Originally posted by Bashar TegIf they're moronic enough to still give him money at this point, it's their own fault.
not sure if i mind that he's taking all their money and immediately pissing it all away
Though what he's doing became illegal after Nov 2022, once he officialy stated he's running again. Not that that will stop him from using the money for personal expenses.
"Ivanka Trump, the daughter of former President Donald Trump, and her husband Jared Kushner have been subpoenaed by special counsel Jack Smith, ABC News has learned.
The subpoena for the couple is specifically related to the special counsel's probe of Jan. 6 and the activities leading up to that day by the former president and his allies regarding efforts to overturn the 2020 election, sources told ABC News." -snip
🙂
Tell the truth and incriminate "daddy", or lie and incriminate herself. Choices, choices.
Jury says Trump must pay E. Jean Carroll $5 million for sexual abuse and defamation
-A federal jury in New York found former President Donald Trump liable for sexually abusing and forcibly touching E. Jean Carroll in the 1990s.
-Trump was also found liable for defaming the writer last fall when he accused her of making up that account.
-The jury awarded Carroll $5 million in compensatory and punitive damages.
-Carroll, 79, alleged in a lawsuit that Trump raped her in a dressing room of the Bergdorf Goodman department store in the mid-1990s. -snip
Donald Trump found guilty of rape.
Trump won't lose a single voter over this, especially his Evangelical base, they didn't care in 2016, they won't care now.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Not rape, just sexual abuse.And a civil case so only a huge fine, but no jail time (which Ive never understood).
For that Trump would have gotten 10 days community service and a 25 dollar ticket in the UK, judging by how they handle full on rapes;
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/uk-man-raped-13-old-180144413.html
Originally posted by cdtm
For that Trump would have gotten 10 days community service and a 25 dollar ticket in the UK, judging by how they handle full on rapes;https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/uk-man-raped-13-old-180144413.html
I mean I dont understand making a civil case out of a criminal one. Makes me not trust the accuser if im being honest. Though I get that was the only option at this point due to statute of limitations.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Not rape, just sexual abuse.And a civil case so only a huge fine, but no jail time (which Ive never understood).
"Sexual abuse" is just a sugar coated form of rape.
Could be that too much time went by, statute of limitation, or she felt it would have been near impossible and possibly years of her life in taking him to criminal court.
Either way, Trump is a convicted sexual offender, the head of the Republican party and current most likely presidential Republican candidate 🙂
Originally posted by Darth ThorIt doesn't need to be one over the other. They're just completely different things.
I mean I dont understand making a civil case out of a criminal one. Makes me not trust the accuser if im being honest. Though I get that was the only option at this point due to statute of limitations.
In a criminal case, the alleged victim isn't actually a party to the proceeding, merely a witness. The parties in the criminal proceeding are the accused and the state. So it could not proceed merely as a matter of prosecutorial discretion. From the victim's perspective, they basically get no control over how it unfolds, still get subject to cross examination, and the case has to meet the much higher bar of beyond a reasonable doubt - which is notoriously hard to do in rape cases. And then, even if successful, the "justice" is not in a form that compensates them for their harm.
OJ was found not guilty in criminal court, but liable for 30 million in civil court. You don't have to choose, but if you did have to choose, wouldn't you (as a victim) prefer civil justice?
Originally posted by Smurphdo you mean prefer in terms of increased chances of victory for the plaintiff or prefer in terms of putting a price on something some might consider priceless?
It doesn't need to be one over the other. They're just completely different things.In a criminal case, the alleged victim isn't actually a party to the proceeding, merely a witness. The parties in the criminal proceeding are the accused and the state. So it could not proceed merely as a matter of prosecutorial discretion. From the victim's perspective, they basically get no control over how it unfolds, still get subject to cross examination, and the case has to meet the much higher bar of beyond a reasonable doubt - which is notoriously hard to do in rape cases. And then, even if successful, the "justice" is not in a form that compensates them for their harm.
OJ was found not guilty in criminal court, but liable for 30 million in civil court. You don't have to choose, but if you did have to choose, wouldn't you (as a victim) prefer civil justice?