658
submitted 8 months ago by DevCat@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

District Judge Lewis Kaplan has said it multiple times: Donald Trump raped E. Jean Carroll in 1996. Kaplan wrote it in May 2023, when he presided over one of the trials against Trump. And he reminded jurors of the rape this week, during the latest proceedings in the multi-layered, winding rape and defamation cases brought against Trump by Carroll.

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 169 points 8 months ago

Did she call him the rapist Donald J Trump? The same Donald Trump who raped E Jean Carroll? The woman who was raped by Donald Trump? The same rapist who also raped his wife? The same rapist Donald J Trump who described sexually assaulting woman on a radio show? The same rapist who spied on nude underage girls at his pageant? Because Donald Trump is a rapist as a matter of legal fact.

[-] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 87 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

A rapist who is not only sickeningly still walking free, but is the frontrunner for the Nazi party.

I'd say that it's a new low for the Nazi party, but we all know it's not.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago

I'd say that it's a new low for the Nazi party, but we all know it's not.

I mean, that has more to do with how low the bar has been set. Trump has been digging diligently for decades, but the bar is halfway through the planet’s mantle.

[-] badbrainstorm@lemmy.today 6 points 8 months ago

Mantle, lol Everybody knows the Nazis fled to hollow earth at Antarctic...

[-] Rookwood@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The thing is, when you allow the single opposing party in our system to run against a literal Nazi party, no one wins. Except the wealthy of course.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 106 points 8 months ago

Trump and his lawyers have been really pissing off both the judge and the jury with how unseriously they're treating the proceedings. They're gonna take two hours (an absurdly short time for a jury) and write a check for $15mil, I bet.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 65 points 8 months ago

Trump will never pay anyone. They're going to have to garnish his pension from being president.

[-] TheOneWithTheHair@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I am not a lawyer, but according to this site: https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/bankruptcy/bankruptcy-basics/will-filing-for-bankruptcy-stop-a-civil-lawsuit.html

"Bankruptcy will stop almost all civil litigation matters except for family court cases involving domestic support obligations, at least temporarily."

He's looking at about 400 mill from the New York Fraud trial.

This is civil litigation. He's going to pull the Rudy G. maneuver.

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago

It wouldn’t even be the first time he’s had to declare bankruptcy. For the ultra wealthy, bankruptcy doesn’t mean you’re financially ruined; It just means the bank has a bad day when they find out you aren’t repaying them.

There’s an old saying along the lines of “If you owe the bank $100k and can’t repay it, you have a big problem. If you owe the bank $100M and can’t pay it back, the bank has a big problem.”

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 13 points 8 months ago

Bankruptcy doesn't mean you don't have to pay the debts, it means the court is given control of your finances and decides who gets paid from it if you don't have enough to pay everyone. Declaring bankruptcy would result in his accounts being wiped out.

[-] Klear@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago

Not the one in Moscow.

[-] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago

pissing off both the judge and the jury

There’s still one other role for him to piss off if he wants to go for the trifecta.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 9 points 8 months ago

Not in a civil trial, unfortunately.

[-] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

I know. I’m just keeping score at home and looking to be able to say “That’s a bingo!”

[-] Riccosuave@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I think they are likely to return an award for punitive damages that is closer to $150 million.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 3 points 8 months ago

How did you come up with that number?

[-] Riccosuave@lemmy.world 26 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

A few factors:

  • Carroll's attorney Robbie Kaplan made it a point to strategically and repeatedly use Trump's claims of being a multi-billionaire against him, including in his opening statement where he asked the jury to return punitive damages that would be sure to stop further defamation based on his self-attested net worth.

  • After seeing the amount that the jury returned in the Ruby and Shay Moss case against Rudy Giuliani I think that it is reasonable to expect this jury to weigh that in their deliberations, and return a similar or even greater amount in this case due to the actual finding of rape.

  • Everybody wants to be king for a day, and jury's historically punish the fuck out of their peers when they feel they are being disrespectful towards the victim, the court, or the jury itself. In this case I would expect them to throw the book at Trump to make a statement about the power of the jury system in the United States.

I am confident in saying that the award for punitive damages in this case will be far greater than most are expecting. I wouldn't be surprised if it was even more than $150 million. You can come back here and tell me I'm a moron if I got this totally wrong, but I don't think I do.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Considering Alex Jones' judgment was $1 billion (not that he's even pretended to pay any of it), I think caps are off the table.

[-] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I'll put the under-over at 250M

Not even counting that he's acting like a spoiled cunt during the proceedings, in full display to the jury

So more like $400M

[-] Maeve@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

The jury is free to return so much more (or less, heaven forbid!) than sought.

[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 31 points 8 months ago

So when is somebody going to sentence this shit weasel?

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 8 months ago

Rape has a statute of limitations. Even if he came forward and said flat out that he raped her, he can’t be charged criminally for it. He can be charged civilly though, which is why he keeps claiming it never happened.

[-] sandwichfiend@c0tt0n.world 24 points 8 months ago

You yanks and your rapey presidents

@DevCat @politics

[-] Rookwood@lemmy.world 32 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Don't forget our rapey Supreme Court Justices that serve for life and take bribes with no consequence!

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

You Brits and your rapey royals. At least our rapists aren't just parasitic figureheads, I guess.

[-] cashews_best_nut@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

"Brits"? He's the most Australian Aussie I think I've ever seen.

[-] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 8 months ago

If they don't want to be called Brits then they should stop being part of the British Commonwealth, duh

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

He rapes and he saves, but he rapes more than he saves.

[-] GilgameshCatBeard@lemmy.ca 5 points 8 months ago

So has reality.

[-] rabiddolphin@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

Is this the best our country can do? Two dinosaurs who act inappropriately around women and children?

[-] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 38 points 8 months ago

I think you are (intentionally?) confusing the large gap and missing the nuance between raping, potentially even worse things as we’ve recently got more proof of, and acting goofy and awkward with greetings or whatever. Both can be described inappropriate, sure, but you have to realize there’s a long way between rape, pedophilia, and awkward greetings with kisses to forehead or whatever.

[-] rabiddolphin@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

He assaulted Tara Reid and you call it a kiss on the forehead? Your blue hat must be full of mercury. You're sick

[-] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 24 points 8 months ago

I’m sick? Blue hat?

At this point it’s clear you’re just intentionally being provocative and contrarian.

If you had a specific case to point out, such as that one, you could have just done that, instead of whatever the fuck this is.

I still don’t know the case you are referring to, which could have been a great moment to educate and inform others, instead you spent the opportunity attacking and calling me sick, for what? You boggle me. Makes no sense.

[-] evatronic@lemm.ee 23 points 8 months ago

They're talking about the lying sack of traitorous shit, Tara Reade, who has a hard time telling the truth about ANYTHING, oh, and defected to Russia when things got spicy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden_sexual_assault_allegation

[-] sandwichfiend@c0tt0n.world 3 points 8 months ago

@evatronic @orgrinrt You yanks and your perverted presidents

[-] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 2 points 8 months ago

believe women

[-] HandBreadedTools@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago
this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2024
658 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3064 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS