"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
ISO Billionaire Wife please, thank you...
Obviously this will get tossed on appeal. It will take years and probably make its way to the Supreme Court. What a joke, the NYC jury deliberated for 3 hours and made the $83M judgement all because he denied the charges and called her a whack job.
Only thing that stings is he has to post the $83M and put it in escrow. But I believe its interest bearing. This is just going to prove his theory the Dems are out to get him in the judicial system.
If Trump wins it will be payback when the judicial system starts investigating everyone close to Biden.
Originally Posted by tgull
imagine thinking that this verdict will actually hold up on appeal, or that Trump would ever write this woman a check for 83 million come on tine you’re better than that
they’ll almost definitely be some kind of payout, but certainly not 83 million
I doubt any payout on this case, this really comes down to 1st amendment, someone can deny their accuser all they want and there is nothing illegal calling someone a whackjob. Either way, everything I have just read is it will likely make its way to the Supreme Court and Trump's second term will be done by then. Excellent chance this old lady gets nothing, she is about to be 81 and looks like she is 90.they’ll almost definitely be some kind of payout, but certainly not 83 million
Oh coolI doubt any payout on this case, this really comes down to 1st amendment, someone can deny their accuser all they want and there is nothing illegal calling someone a whackjob. Either way, everything I have just read is it will likely make its way to the Supreme Court and Trump's second term will be done by then. Excellent chance this old lady gets nothing, she is about to be 81 and looks like she is 90.
PokerFraudAlert...will never censor your claims, even if they're against one of our sponsors. In addition to providing you an open forum report fraud within the poker community, we will also analyze your claims with a clear head an unbiased point of view. And, of course, the accused will always have the floor to defend themselves.-Dan Druff
I don't ever want o feel like I did that day....I doubt any payout on this case, this really comes down to 1st amendment, someone can deny their accuser all they want and there is nothing illegal calling someone a whackjob. Either way, everything I have just read is it will likely make its way to the Supreme Court and Trump's second term will be done by then. Excellent chance this old lady gets nothing, she is about to be 81 and looks like she is 90.
Yeah O' Yeah it's hard to believe that i'm all alone...
I can sing and beautifully
Lol that PFA Team Retard thinks the Supreme Court is going to take up a run of the mill defamation case. You guys are fucking clueless. Trump will get the judgment reduced on appeal though.
First they give a summary judgement, which is insane to the point of actual judicial misconduct, then this. It's literally awarding 90 million overall for a rape fan fiction story that supposedly occurred in a dressing room somewhere in a two year window she cannot be sure of. All sponsored by a Democrat mega donor. This story was initially put out just in time for the 2020 election and her book deal.
There's another element that is not mentioned basically at all with this nonsense - she too claimed in 2019 that one of the most influential people in the history of television sexually assaulted her in an elevator (sometime in the late 90s by her totally truthful statements), Les Moonves. This, much like the Trump situation, was as he was being hung out to dry by the media/metoo'd.
So let's get this straight, a homely woman who would have been at least 52 at the time of the alleged Trump encounter and several years older at the time of alleged Moonves encounter, was sexually assaulted by two of the most prominent men in America in public - one of whom is still likely banging pornstars and Eastern European prostitutes but would have been at least 27 years younger at the time?
Story checks out.
For anyone thinking it's OK for this type of weaponization and politicization of our judicial system to continue because it is happening to someone you despise - this time - just know you are on the wrong side of history that has potential to get very ugly in the coming years because of these types of actions.
Last edited by VaughnP; 01-26-2024 at 06:55 PM.
I bet you 1 milliom dollars that you do not know
1 Milliom!
you don't have a million
It's interesting she came forward shortly after Trump refused to start war w Iran.
Who's the judge?
So Reid Hoffman bankrolled the lawsuit, he's one shady mf'er and an extremely dangerous threat to democracy.
He thinks he should make all the political decisions and and the public should be manipulated to follow.
The timing screams blackmail.
So I guess Bill Clinton's victims are moving forward with similar lawsuits? Nope just Trump.
Idk how liberals can go along w this. From the mid 90's, fuck that bitch.
So Trump raped her in dept store dressing room. That's so brazen there should be way more victims, think Weinstein/Cosby.
Habba knocked it outta the park with this decision. $5M jumps to $88M total. Might have earned herself a shot to be Mrs. trump the 4th. Proven ability to overcome gag reflex when entering the trump miasma.
The reason all workers deserve a living wage is because all workers need to be alive. Not very complex.
Question for the attorneys here:
I am aware of the law surrounding "litigation privilege", which protects people from defamation claims related to litigation to which they're involved.
For example, if someone were to sue me for $10,000 claiming that they loaned me money and I didn't pay it back, and I was asked by Pokernews to comment on the matter, they could not successfully sue me for defamation for calling that person a liar. This would be the case even if it were eventually found in court that I DID owe the $10,000, and that I knew it all along.
Basically litigation privilege exists so people are allowed to comment on matters of legal dispute (both within the courtroom and outside of it), without fearing that they could possibly trigger a defamation case on top of everything else.
I know that California has litigation privilege, as does New York, where this Trump trial occurred.
So how is Trump liable for defamation for calling these allegations a "hoax", and for making other derogatory statements about E. Jean Carroll, related to her legal actions against him? I realize that some of these occurred after the first trial, but doesn't NY recognize litigation privilege even after the case is concluded?
If Trump were to have gone after her and spread unrelated rumors about her to get her back (say, if he claimed that he heard she had sex with the entire NY Knicks team in the 1970s), then I could understand a defamation suit against him. But it seemed his comments were 100% related to the case itself and her motivation for bringing the case against him -- all of which I would assume would be covered by litigation privilege.
Can someone give a little more clarity here?
I know that Trump's attorneys made this exact argument last year, but somehow it didn't hold up. I actually thought of litigation privilege before I even saw that Trump's attorneys had made that argument.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
