlocked Central Asia!".

    • In 2009, Maddow was nominated for GLAAD's 20th Annual Media Awards for a segment of her MSNBC show, "Rick Warren, Change To Believe In?", in the Outstanding TV Journalism Segment category.

    • In June 2009, Maddow's MSNBC show was the only cable news show nominated for a Television Critics Association award in the Outstanding Achievement in News and Information category.

    • In March 2010, Maddow won at the 21st Annual GLAAD Media Awards in the category of Outstanding TV Journalism – Newsmagazine for her segment, "Uganda Be Kidding Me".

    • In July 2010, Maddow was presented with a Maggie Award for her ongoing reporting of healthcare reform, the murder of Dr. George Tiller, and the anti-abortion movement.

    • In August 2010, Maddow won the Walter Cronkite Faith & Freedom Award, which was presented by the Interfaith Alliance. Past honorees included Larry King, Tom Brokaw, and the late Peter Jennings.


    I'm perfectly content sharing the company of those who think likewise, Bill.

    You know I also wanted to post journalism awards that Tucker Carlson has won for comparison, but there doesn't appear to be any. And my goodness... The whole Fox News network hasn't won any journalism awards either. 😢


  11. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 6:11 am

    What else ya got to defend your Mango Messiah sexual abuser with, Bill? Wanna tell us how the judge in the case wasn't a real judge and all the jurors were on MSNBC's payroll...?


  12. by oldedude on May 10, 2023 6:43 am
    Wanna tell us how the judge in the case wasn't a real judge and all the jurors were on MSNBC's payroll...?

    I was just wondering. Are you on the payroll of MSNBC? Because if not, you just defeated your own "argument." The point is that you'll do anything. Yes anything. to prove he's the antiChrist. I think it's laughable. You (et.al) waste sooooo much of your energy on this. Like I said before. You have no other life than your complete and utter hatred of another person.

    As Eleanor Roosevelt said....


  13. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 7:04 am

    I never ceases to amaze me, olde dude, how many words you can employ to say absolutely nothing whatsoever.


  14. by HatetheSwamp on May 10, 2023 7:59 am

    po,

    Rachel is a skilled, wacked out, progressive, Swamploving EFFIN commentator. She's as far from being a journalist as anyone on cable news.


  15. by HatetheSwamp on May 10, 2023 8:01 am

    What else ya got to defend your Mango Messiah sexual abuser with, Bill? Wanna tell us how the judge in the case wasn't a real judge and all the jurors were on MSNBC's payroll...?

    Defend? Nuthin. He's despicable, as I said to isle.

    I just can't be certain that he did this thing. Sheeeeeeeeeeeesh!


  16. by HatetheSwamp on May 10, 2023 8:09 am

    Wanna tell us how the judge in the case wasn't a real judge and all the jurors were on MSNBC's payroll...?

    I have noted before that Alan Dershowitz has said, "This judge has made many errors."


  17. by Curt_Anderson on May 10, 2023 9:28 am
    “I just can't be certain that he did this thing. Sheeeeeeeeeeeesh!”. —HtS

    The jurors did not have to be certain that Trump did what he was accused of. They only had to decide that it was more likely than not. In civil court, it is a preponderance of the evidence; not beyond reasonable doubt.

    Given how quickly they reached their decision, and the dollar amount that they came up with after looking at the evidence including Trump’s videotaped testimony, they apparently decided it was much more likely than not.


  18. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 9:37 am

    "She's as far from being a journalist as anyone on cable news." -Hate

    According to your totally ignorant and massively biased opinion on the subject perhaps. But not that of anyone who knows what journalism actually is.

    But hey, keep the examples of your dementedly willful pig-ignorance coming.....


  19. by HatetheSwamp on May 10, 2023 10:28 am

    The jurors did not have to be certain that Trump did what he was accused of. They only had to decide that it was more likely than not.

    Based on what I know from this distance, knowing that she couldn't say what effin YEAR it is supposed to have happened, I'd have had trouble believing that her tale is more likely than not to have happened.

    Trump is despicable. Because of that, he's easy to lie about.


  20. by Curt_Anderson on May 10, 2023 10:44 am
    I was assaulted once. Not sexually, but an assault nonetheless. I attended a very large high school. I was getting some books out of my locker when somebody ran by and slugged me in the kidney region from behind. They kept running. I doubled up in pain. I never reported it although I had a a strong suspicion as to who the culprit was.

    Here’s the kicker: I couldn’t tell you what year this happened. Even shortly thereafter I wouldn’t have been able to give you the date. Being assaulted is not the sort of thing you mark on your calendar or put down in your diary. It’s the sort of thing you want to forget.


  21. by HatetheSwamp on May 10, 2023 11:04 am

    That's understandable. The thing is Trump couldn't possibly present an alibi.

    I know you'd like to blame Trump that she has a weak story but it's not his fault.


  22. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 11:39 am

    "Trump is despicable. Because of that, he's easy to lie about." -Hate

    Not that you're defending him or anything.


  23. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 11:41 am

    Curt, Hate doesn't understand that traumatic events don't automatically come with a time stamp. But they are burned into your mind nonetheless.


  24. by Curt_Anderson on May 10, 2023 12:49 pm
    "That's understandable. The thing is Trump couldn't possibly present an alibi." --HtS

    Let's say E. Jean said it happened on October 5th, 1997 at 7:15pm. The store is apparently close to Trump Tower. Would he have been able to present an alibi? Besides the MAGA cult, who would believe he didn't manufacture his alibi?


  25. by HatetheSwamp on May 10, 2023 1:01 pm

    As I've noted, if there was a NYT photo of Trump attending a Broadway show on the day,or plane tickets or hotel receipts revealing that he was in El Paso, he'd have been able to mount a defense. But, some Thursday in 95 or 96? That's not compelling.

    po and you are looking for reasons to believe her. Not I.


  26. by oldedude on May 10, 2023 3:15 pm
    I'm with that. Did he do it? yeah... maybe. It just seems like a golddigger trying to score point by being a patsy for the sheeple. She "just remembered"? Gimmieabreak. At least pedojoe's daughter had written about her sexual assault long before and wasn't going to say anything until others exposed it against her will and knowledge. Do I mind? Sure. The same way I minded the "me too" movement that axed Franken with questionable "evidence."


  27. by oldedude on May 10, 2023 6:03 pm
    Lead,
    This is more of a case of jury nullification. It would be like if curt, po, or the rest of the tribe in the jury. Regardless of the evidence, he would still be guilty. Even if he was in Paris and had tickets to a gala with the mrs. With photos. They'd still condemn him and recommend the death penalty.


  28. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 6:25 pm

    olde dude, I wish there was some way for you to comprehend just how flaming ignorant you are of this case apparently.

    "This is more of a case of jury nullification." -olde dude

    This is more a case of you being a dedicated, Trump-defending MAGA Republican before being an actual American with any sense of respect for our justice system whatsoever.


  29. by oldedude on May 10, 2023 7:05 pm
    olde dude, I wish there was some way for you to comprehend just how flaming ignorant you are of this case apparently.

    So why don't you explain exactly what facts I'm missing? No blithering. I'm apparently missing facts.


  30. by oldedude on May 10, 2023 7:10 pm
    I haven't disagreed with the final decision. Mostly because I really don't give a sht. I've said that already. If he lives or dies makes no difference in my life either way. I think she wanted her 15 minutes of fame. Okay... She can't remember what year it was. That sounds suspicious to me. She made $5mil.

    So what FACTS did I miss?


  31. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 7:18 pm

    Well, you're missing the fact that you were not on that jury and therefor it is impossible for you not to be missing essentially all of the evidence they saw and heard. Neither was I. But I followed the coverage quite intently and have a far greater familiarity with it than you seemingly do.

    Very much like an idiot, all you are doing is sitting there, declaring that based on your vast ignorance of the case and the trial, you don't think he was found legally liable for sexually assaulting Carroll in a fair and just manner and that the jurors decided to wipe their unanimous asses with their sworn civil duty and find him liable even though they didn't really think he was, because you never saw the evidence that they did. Because that is what your ignorance combined with your dedicated support for Trump leads you to believe.


  32. by oldedude on May 10, 2023 7:27 pm
    You just proved my jury nullification point perfectly! Thanks!

    You're such a sport about this.


  33. by Ponderer on May 10, 2023 7:31 pm

    It's actually really simply, od.

    After seeing all the evidence and hearing all the testimonies and depositions, the jurors simply believed that Carrol was telling the truth and that Trump was lying.

    Only three hours of deliberation to come to a unanimous decision is evidence of them being pretty darned confident in their opinions of the character of the two and the likely truthfulness of their stories.


  34. by HatetheSwamp on May 11, 2023 1:56 am

    Only three hours of deliberation to come to a unanimous decision is evidence of them being pretty darned confident in their opinions of the character of the two and the likely truthfulness of their stories.

    No. Maybe if this happened in, say, Omaha or, heck, Phoenix. But, in Manhattan?, it's probably only evidence of TDS.


  35. by islander on May 11, 2023 4:10 am

    Teri answers some of the questions from those suffering from Trump denial syndrome:

    So are you saying all it takes to convict a man is a woman’s word?

    "I am saying that a woman’s word is the same as any eyewitness testimony: It is evidence. Whether it is sufficient evidence is up to the jury. The jury’s task is to weigh the evidence, including testimony, and decide who to believe. The technical word for this is “probative value" *

    A reader said this about Trump in response to the E. Jean Carroll case:

    How the Access Hollywood tape failed to derail him, where he himself admits to assaulting women, continues to baffle me.

    Spoiler: His supporters don’t think what Trump did should qualify as a crime. This makes perfect sense when you understand the history of rape laws and cultural attitudes toward rape, and the meaning of MAGA. *

    * Teri Kanefield


  36. by HatetheSwamp on May 11, 2023 4:28 am

    I agree...as far as it goes...

    Still, I know all about the extensive reach of the Swamp and, particularly, of Biden's Banana Republic.

    Trump is despicable. However,...I'm not convinced that he did this thing.


  37. by oldedude on May 11, 2023 6:45 am
    First, it's muffy, so along with the usual suspects here, she would be someone I would really want to complete my jury nullification.

    I'm very open to it being a political stunt. I DO understand her NOT saying anything prior to Trump running for President. NY politics are dangerous at best, and generally life threatening. Why not when Trump was running the first time? or the second? The longer the time between the act and the civil suit the word of the victim diminishes. Especially when there's money involved.

    We know the swampster dims could easily lead the sheep into another "Kavanaugh" hearing. I'm not putting anything past them to destroy anyone in their path. Even E Jean.

    These questions aren't about hatred, or her lying, or anything of the sort. Again, did he at least pulled her in to a changing room? He didn't argue that, so there's intent.

    The defamation. I haven't cared enough to look at this. Would he do that as a norm? Sure.

    Again, this matters so little to me, and one of the main reasons I didn't post prior to this.


  38. by islander on May 11, 2023 7:03 am
    Marcy Wheeler, like Teri Kanefiled and Heather Cox Richardson, is an expert in her field and lie them is a very good source of reliable information as opposed to those who get their info from the right wing media and Fox news entertainers.

    "A jury in Manhattan awarded E. Jean Carroll $5 million in damages after finding the former president Donald Trump liable for defamation and sexual abuse.

    Under New York State’s New York’s Adult Survivors Act which went into effect last November, Carroll filed a lawsuit against Trump for defamation based on his public denials after she accused him of raping her in 1996.

    While the jury did not find Trump liable for rape – the challenge likely hanging on penetration as Teri Kanefield explained in an online thread – they did find credible Carroll’s accusation of sexual abuse and found Trump had defamed her with his repeated denials.

    As revolting as it often is, Trump’s testimony is worth a scan as yet another example of classic abuser’s behavior called DARVO: Trump repeatedly Denied the accusation, Attacked his accuser, Reversed the Victim and Offense by claiming Carroll and the other women who supported her with their own sexual abuse accusations against Trump were lying about him. He minimized what he said about grabbing women by the pussy in the Access Hollywood tape and lied about his infidelities.

    After reading Trump’s testimony one can only wonder what he might say under oath about the presidential records and classified documents he stole from the White House."

    emptywheel.net


  39. by HatetheSwamp on May 11, 2023 7:51 am

    Baha baha baha. Right. You bury yourself in the bosom of objective journalism. Baha baha baha!


  40. by Curt_Anderson on May 11, 2023 9:27 am
    “After reading Trump’s testimony one can only wonder what he might say under oath about the presidential records and classified documents he stole from the White House." —islander

    We don’t have to wonder entirely. Last night, Kaitlyn Collins asked Trump if he showed anybody the classified documents he had at Mar-a-Lago. Trump answered “not really”. The correct answer should’ve been an unequivocated “no”.


  41. by islander on May 11, 2023 10:53 am

    "We don’t have to wonder entirely. Last night, Kaitlyn Collins asked Trump if he showed anybody the classified documents he had at Mar-a-Lago.
    Trump answered “not really”.<---[Them's weasel words LoL] The correct answer should’ve been an unequivocated “no”. ~ Curt


  42. by HatetheSwamp on May 11, 2023 12:21 pm

    The correct answer would have been the truth. Duh


  43. by islander on May 11, 2023 12:29 pm

    That's what weasel words are used for, to avoid answering a question but make it seem like you did.



  44. by oldedude on May 11, 2023 2:47 pm
    So you're saying that if he knows he showed people who were read in to the operations and had the clearance, he's supposed to LIE about it. Got it. Whose the weasel now?


  45. by Curt_Anderson on May 11, 2023 5:12 pm
    “So you're saying that if he knows he showed people who were read in to the operations and had the clearance, he's supposed to LIE about it.” —OD

    Wrong. Then Trump should’ve said “yes, but only the people with proper clearance”.


  46. by oldedude on May 11, 2023 7:54 pm
    Or.... because he knows that elitist pricks are after him no matter what, he could have answered how he did. You seem to think that you could answer everything perfectly with your 20/20 asssight. My guess is that you couldn't think of that with any political thought in your body and get it right.


  47. by Curt_Anderson on May 11, 2023 9:01 pm
    “You seem to think that you could answer everything perfectly with your 20/20 asssight.” —OD

    It’s easy for honest people. If you make it a habit to speak the truth you don’t need to remember your last lie.


  48. by HatetheSwamp on May 12, 2023 3:28 am

    Biden, and the string pullers, avoid nearly every important question they're asked...and, "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" outright lies about most of the rest and you're chagrined over an imprecise answer from Trump.

    How bout a little honesty from you just for once.


  49. by islander on May 12, 2023 4:50 am

    ”Biden, and the string pullers, avoid nearly every important question they're asked”...and, "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" outright lies about most of the rest and you're chagrined over an imprecise answer from Trump <---Prefect example of “Whataboutism”

    Whataboutism is an argumentative tactic where a person or group responds to an accusation or difficult question by deflection. Instead of addressing the point made, they counter it with “but what about X?”.

    Many children learn this tactic early on, in response to being told off for the state of her room, one child’s whataboutist reply will be to say: “But what about my brother’s room? His is worse.”

    It is also Donald Trump’s “favourite dodge”. When criticised, Trump would routinely deflect attention by claiming that someone else was worse.

    "Anyone who has ever studied the Soviet Union knows about a phenomenon called 'whataboutism'. Ioffe cited the Soviet response to criticism, "And you are lynching negroes", as a "classic" form of whataboutism. She said that Russia Today was "an institution that is dedicated solely to the task of whataboutism", and concluded that whataboutism was a "sacred Russian tactic".[71][23][24] Garry Kasparov discussed the Soviet tactic in his book Winter Is Coming, calling it a form of "Soviet propaganda" and a way for Russian bureaucrats to "respond to criticism of Soviet massacres, forced deportations, and gulags" ~`Wikipedia


  50. by HatetheSwamp on May 12, 2023 5:30 am

    Whataboutism is an argumentative tactic where a person or group responds to an accusation or difficult question by deflection.

    isle,

    Notice. My comment was specifically to Curt...

    ...WHO HASN'T OFFERED ANYTHING BUT TRUMP WHATABOUTISM HERE IN WHAT? TWO? THREE YEARS? MORE THAN THAT!!!!!?

    Duh, or as po'd say, EFFIN duh.

    Baha baha bahahahahahahahahahaha baha baha baha!


  51. by islander on May 12, 2023 5:57 am

    Hate ~ "...WHO HASN'T OFFERED ANYTHING BUT TRUMP WHATABOUTISM HERE IN WHAT? TWO? THREE YEARS? MORE THAN THAT!!!!!?" <---False

    Scroll up and you won't find any whataboutism argument by Curt...If you think you can, give us the post number. Was there any whataboutism in Curt's last post #47 ? How about #45 or #40 ??? I think you get the picture and can see how false your accusation was....



  52. by HatetheSwamp on May 12, 2023 6:14 am

    isle,

    "C'mon man. Gimme a break."

    You know d@ng well that any time criticism of "that feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" appears on SS, if Curt replies, it's always...EFFIN ALWAYS...to point out something bad about Trump.

    The day you post to Curt, "Hey, Curt, don't you have anything besides a Trump-whadabout when Biden's the issue!?," I'll take you more seriously.


  53. by HatetheSwamp on May 13, 2023 2:17 pm

    The flimsy case against Trump

    Right. She doesn't know what year. Two friends say she told them about it and, guess what? They don't know what year either.

    Stinks.

    View Video


  54. by islander on May 13, 2023 3:00 pm

    Hate...Read Curt's post # 20 again.


  55. by HatetheSwamp on May 13, 2023 3:09 pm

    Ah yes. As the song says, "I remember it well."

    That's why it's so devastating that her two friends who claim she told them about it, curiously, can't even remember the effin year either.


  56. by islander on May 13, 2023 4:21 pm

    What's the big deal? I have to think about it and do a little math to remember what year my kids were born.


  57. by oldedude on May 14, 2023 4:54 pm
    Rape victims are VERY specific about the trauma. Years later, they can tell you scents, lights, everything.

    One of the issues with this case is the law referenced by Curt will be part of the appeal, stating the law was passed ONLY for this case. If that's true or not is another matter (I'm not taking a stance on this at all, but that's what some lawyers are saying).


  58. by Curt_Anderson on May 14, 2023 5:35 pm
    "Rape victims are VERY specific about the trauma. Years later, they can tell you scents, lights, everything." ---OD

    I doubt that's true. I once witnessed a pedestrian being hit by a speeding car. My memory of it was if it were in slow-motion with the girl rolling up and over the top of the car. But my memory of it was if I had tunnel vision with no memory of other witnesses, et cetera.

    See "Why Rape and Trauma Survivors Have Fragmented and Incomplete Memories". Link below.

    If somebody testifies to something that bolsters their case and/or puts them in good light I retain some skepticism and wait for confirming evidence or witnesses. If somebody says something that is to their detriment and hurts their case I am willing to believe them.

    I believe Trump when he says that he can grab women by the pussy because he's a celebrity. I believe Trump when he says that he considers himself a star. I believe Trump when he said for millions of years rich and famous men can have sex with whoever they please, "fortunately or unfortunately". I believe Trump when he mistook E. Jean Carroll for his ex-wife. I believe Trump when he said that his pick-up technique is to take women shopping---then "I moved on her like a bitch."

    I believe E. Jean Carroll when she says she cannot remember the date of the sexual assault--she could have come with a specific date and it's unlikely that Trump would have had a credible alibi. I believe E. Jean when she said she was not sure if it Trump inserted his penis or his finger as she was being pushed against a wall.
    time.com


  59. by islander on May 15, 2023 5:19 am

    You're absolutely correct, Curt.

    I was hit broadside (t-boned) by a car speeding through a stop sign 20 or so years ago. I have clear memories of the loud "whoomph" of the car hitting the passenger side of my vehicle and seeing my windshield collapsing and crumbling into tiny pieces. I remember climbing out of my truck on the lawn of somebody's house where it had ended up. I could not tell you the exact year that it happened.





  60. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 5:22 am

    ...and, isle, no one who knows you remembers when it happened. Eh. Must be a progressive thing.


  61. by islander on May 15, 2023 6:01 am

    Hate...No. Even my wife couldn't tell me the exact date or year. It's not something that happened to them so it's even less likely that they would remember.


  62. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 6:10 am

    Bullfernerner.

    I busted up my big toe more than 50 years ago and I remember the surgery and hospital stay exactly.

    The truth here is that E Jean's story is weak. It gives Trump no opportunity to provide an alibi. Curt and you dismiss the problems with her story because of your deranged Trump hate.


  63. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 8:00 am

    "Bullfernerner.

    I busted up my big toe more than 50 years ago and I remember the surgery and hospital stay exactly."
    -He Who All Reality of the Human Condition is Based Upon


    Something hasn't ever happened to you, so therefore it has never happened to anyone.



    That is one damned fine example of what passes for MAGA Republican "logic" there I tell ya what. You're a tremendous credit to the MAGA Republican race is what you are, Bill.


  64. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 8:06 am

    "The truth here is that E Jean's story is weak. It gives Trump no opportunity to provide an alibi. Curt and you dismiss the problems with her story because of your deranged Trump hate." -Hate

    The jury unanimously didn't think so. But then, you had much more exposure to the facts and evidence of the case than any of them did.

    Nothing stopped Trump from showing up and testifying in his own defense. You're totally dismissing the importance of the fact that he refused to show up for the trial and look those jurors in the eye under oath and declare that he didn't do it. That's a pretty strong indication of guilt for jurors to dismiss as easily as you do in your abject support and defense of him, Bill.


  65. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 8:26 am

    po,

    The jury was a bunch of Manhattan TDS progressives.

    I'm convinced that Trump didn't seriously defend himself so he could campaign on Swamp corruption.


  66. by Curt_Anderson on May 15, 2023 9:11 am
    “The jury was a bunch of Manhattan TDS progressives.” —HtS

    That is Trump’s lame excuse meant entirely for the gullible like you and olde dude. Yes Manhattan has many Democrats and liberals. About 58% of Manhattanites are Democrats or lean Democratic. That still gives Donald Trump’s legal team plenty of non-Democrats to choose from during the jury selection process, which is called voir dire. Both the prosecution and the defense have equal opportunities to include or exclude jurors. There were only nine jurors in the jury.


  67. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 9:30 am

    "That feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" beat Trump in Manhattan 84.5-14.5.

    gothamgazette.com


  68. by Curt_Anderson on May 15, 2023 10:12 am
    There are 691,682 Trump voters there according to your link. Trump only needed a handful of jurors who were not ardent Trump haters. If the jurors were all prejudiced against Trump, blame Trump’s lawyers.


  69. by Curt_Anderson on May 15, 2023 10:23 am
    The jurors in the sexual assault/defamation trial were unanimous in their decision. Jurors in New York, Civil Court need not be unanimous. Even the juror who admitted that he gets most of his “news” from right wing conspiracy radio decided that Trump is liable.
    ww2.nycourts.gov


  70. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 10:44 am

    Even the friends who claim she told them about it don't remember the effin year it happened.


  71. by Curt_Anderson on May 15, 2023 11:03 am
    So? Despite that omission the jurors unanimously decided against Donald Trump.


  72. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 11:28 am

    "Even the friends who claim she told them about it don't remember the effin year it happened." -Hate

    I can't tell you what day of the week or even month I injured my eye and lost sight in it somewhere around 50 years ago. I can't even be sure what year it was.


    But it's still a fact that it happened.


  73. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 12:21 pm

    po,

    Her story is weak. Period. She can't claim to know the effin year of the attack.

    Does that mean it didn't happen? No.

    But, if she decided to lie about Trump, claiming not to remember a detail that could allow him to provide an alibi is what she'd have to do.


  74. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 12:28 pm

    "Her story is weak. Period." -Hate

    Actually, her story was very strong and extremely persuasive to the jury, who heard a far greater amount of it from her mouth, as you absolutely did not.

    You need to understand that the opinions of one such as yourself who is pretty ignorant of the vast amount of details to the story mean essentially nothing.

    Had you been on that jury, you would have been just as likely to find him responsible for sexually abusing and defaming her as the rest of the jurors did. Because of all the knowledge you would have gained from the trial and the testimonies.


  75. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 12:39 pm

    Here's what I think, po.

    Neither E Jean nor her friends could say what effin YEAR this took place. Trump was, therefore, unable to supply an alibi for the supposed time of the attack. AND, all the reporting I've seen here has come from lib, Trump hating media sources.

    AND, even with all that, pb has never defended Trump. pb's only pointed out the truth that E Jean has a weak story. She does.


  76. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 1:09 pm

    "Neither E Jean nor her friends could say what effin YEAR this took place." -hate

    Irrelevant.

    Civil cases of this sort are commonly decided when the exact date is unknown.


    "Trump was, therefore, unable to supply an alibi for the supposed time of the attack." -Hate

    Irrelevant.

    There was still absolutely nothing stopping him from testifying in person and declaring under oath that the attack never happened.


    "AND, all the reporting I've seen here has come from lib, Trump hating media sources." -Hate

    Irrelevant.

    That's what you call all media sources who report the facts about Trump and don't give him a blowjob along with every bit of coverage of him. Nothing reported by any of the "Lib, trump hating media sources" has been found to be in error anyways.


    You got nothing, Bill.


  77. by Curt_Anderson on May 15, 2023 1:12 pm
    HtS,
    What makes you think that even if Trump did claim he wasn't in town that day that Trump would have a credible alibi* for any particular date decades ago? Like other crime bosses, Trump eschewed written documentation of his activities. You might remember this exchange:


    "What about these notes? Why do you take notes," Trump asked, according to [Don] McGahn. "Lawyers don't take notes. I never had a lawyer who took notes."

    McGahn explained that his notes were not necessarily negative in nature and that he took them because he was a "real lawyer."

    "I've had a lot of great lawyers, like Roy Cohn," Trump replied. "He did not take notes."

    * It goes without saying that the jury would be skeptical if Trump claimed he was nowhere near that department store unless there was evidence, perhaps airline tickets or hotel bills putting him in a different city. Of course he has his own plane and hotels so he probably wouldn't have any receipts to show.
    businessinsider.com


  78. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 1:32 pm

    pb's pointing out that E Jean's story is so weak that she can't tell us what year the attack effin took place...nor can her friends who claim she told them.

    It's weak.


  79. by Curt_Anderson on May 15, 2023 1:36 pm
    Yeah, we know you think that. You've made that argument in Trump's defense about ten times now. Apparently after listening to all the testimony, including Trump's video-taped deposition, the unanimous jury disagreed to the tune of $5 million.


  80. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 1:48 pm

    The jury believed that Trump was lying and Carroll wasn't. They had all the evidence that they felt they needed to come to that conclusion with full confidence.

    We realize that this is all so hard for you to fully comprehend, since you worship and defend the very ground Trump walks on, Bill. We understand.


  81. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 2:30 pm

    A jury of TDS Manhattanites. If this had happened in Omaha or Tulsa, the verdict would have had some credibility. But, bottom line, this will help Trump politically.

    "They're not after me, they're after you. I'm just standing in the way."


  82. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 3:59 pm

    "A jury of TDS Manhattanites." -Hate

    I can see that like olde dude, you have no confidence in the American form of a justice system, Bill. I suppose that the reality of nine random citizens of this country putting their sworn civil duty before any personal political opinions and doing what's right must come as something of a flabbergasting revelation to you. I can understand how it might be difficult for you to believe, given that you apparently wouldn't think twice before letting your politics get in the way of your sworn duty as a juror.

    And you know, I believe that Trump's attorneys had the power to dismiss potential jurors before the trial if they perceived any bias or any possibility thereof. But then I understand that you have so little else to defend Trump with. So whattaya gonna do.



  83. by HatetheSwamp on May 15, 2023 4:55 pm

    I can see that like olde dude, you have no confidence in the American form of a justice system, Bill

    You know d@ng well that, back in the day, in the south, many hundreds of blacks were convicted of crimes they didn't commit...many were executed. Among the woke, Trump is hated as much as any black was by the KKK. Hated by you, as an example.


  84. by Ponderer on May 15, 2023 7:07 pm

    "You know d@ng well that, back in the day, in the south, many hundreds of blacks were convicted of crimes they didn't commit...many were executed." -Hate

    Yeah, I've read history. I've seen documentaries. I've seen To Kill a Mockingbird. But that's the South you're talking about.

    No one thought for a second that those people would ever find Tom Robinson innocent, even though the evidence all made it obvious that he was. Their racism took precedence over their civic duties. In fact, although the idea completely escaped Atticus, I think it was obvious that those police and deputies simply killed Tom Robinson once they were away from town after the trial. I believe the writing strongly insinuated it. He never tried to escape. But he was never going to get to that prison either. I know what the police are like in the South too.

    Bill, it's completely different when you are talking about actual civilization, which can be found a bit North of there. You're saying that because of the worst examples of racist, un-American states' where people shirk their civic duty that you can think of, that any state's population would be just as willing to wipe their asses with their civic duty as Southerners are.

    That's simply wrong. Every state is not a Southern state. You can't judge a huge Northern city by the worst examples of American states that make up the South.

    That's neither open minded nor fair of you, Bill.


  85. by HatetheSwamp on May 16, 2023 3:32 am

    Wow, po. I am acquainted with no one who is more devoted to the values and abuses of the woke mob than are you.

    Clearly, Trump made a strategic decision. He knows that justice is impossible for him in Manhattan. He knows that the injustice purveyed by the woke mob will startle and disturb white suburban voters in purple states. He gets that devoted MAGAs already effin KNOW the truth of 'They're not after me, they're after you...' and that $50-$100 contributions will cover the judgment against him...if it survives appeal.

    So, he let E. Jean have her way with him.

    He'll continue to say things that are true. I don't know this woman...well, you saw the clip from the CNN Trump Infomercial. And, as much as it'll exasperate you, Trump wins the E. Jean skirmish.

    Big time.


  86. by islander on May 16, 2023 4:02 am

    Despite what Trump and Hate want you to believe...“No matter how hard they try to spin themselves as the party of family values. That’s hard to do with a straight face given that the defacto leader of their party has now been branded a sexual abuser.” Jen Paski


  87. by HatetheSwamp on May 17, 2023 4:14 am

    Despite what Trump and Hate want you to believe...“No matter how hard they try to spin themselves as the party of family values. That’s hard to do with a straight face given that the defacto leader of their party has now been branded a sexual abuser.”


    There you go again.

    I haven't, for one keystroke, gotten even close to defending Trump in this. In the aftermath of the CNN Trump Infomercial, I posted here that, based on the clips I saw, I was appalled.

    I think Trump is despicable.

    But, apart from what I think about the Swamp, and unlike you, I don't hate.

    The real life truth?, E Jean's case has holes. I can see that obvious truth without falling in love with Trump. I'm glad I'm not you.

    As I wrote to Curt elsewhere, I watched Megyn Kelly's podcast t'other day. She spoke with Josh Hawley. They discussed at length the deeply disturbing lack of character in Trump.

    The Republican Party is the home of openness and inclusion and tolerance and diversity, acceptance...and, free-effin-thinking. Many join me. We despise Trump.

    Still, as I've been reminding Donna and po for years, this ain't a Christian nation. We don't elect a national pastor. If I eventually do vote for Trump, IF, it will be because the only alternative is a "feckless dementia-ridden piece of crap" who sniffs little girls and lies as much as does Trump.


Go To Top

Comment on: "E Jean Carroll awarded $5 million"

* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page