China Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 8 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said: That will be an attempt to get a mistrial. Trump and his lawyers have already been instructed by Judge Kaplan what topics are off limits. Guaranteed he will stray out of bounds and then the judge will have to instruct the jury to disregard, or remove them entirely while he chastises Trump and his lawyers. If he's allowed to go too far it can be seen as tainting the jury and then there can be a motion for a mistrial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 Trump Takes Stand in Civil Case After a Delay of Days Former President Donald J. Trump took the stand in his own defense on Thursday in the civil trial for E. Jean Carroll’s defamation lawsuit against him. Mr. Trump headed to the witness box after the judge in the case, Lewis A. Kaplan, quizzed Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, about what the former president would say — an effort to ensure he did not stay beyond the scope of the case at hand. She moved quickly, asking him if he stood by his remarks. “100 percent, yes,” Mr. Trump said. “She said something I considered a false accusation.” That last statement was stricken by the judge. Asked if he intended to hurt Ms. Carroll, he said no. “I just wanted to defend myself, my family and frankly, the presidency,” Mr. Trump said. The defense quickly rested. Click on the link for the full article 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Trump's sentence should have stopped after "myself". That's all he really cares about. The rest is pandering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmirOfShmo Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 1 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 So Kaplan cites the legal precedent of "No do-overs." I'm always fascinated by arcane legal jargon. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 1 minute ago, Dan T. said: So Kaplan cites the legal precedent of "No do-overs." I'm always fascinated by arcane legal jargon. Which is odd, because I thought that's what an appeal was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 (edited) 22 minutes ago, China said: Which is odd, because I thought that's what an appeal was. I'm thinking that the "by disappointed litigants" part is the important part of that statement. Retrials aren't granted based on the defendant being disappointed in the outcome. Edited January 25 by Califan007 The Constipated 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 40 minutes ago, China said: Which is odd, because I thought that's what an appeal was. Isn't this trial for new (additional) civil damages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Was Trump cross-examined? If not, why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 22 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said: Isn't this trial for new (additional) civil damages? Yes, but that doesn't mean there can't be an appeal on the amount of damages, if Trump is "disappointed" in the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 24 minutes ago, Dan T. said: Was Trump cross-examined? If not, why not? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmirOfShmo Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 37 minutes ago, Dan T. said: Was Trump cross-examined? If not, why not? Yes. Pretty sure he was asked "Did you attend the first trial?" and he said "No" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25 Author Share Posted January 25 So the other day he posted 44 times in an hour abour Carroll, and he apparently threw another fit posting 37 times over two hours late last night. 'Obsessive' Trump posted about E. Jean Carroll 37 times in 2 hours in late-night meltdown Donald Trump spent two hours overnight posting smears and denials against author E. Jean Carroll ahead of his possible testimony in a defamation trial. The second defamation trial involving Carroll will resume Thursday following a three-day delay due to a juror's illness, and panelists on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" noted that Trump had made 37 late-night posts about Carroll before he possibly takes the stand. Click on the link for the full article Truly a very stable genius. Are we taking bets on how soon after this second trial ends that he gets sued again for his continued defamation? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmirOfShmo Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Brave. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ball Security Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 When discussing punitive damages, Carroll’s lawyer reminds the jury that Trump said Mar-a-Largo is worth $1.5B. 🤣 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 $12 mil + $100 mil sounds about right to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) Verdict is in, waiting for specifics: 1. Did he defame? Y $7.3 m $11 m reputation repair 2. Did Trump act with malice? YY to both dates $65 m punitive damages $83.3m. Total Has to post bond to appeal like with the $5 million judgment. Edited January 26 by LadySkinsFan 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Tee hee 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 26 Author Share Posted January 26 That didn't take long. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ball Security Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Dig into those pockets, MAGA. No need to have two kidneys when you can sell one. 1 1 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Hahahahaha you orange pos 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 26 Author Share Posted January 26 4 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now