2024 GOP Primary

Not true. Jury made no determination on that.

They made no determination that he raped her, so they didn't find that he put his junk in her. They did find that he "sexually abused" her, meaning he forcibly put his fingers in her. If you think that makes a difference imagine someone doing it to your wife or daughter. I doubt you'd be in a big hurry to make that guy President.
 
Illinois Elections Board Votes to Keep Trump on the Ballot

Illinois Elections Board (1/2 Dem; 1/2 GOP) votes unanimously to keep Trump on the ballot.

"The Illinois State Board of Elections voted to include former President Donald Trump on the state’s primary ballot following a recommendation from the board’s general counsel to dismiss the case.

The board is a bipartisan one made of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats, who voted unanimously to dismiss the challenge."

“If we exceeded our authority ... and looked at the underlying of conduct ... I think what we would see would be an opening of floodgates of litigation,” he said. For example, every school board candidate could then challenge their rivals over alleged criminal conduct and require election boards to investigate."


“The relief that petitioners are seeking is one of ballot forfeiture” and they had not met that threshold, he added.
 
Mr D
Do You think Trump did that?

I think her case is a joke on the evidence, but would I bet the house on his innocence? Well, he was a notorious philanderer who banged porn actresses and bragged about grabbing women by their genitals. A lot of people aren't going to make that bet, and of course, most people are never going to look at the evidence as we have. They're going to hear about the verdict, compare it with the Billy Bush tape, and presume guilt.

Let's put it this way. If you're having to expend time and resources on stuff like this, you're losing.
 
Last edited:
I think her case is a joke on the evidence, but would I bet the house on his innocence? Well, he was a notorious philanderer who banged porn actresses and bragged about grabbing women by their genitals. A lot of people aren't going to make that bet, and of course, most people are never going to look at the evidence as we have. They're going to hear about the verdict, compare it with the Billy Bush tape, and presume guilt.

Let's put it this way. If you're having to expend time and resources on stuff like this, you're losing.
I don't believe he did no wrong, but E. Jean Carroll's case does not even rise to the preponderance of credible evidence standard if one looks at the case without political bias.

And, simply put, I don't believe her.
 
I don't believe he did no wrong, but E. Jean Carroll's case does not even rise to the preponderance of credible evidence standard if one looks at the case without political bias.

And, simply put, I don't believe her.

I've seen much, much stronger personal injury cases thrown out by the Texas Supreme Court on "no evidence" grounds. It is very weak, but I've actually looked at the evidence in the Carroll case to know this as I'm sure you have. Your average voter hasn't and won't. Furthermore, the media will never even raise the evidentiary issue or the fact that Trump presented very little of a defense (which was dumb). All your typical voter will hear is that a jury found him liable for sexual abuse.

And again, we didn't have to deal with this problem. But we chose to because of boots, eating pudding by fingers, or something.
 
The fact that the "rape" mirrors a Law and Order (one of Carroll's favorite shows) episode with the exact same details (same store, dressing room) is mind boggling to how this is allowed to happen.
 
The fact that the "rape" mirrors a Law and Order (one of Carroll's favorite shows) episode with the exact same details (same store, dressing room) is mind boggling to how this is allowed to happen.

Obviously you can't disallow cases just because a TV show had a similar fact pattern. If you could, it would basically give dudes (even those who don't wear makeup and dresses) carte blanche to rape women in that store. But I do get your point, and like I said earlier, I think her case is ******** and laughably weak.

But I think Trump supporters have a bit of a blind spot - not because they think he's innocent but because they think others will have the same information as they do and will therefore judge the case the same way. Housewives in suburban Atlanta, Philadelphia, Phoenix, and Detroit aren't going to follow news sources that give Trump a fair shake on the matter by providing any kind of context. Right now, they're reading raunchy books for their book clubs and watching The View or some other show for stupid people, and starting in August, they'll start watching CNN or one of the big 3 networks for election information. You know how they'll spin the issue, and of course, the border, crime, inflation, etc. will get virtually no coverage or talk at all.
 
The Hispanics that came through legally want nothing to do with the illegals or those who are helping them. This is Cuellar's problem and the reason he tries to side with the Repubs. when this issue comes up. That is good, but then he is solid lib on all other issues which is a backdoor try at keeping his job.

I know Henry. My father taught him in college. He's not trying to side with anyone. He is his own man and when the chips are added up, he's a Democrat, but he's a Catholic and understands the border is out of control. He is a proud Latino but he's not a racist/fanatic in the sense that they can do no wrong.
 
Bill Bellicek, most successful coach in the history of the NFL is looking for a job, mostly because people wonder if he is too old at 71. Truly brilliant people sometimes carry terrific mental acuity into their 80s. Unfortunately..we ain't choosing between men with intellectual or moral excellence to lead the free world.
 
Maybe not but what are the odds of it being the exact same store (Bergdorf) and in a dressing room? That is just too much of an astronomical coincidence.

I could dismiss that coincidence if there was verifiable and clearly independent evidence - surveillance video, police report of the incident, etc. Instead she really had nothing but her own testimony and the testimony of 2 friends (one of whom is a retired journalist and almost surely a Trump hater) who claimed Carroll told them about the rape.
 
I could dismiss that coincidence if there was verifiable and clearly independent evidence - surveillance video, police report of the incident, etc. Instead she really had nothing but her own testimony and the testimony of 2 friends (one of whom is a retired journalist and almost surely a Trump hater) who claimed Carroll told them about the rape.

Btw, you know the store even in the 90's had surveillance video. Was it destroyed because of time? If not there should be a video of the incident.
 
Btw, you know the store even in the 90's had surveillance video. Was it destroyed because of time? If not there should be a video of the incident.

That actually doesn't shock me too much. When authorities aren't contacted and nothing is reported to staff, stores don't typically keep surveillance video around indefinitely. And for obvious reasons, they don't typically put them in dressing rooms. If they did, I'm sure you'd be in a thriving second career as a security camera monitor. Lol
 
That actually doesn't shock me too much. When authorities aren't contacted and nothing is reported to staff, stores don't typically keep surveillance video around indefinitely. And for obvious reasons, they don't typically put them in dressing rooms. If they did, I'm sure you'd be in a thriving second career as a security camera monitor. Lol
She was obviously asking for it by taking off her clothes. Come on man!
 
That actually doesn't shock me too much. When authorities aren't contacted and nothing is reported to staff, stores don't typically keep surveillance video around indefinitely. And for obvious reasons, they don't typically put them in dressing rooms. If they did, I'm sure you'd be in a thriving second career as a security camera monitor. Lol

I wouldn't take the job because I know I would get myself into too much trouble.
 
Last edited:

"The White House wants to replace Kamala..."

Who the **** is "The White House"? Those are the people/cockroaches infesting our government who long ago should have been exposed to the sanitizing light of publicity, extremely hard questions, and legal liability for all the fuckuppery in which they have engaged over the past several decades.
 
The only way Joe Biden is re-elected is if the Republicans completely screw up the nomination process. Likewise the only way Trump ever regains the White House is if the Democrats nominate someone unpalatable and apparently inept. I feel like a man watching two 80 mph trains on the same track heading towards one another. Everybody knows a train wreck is a bad idea, but the momentum makes it inevitable.
 
^^^And cheat their sorry asses off, just like they did in 2020. That is also how they beat Trump. It's really the only way because liberalism and any democrat candidate are both diseases. Anyone thinking otherwise is really not a serious person, to quote a former slugging poster.
 
Il
^^^And cheat their sorry asses off, just like they did in 2020. That is also how they beat Trump. It's really the only way because liberalism and any democrat candidate are both diseases. Anyone thinking otherwise is really not a serious person, to quote a former slugging poster.
Not gonna argue with passionate posters unencumbered by logic.
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC

Recent Threads

Back
Top