*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 8062
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10340 on: May 06, 2023, 07:58:22 PM »
There are lots of reasons why many women don't immediately report rape or other sexual harassment or abuse, especially when committed by powerful people.

Yes, and one of those reasons is that they are lying headcases who admit in court that they love the tv shows that the powerful people who rape them go on to star in.
Maybe and maybe not.  That's for the jury to decide.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline Dr Van Nostrand

  • *
  • Posts: 1253
  • There may be something to this 'Matrix' stuff...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10341 on: May 06, 2023, 10:34:20 PM »
There are lots of reasons why many women don't immediately report rape or other sexual harassment or abuse, especially when committed by powerful people.

Yes, and one of those reasons is that they are lying headcases who admit in court that they love the tv shows that the powerful people who rape them go on to star in.

Another reason they don't report is because of people like you.

How many women do you know that have been sexually assaulted?
Do you talk to them?
The truth is that statistically, a lot of the women you know have been sexually assaulted. They just don't talk to dicks like you about it and you'll never know what's really going on.

Oh wait, the real question is, "Do you know any women at all?"
Go on, tell us about how all the MAGA women in your life agree with you.

Round Earther patiently looking for a better deal...

9A[akDd->otsiC.PG(k6O_cY@\8dpw&!Jx2+G

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3540
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10342 on: May 07, 2023, 03:54:18 AM »
Well that deposition might change things lol. I don't know what his chances of losing were before but I think they at least went up after that shit show.

Why? What's actually changed? We've known that Trump is a sleazy creep for decades, and even if we take into account the numerous Trump fans who are apparently entirely ignorant of how their idol spent the eighties and nineties, he's still publicly demonstrated what a foul person he is many times over the past several years. If his fans didn't care then, then they won't care now.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4264
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10343 on: May 07, 2023, 12:27:12 PM »
Well that deposition might change things lol. I don't know what his chances of losing were before but I think they at least went up after that shit show.

Why? What's actually changed? We've known that Trump is a sleazy creep for decades, and even if we take into account the numerous Trump fans who are apparently entirely ignorant of how their idol spent the eighties and nineties, he's still publicly demonstrated what a foul person he is many times over the past several years. If his fans didn't care then, then they won't care now.

I mean, it might not. It really doesn't change the fact that Carroll has no actual evidence of rape and no real grounds to claim defamation under the circumstances. It's just that whenever all someone has to do is keep his head down and answer the questions as simply as possible, and instead does... that... he can really only hurt his chances. It's the kind of reminder of how much of a slimeball he really is that we haven't seen in years. It's not a good look. So it might change things. But it might not, and probably shouldn't, because materially nothing has changed; it does nothing to dispel the fact that she's presented nothing notable to support her claim, or the fact that her claim of defamation solely because he denied that he raped her is laughably weak.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline Dr Van Nostrand

  • *
  • Posts: 1253
  • There may be something to this 'Matrix' stuff...
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10344 on: May 07, 2023, 01:19:14 PM »
Well that deposition might change things lol. I don't know what his chances of losing were before but I think they at least went up after that shit show.

Why? What's actually changed? We've known that Trump is a sleazy creep for decades, and even if we take into account the numerous Trump fans who are apparently entirely ignorant of how their idol spent the eighties and nineties, he's still publicly demonstrated what a foul person he is many times over the past several years. If his fans didn't care then, then they won't care now.

I mean, it might not. It really doesn't change the fact that Carroll has no actual evidence of rape and no real grounds to claim defamation under the circumstances. It's just that whenever all someone has to do is keep his head down and answer the questions as simply as possible, and instead does... that... he can really only hurt his chances. It's the kind of reminder of how much of a slimeball he really is that we haven't seen in years. It's not a good look. So it might change things. But it might not, and probably shouldn't, because materially nothing has changed; it does nothing to dispel the fact that she's presented nothing notable to support her claim, or the fact that her claim of defamation solely because he denied that he raped her is laughably weak.

Keep in mind, this is a civil case not a criminal case. The burden of proof is lower. The standard is not "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." It's something like "a preponderance of the evidence" or "clear and convincing evidence."
Round Earther patiently looking for a better deal...

9A[akDd->otsiC.PG(k6O_cY@\8dpw&!Jx2+G

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4264
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10345 on: May 07, 2023, 02:10:53 PM »
Well that deposition might change things lol. I don't know what his chances of losing were before but I think they at least went up after that shit show.

Why? What's actually changed? We've known that Trump is a sleazy creep for decades, and even if we take into account the numerous Trump fans who are apparently entirely ignorant of how their idol spent the eighties and nineties, he's still publicly demonstrated what a foul person he is many times over the past several years. If his fans didn't care then, then they won't care now.

I mean, it might not. It really doesn't change the fact that Carroll has no actual evidence of rape and no real grounds to claim defamation under the circumstances. It's just that whenever all someone has to do is keep his head down and answer the questions as simply as possible, and instead does... that... he can really only hurt his chances. It's the kind of reminder of how much of a slimeball he really is that we haven't seen in years. It's not a good look. So it might change things. But it might not, and probably shouldn't, because materially nothing has changed; it does nothing to dispel the fact that she's presented nothing notable to support her claim, or the fact that her claim of defamation solely because he denied that he raped her is laughably weak.

Keep in mind, this is a civil case not a criminal case. The burden of proof is lower. The standard is not "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." It's something like "a preponderance of the evidence" or "clear and convincing evidence."

I don't think she's presented either. I'm looking forward to seeing what the jury decides.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 8062
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10346 on: May 07, 2023, 02:20:12 PM »
Given Trump's record of not being able to filter what comes out of his mouth, I'd think that defamation would be pretty much a slam dunk.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4264
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10347 on: May 07, 2023, 02:42:43 PM »
Given Trump's record of not being able to filter what comes out of his mouth, I'd think that defamation would be pretty much a slam dunk.

In this case though? All he really did was say that she lied when she said he raped her, and that she's not his type. He's defending himself. I feel like he has a better claim at defamation here than she does, tbh.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8911
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10348 on: May 07, 2023, 05:03:51 PM »
The entire Trump "rape case" is a national embarrassment. An enormous piece of the American pie now has a terminal case of grasping at straws. Some old woman says Trump raped her. That's it. That's all she has. She says it happened. I could say Trump raped me and I would have precisely the same amount of evidence that she has. Then if Trump says "no, I didn't" I can sue him for defaming my very valuable name! I will now sue him!

The sad fact is that people want what this woman says to be true. They don't care how much or how little evidence she has. They just want Trump to have to give her money because it would embarrass him. I would say that people want to be able to call him a rapist, but they'll do that regardless of the outcome of the case. It's making a mockery of the American court system. As Mitch McConnell has warned these sorts of people before: you'll regret this, and you may regret it a lot sooner than you think.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4264
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10349 on: May 07, 2023, 06:06:58 PM »
The entire Trump "rape case" is a national embarrassment. An enormous piece of the American pie now has a terminal case of grasping at straws. Some old woman says Trump raped her. That's it. That's all she has. She says it happened. I could say Trump raped me and I would have precisely the same amount of evidence that she has. Then if Trump says "no, I didn't" I can sue him for defaming my very valuable name! I will now sue him!

The sad fact is that people want what this woman says to be true. They don't care how much or how little evidence she has. They just want Trump to have to give her money because it would embarrass him. I would say that people want to be able to call him a rapist, but they'll do that regardless of the outcome of the case. It's making a mockery of the American court system. As Mitch McConnell has warned these sorts of people before: you'll regret this, and you may regret it a lot sooner than you think.

I mean, to be fair about the idea of people calling him a rapist, he's literally been recorded saying that he's sexually assaulted women. As he repeated in the deposition, it's something that as a rich celebrity he thinks he's entitled to, so it seems like a fair assessment. Other than that, I (shockingly) agree with you.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2023, 06:08:35 PM by Roundy »
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7962
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10350 on: May 07, 2023, 06:18:42 PM »
The entire Trump "rape case" is a national embarrassment. An enormous piece of the American pie now has a terminal case of grasping at straws. Some old woman says Trump raped her. That's it. That's all she has. She says it happened. I could say Trump raped me and I would have precisely the same amount of evidence that she has. Then if Trump says "no, I didn't" I can sue him for defaming my very valuable name! I will now sue him!

The sad fact is that people want what this woman says to be true. They don't care how much or how little evidence she has. They just want Trump to have to give her money because it would embarrass him. I would say that people want to be able to call him a rapist, but they'll do that regardless of the outcome of the case. It's making a mockery of the American court system. As Mitch McConnell has warned these sorts of people before: you'll regret this, and you may regret it a lot sooner than you think.

With Trump, it could be he did or didn't.  But her word alone, especially that she went about her day, doesn't strike me as emotionally damaging.  So I'm not sure it happened.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8911
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10351 on: May 08, 2023, 01:42:30 AM »
I mean, to be fair about the idea of people calling him a rapist, he's literally been recorded saying that he's sexually assaulted women.

If you are referring to the "grab em by the pussy" clip, that's not saying he sexually assaulted women. "They let you do it" can easily be interpreted as consent. Is there some other clip I'm unaware of?

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3540
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10352 on: May 08, 2023, 03:27:34 AM »
Well that deposition might change things lol. I don't know what his chances of losing were before but I think they at least went up after that shit show.

Why? What's actually changed? We've known that Trump is a sleazy creep for decades, and even if we take into account the numerous Trump fans who are apparently entirely ignorant of how their idol spent the eighties and nineties, he's still publicly demonstrated what a foul person he is many times over the past several years. If his fans didn't care then, then they won't care now.

I mean, it might not. It really doesn't change the fact that Carroll has no actual evidence of rape and no real grounds to claim defamation under the circumstances. It's just that whenever all someone has to do is keep his head down and answer the questions as simply as possible, and instead does... that... he can really only hurt his chances. It's the kind of reminder of how much of a slimeball he really is that we haven't seen in years. It's not a good look. So it might change things. But it might not, and probably shouldn't, because materially nothing has changed; it does nothing to dispel the fact that she's presented nothing notable to support her claim, or the fact that her claim of defamation solely because he denied that he raped her is laughably weak.

My bad. For some reason I thought you were talking about his chances of losing the upcoming election rather than this trial. I really have no idea as to which way the trial is likely to be decided, and I can't help but feel apathetic about it due to the fact that it will change absolutely nothing in the current political landscape.

If you are referring to the "grab em by the pussy" clip, that's not saying he sexually assaulted women. "They let you do it" can easily be interpreted as consent. Is there some other clip I'm unaware of?

In the same clip, he also says "I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait," which is more or less describing sexual assault. Now, his infamous "Grab 'em by the pussy" line was immediately preceded by him saying, "When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything." I had a discussion a few years ago with someone here who argued that this was Trump closing the subject of his approaching and kissing women and beginning the entirely new subject of how when someone is a star, women let them do "it" - "it" then being clarified as "Grab 'em by the pussy" - which is all discussed in entirely hypothetical terms, and therefore we shouldn't interpret the "Grab 'em by the pussy" line as being a continuation of the subject of how he approaches and kisses women without asking. There's no way to prove what it was that Trump really meant, but I'm pretty sure that most reasonable people would interpret "Grab 'em by the pussy" to be meant in the same spirit as approaching and kissing women without asking rather than the entirely new subject of how he hypothetically could grope women without their consent, but doesn't.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8911
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10353 on: May 08, 2023, 03:36:11 PM »
If you are referring to the "grab em by the pussy" clip, that's not saying he sexually assaulted women. "They let you do it" can easily be interpreted as consent. Is there some other clip I'm unaware of?

In the same clip, he also says "I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait," which is more or less describing sexual assault. Now, his infamous "Grab 'em by the pussy" line was immediately preceded by him saying, "When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything." I had a discussion a few years ago with someone here who argued that this was Trump closing the subject of his approaching and kissing women and beginning the entirely new subject of how when someone is a star, women let them do "it" - "it" then being clarified as "Grab 'em by the pussy" - which is all discussed in entirely hypothetical terms, and therefore we shouldn't interpret the "Grab 'em by the pussy" line as being a continuation of the subject of how he approaches and kisses women without asking. There's no way to prove what it was that Trump really meant, but I'm pretty sure that most reasonable people would interpret "Grab 'em by the pussy" to be meant in the same spirit as approaching and kissing women without asking rather than the entirely new subject of how he hypothetically could grope women without their consent, but doesn't.

Is this the part where you tell me that every woman you've kissed you literally asked about it first? The way you think about human interaction truly boggles the mind, honk.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2023, 03:39:04 PM by Rushy »

Re: Trump
« Reply #10354 on: May 08, 2023, 11:05:53 PM »
lol tell me you'll be single until the day you die without telling me you'll be single until the day you die
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3540
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10355 on: May 09, 2023, 01:45:00 AM »
If you are referring to the "grab em by the pussy" clip, that's not saying he sexually assaulted women. "They let you do it" can easily be interpreted as consent. Is there some other clip I'm unaware of?

In the same clip, he also says "I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait," which is more or less describing sexual assault. Now, his infamous "Grab 'em by the pussy" line was immediately preceded by him saying, "When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything." I had a discussion a few years ago with someone here who argued that this was Trump closing the subject of his approaching and kissing women and beginning the entirely new subject of how when someone is a star, women let them do "it" - "it" then being clarified as "Grab 'em by the pussy" - which is all discussed in entirely hypothetical terms, and therefore we shouldn't interpret the "Grab 'em by the pussy" line as being a continuation of the subject of how he approaches and kisses women without asking. There's no way to prove what it was that Trump really meant, but I'm pretty sure that most reasonable people would interpret "Grab 'em by the pussy" to be meant in the same spirit as approaching and kissing women without asking rather than the entirely new subject of how he hypothetically could grope women without their consent, but doesn't.

Is this the part where you tell me that every woman you've kissed you literally asked about it first?

This is a very disingenuous reading of what I'm saying, and not at all a reasonable interpretation of what Trump was talking about. If he had been talking about kissing women that it would be seen as generally considered acceptable to kiss without asking, like wives or girlfriends, then there would be no point to him saying this in the first place. Of course you don't need to be a star to kiss your wife or girlfriend without asking. Anyone can do that. Not even Trump would try to brag about something so unremarkable.

It's also worth pointing out that these "Trump didn't actually say anything bad if you pay attention 8)" arguments hit a pretty major snag when you consider that Trump himself already admitted wrongdoing, so to speak, by apologizing for those comments. If he had only ever meant that he kissed his wife without asking or that he could hypothetically grope women without their consent, he would have said so. Trump almost never apologizes even when he is clearly to blame; why in the world would he apologize if he really had done nothing wrong?
« Last Edit: May 09, 2023, 03:12:20 PM by honk »
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10842
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10356 on: May 09, 2023, 07:24:02 PM »
There are lots of reasons why many women don't immediately report rape or other sexual harassment or abuse, especially when committed by powerful people.

Yes, and one of those reasons is that they are lying headcases who admit in court that they love the tv shows that the powerful people who rape them go on to star in.
Maybe and maybe not.  That's for the jury to decide.

Looks like the jury has decided:


*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6709
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10357 on: May 09, 2023, 07:29:26 PM »
They certainly have!

“Donald Trump sexually abused and defamed writer E Jean Carroll, a New York jury finds in civil case

The jury awarded the writer almost $5m in damages for the battery and defamation charges”
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10842
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10358 on: May 09, 2023, 07:36:16 PM »
So the jury rejects the claim about being raped, but the jury thinks Trump sexually abused her in a different way that was not claimed? How does that work?

This is a win for Trump. This secondary verdict will be appealed and squashed then that will be it for this case.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6709
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10359 on: May 09, 2023, 07:41:04 PM »
This is a win for Trump.
lol

Only you could attempt to paint it that way.
Well, not only you. The other Trump cult members will obviously agree.
Doesn’t really feel like a big win but whatever makes you feel warm and fuzzy
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"