Please answer if the following factual statement is either TRUE Or FALSE:
CJKent_band
The truth hurts, but if you accept it, it will set you free
“Mr. Trump acted maliciously, out of hatred, ill will, or spite, vindictively, or in wanton, reckless, or willful disregard of Ms. Carroll's rights…”
Again, I am asking you to please keep it 100%, because you don’t have to “explain your answer”.l, and your answer will not affect your grades.
Again, I am asking you to please keep it 100%, because you don’t have to “explain your answer”.l, and your answer will not affect your grades.
16 comments
Just Answer The God Damn Question!
isn't this something a prosecuting attorney would say about someone who decided to act out what was seen from one of the editions of grand theft auto or the remake of i spit on your grave?
FYI the Factual Statement is part of questions 2 and 3 in the VERDICT FORM of the Carroll VS Trump case and I quote:
“2. In making the June 21, 2019 statement, Mr. Trump acted maliciously, out of hatred, ill will, or spite, vindictively, or in wanton, reckless, or willful disregard of Ms. Carroll's rights?”
“3. In making the June 22, 2019 statement, Mr. Trump acted maliciously, out of hatred, ill will, or spite, vindictively, or in wanton, reckless, or willful disregard of Ms. Carroll’s rights?”
The Pics of the Verdict Form are here; so it did happen…
Carroll VS Trump Verdict Form 1 Of 2
https://tuscl.net/photo/13718
Carroll VS Trump Verdict Form 2 Of 2
https://tuscl.net/photo/13719
:D
1. Cannot remember the year the assault happened..
2. Cannot accurately describe the location of the assault
3. the entire lawsuit was financed by Reid Hoffman (Dem megadonor)
4. The dress she claimed she was wearing was not created for another 6 years..
5. Described APPRENTICE (tv show) as among her favorite (generally rape victims tend to not want anything to do with rapist)
6. changed her story multiple times on exam and cross exam
7. did not tell a single person about the alleged incident
8. and other holes in her story - including filing the lawsuit within minutes of the State of NY special law being passed
yea, in any law-abiding country and rule of law country; I am firmly against the DOJ from being weaponized against political opponents. I don't care if that is Frumpy Trumpy or Hunter Biden.
Caroll told a bunch people, and those people testified in the trial. The people she told at the time included a good friend (who warned her not to come forward for fear of Trump's retribution) and her psychiatrist (who testified that Caroll squirmed during retelling of the event). Gah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Jean_Ca…
You can read more at the link above or if you're so inclined, can read the actual depositions and testimony from the trial itself on a site like casetext. Either way, wherever you're getting your information about the case from isn't telling you the truth.
To CJ's original question: TRUE. I'm embarrassed to say I once voted for this guy. Never again.
no worries, WIKI is the most unreliable corner of the internet - easily edited with or without source. the page was probably created by a donor of her's and maintained by that person as owner - therefore that single person has full editorial power.
best to do your own searches on the internet - find sources that are trustworthy.
Not here to argue with you - but i can provide sources for all statements above. I am independent and find it pointless to argue with the 'bases' of each party.
Political bases dont win elections (and this is what most americans' have forgotten), it is the candidate that wins the majority of 'independents' that win elections