Yep. Totally normal behavior from a sexual assault survivor.

Everybody knows they're never allowed to smile, joke, or laugh ever again.

Those women are sick.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Those women are sick.

---

"women"

are you sure?

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Laughing and giggling about going on a shopping spree with Trump's money. Totally acceptable behavior for a traumatized rape victim. Totally.


https://www.foxnews.com/media/e-jean-carroll-gleefully-invites-maddow-shopping-spree-with-trumps-83-million

---

Seems odd...but then I've not had any experience with a traumatized rape victim...so I wouldn't presume to know.

What behavior would we deem acceptable from a rape victim?

BluHorseShu said:

---

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Laughing and giggling about going on a shopping spree with Trump's money. Totally acceptable behavior for a traumatized rape victim. Totally.


https://www.foxnews.com/media/e-jean-carroll-gleefully-invites-maddow-shopping-spree-with-trumps-83-million

---

Seems odd...but then I've not had any experience with a traumatized rape victim...so I wouldn't presume to know.

What behavior would we deem acceptable from a rape victim?

---

Remember, this 'victim' said they think rape is sexy.

Maybe whatever dress she buys, she'll remember when it was made before she accuses someone of rape while wearing it 2 years before it exists.

SRCag18 said:

---

Seems like this would have been an easy claim to disprove, no? Something that a defense attorney could've poked holes in, or perhaps used as means to get the trial dismissed?

Maybe you... don't know more than the jury or the judge does in regards to this case?

But I get it. They're all partisan left-leaning nuts, and the truth doesn't matter to them, so long as Trump is hurt, so that's the narrative we'll roll with, and not that Trump was found civilly liable for rape.

We've gone beyond not believing the repeated claims of Carroll and multiple other women in regards to Trump, to just not caring about the claims at all, which is 10x worse.

---

Trump doesn't have to "disprove" anything. A case has to be made that proves him guilty, not the other way around.

When the accuser doesn't remember the month or year it happened and claims to have had clothing that didn't exist, that destroys the case before it exists. There is absolutely nothing credible about saying, "I remember getting raped by him.... don't remember when. And I was wearing clothing that didn't exist at the time."

Why should I believe this is true by default when there are so many lies built into that claim? "You didn't call out my lies!" is..... certainly a take.

Ags77 said:

---

She is supposed to be upset, depressed, sad about being awarded 83 million bucks ? LOL.

---

While I don't agree with THAT straw man argument you're attacking, it certainly does give the optics that she did this for money... Something that Trump was sued for claiming she did.

Aggies2009 said:

---

SRCag18 said:

---

Seems like this would have been an easy claim to disprove, no? Something that a defense attorney could've poked holes in, or perhaps used as means to get the trial dismissed?

Maybe you... don't know more than the jury or the judge does in regards to this case?

But I get it. They're all partisan left-leaning nuts, and the truth doesn't matter to them, so long as Trump is hurt, so that's the narrative we'll roll with, and not that Trump was found civilly liable for rape.

We've gone beyond not believing the repeated claims of Carroll and multiple other women in regards to Trump, to just not caring about the claims at all, which is 10x worse.

---

Trump doesn't have to "disprove" anything. A case has to be made that proves him guilty, not the other way around.

When the accuser doesn't remember the month or year it happened and claims to have had clothing that didn't exist, that destroys the case before it exists. There is absolutely nothing credible about saying, "I remember getting raped by him.... don't remember when. And I was wearing clothing that didn't exist at the time."

Why should I believe this is true by default when there are so many lies built into that claim?

---

Not to mention, her claim was the exact plot of a Law & Order episode. The preponderance of evidence actually goes against the accuser in this case. Even the jury didn't believe she was raped, but they found in her favor in the slander case anyway. So yes, it's reasonable to say they were all partisan left-leaning nuts, and the truth doesn't matter to them.

Ag98inTexas said:

---

Aggies2009 said:

---

SRCag18 said:

---

Seems like this would have been an easy claim to disprove, no? Something that a defense attorney could've poked holes in, or perhaps used as means to get the trial dismissed?

Maybe you... don't know more than the jury or the judge does in regards to this case?

But I get it. They're all partisan left-leaning nuts, and the truth doesn't matter to them, so long as Trump is hurt, so that's the narrative we'll roll with, and not that Trump was found civilly liable for rape.

We've gone beyond not believing the repeated claims of Carroll and multiple other women in regards to Trump, to just not caring about the claims at all, which is 10x worse.

---

Trump doesn't have to "disprove" anything. A case has to be made that proves him guilty, not the other way around.

When the accuser doesn't remember the month or year it happened and claims to have had clothing that didn't exist, that destroys the case before it exists. There is absolutely nothing credible about saying, "I remember getting raped by him.... don't remember when. And I was wearing clothing that didn't exist at the time."

Why should I believe this is true by default when there are so many lies built into that claim?

---

Not to mention, her claim was the exact plot of a Law & Order episode. The preponderance of evidence actually goes against the accuser in this case. Even the jury didn't believe she was raped, but they found in her favor in the slander case anyway. So yes, it's reasonable to say they were all partisan left-leaning nuts, and the truth doesn't matter to them.

---

I love how they obnoxiously try to gaslight us, claiming our thoughts are nothing but conspiracy theories. You'd think after the last 5 years of "conspiracy theory" after "conspiracy theory" being 100% true, they'd have abandoned that strategy. But oh well, I'm here for it.

Antoninus said:

---

Hungry Ojos said:

---

Laughing and giggling about going on a shopping spree with Trump's money. Totally acceptable behavior for a traumatized rape victim. Totally.

---

FFS, it was 30 years ago, even if it happened. She should still be hiding at home behind sackcloth curtains?

---

It was 30 years ago.

Interesting that these women only come forward 30 years after the fact and when it is politically expedient to do so-

ie Kavanagh and Trump.

And then the accused are instructed that they must prove they did not commit rape...ya know 30 years after the fact.

SRCag18 said:

---

Then he should have no issue winning on appeals, right?

Just gotta fork over that $83.3 million into court escrow so he can appeal.

And he definitely has that much money (after all, Mar-a-Lago is worth like one billion), so there's no issue there. This should all be cleared up soon, I'm sure.

---

You have shown numerous times throughout this thread that your knowledge of the legal process is...limited. May want to stop now before you embarrass yourself anymore.

And what is an accused to do when the accuser presents literally ZERO evidence of their 30 year old claim, is inconsistent in literally ALL of her facts and a jury still returns an 83 million dollar award simply because they personally don't like the accused? I certainly hope that if you or your family members are ever accused of something similar, that you are afforded legitimate due process as you are entitled to.

Because Trump received none. But keep celebrating this Marxist sham. It says a lot about your character.

SRCag18 said:

---

Seems like this would have been an easy claim to disprove, no?

---

I thought people were innocent until proven guilty. A woman who has no idea when something happened doesn't give you much to go on to disprove it, does she?

This absolutely never happened, just to be clear. Just like Ballsy-Ford was never assaulted by Kavanaugh.

Ags77 said:

---

How could anyone think Trump would grab this lady by the p#$@% ?

Yall act like there was a tape out there where he said he could just go up to women and kiss them and grab them by the p@#$% or something . Yall act like he had said you could get away with it if your famous. Good grief.

---

What does that tape have to do with this case? Stop trolling.