Trump: Judge Lewis Kaplan (Jean Carroll case) is "highly corrupt"

13,259 Views | 216 Replies | Last: 7 mo ago by richardag
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
At a campaign rally in Rome, Georgia, Trump said:
Quote:

Lewis Kaplan, the judge in the Carroll defamation cases, is "a terrible person, a terrible judge" and "highly corrupt."
Reported in Newsweek

So, now he is defaming a federal judge.

This guy just CANNOT stop stepping on his own johnson.
texagbeliever
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You are right, this case was totally above board. Thank you for bringing this compelling argument to F16. /rollseyes
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's some in-depth analysis right there.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He can say anything he wants about the guy, since the ruling is out. It's amazing so many people don't comprehend the 1st amendment, let alone that truth is an absolute defense to a charge of defamation.

The Seinfeld skit video introduction really took the mask off the charade, imho. His wife's posts and absurd gym pictures only added to the hilarity.
Bonfire.1996
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Is the judge corrupt?
TexAgs91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Antoninus said:

At a campaign rally in Rome, Georgia, Trump said:
Quote:

Lewis Kaplan, the judge in the Carroll defamation cases, is "a terrible person, a terrible judge" and "highly corrupt."

"Freedom is never more than one election away from extinction"
Fight! Fight! Fight!
aggiehawg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
nortex97 said:

He can say anything he wants about the guy, since the ruling is out. It's amazing so many people don't comprehend the 1st amendment, let alone that truth is an absolute defense to a charge of defamation.

The Seinfeld skit video introduction really took the mask off the charade, imho. His wife's posts and absurd gym pictures only added to the hilarity.
Wrong judge. The gym weirdo is Engeron.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Bonfire.1996 said:

Is the judge corrupt?


Bonfire.1996
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If the judge has donated to democrats, any democrats, since 2016, the fungibility of money says that the judge has donated money to impeach Donald Trump in 2019 and 2021, and to defeat him in 2024.

So the probability of the judge being at the very least compromised in impartiality, and potentially corrupt.

These dumbasses never stop to think if Trump is right.
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nortex97 said:

The Seinfeld skit video introduction really took the mask off the charade, imho. His wife's posts and absurd gym pictures only added to the hilarity.
HOLY CRAP.

You don't even know which case we are discussing ... or which judge.

But don't let that stop you. Please carry on.
Bonfire.1996
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Antoninus said:


I am saying that this is NOT a privileged statement and that a claim of corruption in a public official is a serious charge, for which Trump may now be facing STILL MORE civil liability.
unless the judge is actually corrupt
Bonfire.1996
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And realize a corrupt judge is one who professes impartiality while their monetary actions suggest otherwise.
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bonfire.1996 said:

Antoninus said:


I am saying that this is NOT a privileged statement and that a claim of corruption in a public official is a serious charge, for which Trump may now be facing STILL MORE civil liability.
unless the judge is actually corrupt
Yes, truth is a defense in a defamation action, and the burden of proof on that defense will fall upon Trump.

Exactly what evidence have YOU seen that Federal District Judge Lewis Kaplan is "corrupt," other than the fact that you don't like his rulings?

The law has very specific definitions of "corruption" related to bribery, graft and conflict of interest. In VERY broad terms, a government official is "corrupt" if he asks, demands, solicits, accepts, or agrees to receive anything of value in return for being influenced in the performance of his official duties.

Whatcha got?
Not Coach Jimbo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tds is a helluva drug...

Tell us more about this authoritarian state you are so proud of... pretty awesome that you can railroad your political opponents, and when they complain you get to railroad them some more.

Pretty soon you'll have them just doing a dime for breathing funny because it sounded like a threat to your democracy.

Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JImbo, are you yelling at clouds again?

None of that post relates in any way to Trump publicly making defamatory statements about a federal judge.
Hungry Ojos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I really wish that the right would pull a "E. Jean Carroll" back on Biden. He raped Tara Reade a long time ago but no one cared because he was a Democrat, but wouldn't it be great if some southern jurisdiction passed a law to set aside limitations, then have some hometown jury, like in Vidor, Texas scheme to lawfare him to the tune of $350 million? Wouldn't that be interesting. And I bet everything I have that the board's liberals would have a completely different take than the bird-chest puffing they've been doing to Trump. What's good for the goose…
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Antoninus said:

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

That's some in-depth analysis right there.
Yes, it did assume a certain level of knowledge and intelligence. My bad.

The Carroll case is over in the trial court. I am not saying that Kaplan can or will retaliate against him in court in that case.

I am saying that this is NOT a privileged statement and that a claim of corruption in a public official is a serious charge, for which Trump may now be facing STILL MORE civil liability.
So, all the people that have claimed that TRUMP was corrupt could face civil liability? He was public official, too.
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It would depend on what rules there were for evidence admission and testimony and what directions were provided to a jury, but the corruption is more on the prosecution side than the judge in this case, plus a highly biased jury pool.

The actual defamation now is all the media and commentators claiming the trial result was essentially a criminal rape conviction when it was a finding in a civil case that the preponderance of the evidence supported a claim of damages from sexual assault or something of that sort. Not even close to the same thing.
BMX Bandit
How long do you want to ignore this user?
saying someone is "corrupt" without more is likely a colloquial hyperbole opinion that isn't going to rise to being defamatory.

kaplan is never going to sue trump, so we will never find out
Not Coach Jimbo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ag with kids said:

Antoninus said:

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

That's some in-depth analysis right there.
Yes, it did assume a certain level of knowledge and intelligence. My bad.

The Carroll case is over in the trial court. I am not saying that Kaplan can or will retaliate against him in court in that case.

I am saying that this is NOT a privileged statement and that a claim of corruption in a public official is a serious charge, for which Trump may now be facing STILL MORE civil liability.
So, all the people that have claimed that TRUMP was corrupt could face civil liability? He was public official, too.


No, only it's (D)ifferent I'm that situation.
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hungry Ojos said:

I really wish that the right would pull a "E. Jean Carroll" back on Biden. He raped Tara Reade a long time ago but no one cared because he was a Democrat, but wouldn't it be great if some southern jurisdiction passed a law to set aside limitations, then have some hometown jury, like in Vidor, Texas scheme to lawfare him to the tune of $350 million?
That would be a bit difficult, since he does not reside in Vidor and the alleged assault did not occur in Vidor.

The suit would have to be filed in DC (locus of the alleged assault) or Delaware (his residence).
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not Coach Jimbo said:

Ag with kids said:

Antoninus said:

Some Junkie Cosmonaut said:

That's some in-depth analysis right there.
Yes, it did assume a certain level of knowledge and intelligence. My bad.

The Carroll case is over in the trial court. I am not saying that Kaplan can or will retaliate against him in court in that case.

I am saying that this is NOT a privileged statement and that a claim of corruption in a public official is a serious charge, for which Trump may now be facing STILL MORE civil liability.
So, all the people that have claimed that TRUMP was corrupt could face civil liability? He was public official, too.


No, only it's (D)ifferent I'm that situation.
Well, I'm quite sure that Trump has been accused of a lot of the following:

Quote:

The law has very specific definitions of "corruption" related to bribery, graft and conflict of interest. In VERY broad terms, a government official is "corrupt" if he asks, demands, solicits, accepts, or agrees to receive anything of value in return for being influenced in the performance of his official duties.

So, I guess he should start suing about 81 million people...
Hungry Ojos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Antoninus said:

Hungry Ojos said:

I really wish that the right would pull a "E. Jean Carroll" back on Biden. He raped Tara Reade a long time ago but no one cared because he was a Democrat, but wouldn't it be great if some southern jurisdiction passed a law to set aside limitations, then have some hometown jury, like in Vidor, Texas scheme to lawfare him to the tune of $350 million?
That would be a bit difficult, since he does not reside in Vidor and the alleged assault did not occur in Vidor.

The suit would have to be filed in DC (locus of the alleged assault) or Delaware (his residence).


lol, just make it up like Carroll did.
HTownAg98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BMX Bandit said:

saying someone is "corrupt" without more is likely a colloquial hyperbole opinion that isn't going to rise to being defamatory.

kaplan is never going to sue trump, so we will never find out
All this. Although, I thought I heard where he possibly defamed Carroll yet again.
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BMX Bandit said:

saying someone is "corrupt" without more is likely a colloquial hyperbole opinion that isn't going to rise to being defamatory.
I am not sure about that. "Public corruption" is a criminal offense, so Trump is accusing Kaplan of committing a felony.
Quote:

kaplan is never going to sue trump, so we will never find out
Almost certainly true, and it likely would not do any good anyway. A judgment for almost half a billion dollars (including interest) didn't shut him up. I doubt a judgment for a few million in favor or Kaplan would do so.
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HTownAg98 said:

BMX Bandit said:

saying someone is "corrupt" without more is likely a colloquial hyperbole opinion that isn't going to rise to being defamatory.

kaplan is never going to sue trump, so we will never find out
All this. Although, I thought I heard where he possibly defamed Carroll yet again.
He did. In the same speech, at the same rally.
Funky Winkerbean
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Newsweek?

annie88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
He's 100% correct.

Glad he said it.

Federal or no, these judges on these cases have been vindictive Liberals or loons.

That case was pure fabrication and bull**** without any proof.

How anyone has a problem with this is beyond me.
Currently a happy listless vessel and deplorable. #FDEMS TRUMP 2024.
Fight Fight Fight.
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Funky Winkerbean said:

Newsweek?
WTF difference does that make? Do you contend that he did not say it?
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Antoninus said:

nortex97 said:

The Seinfeld skit video introduction really took the mask off the charade, imho. His wife's posts and absurd gym pictures only added to the hilarity.
HOLY CRAP.

You don't even know which case we are discussing ... or which judge.

But don't let that stop you. Please carry on.
Oh well so sorry to get the wrong communist show trial sham bull**** mixed up. You got me.

Perhaps for hack 'judge' Kaplan he was referring to this complaint as to his corruption:

Quote:

NEW YORKSeptember 1, 2020Dozens of legal organizations around the world representing more than 500,000 lawyers along with over 200 individual lawyers today submitted a judicial complaint documenting a series of shocking violations of the judicial code of conduct by United States Judge Lewis A. Kaplan targeting human rights lawyer Steven Donziger after he helped Indigenous peoples win a historic judgment against Chevron in Ecuador to clean up the pollution caused by decades of oil drilling with no environmental controls.

The complaint was formally filed by the National Lawyers Guild in conjunction with the International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL). IADL was founded in Paris in 1946 to fight to uphold the rule of law around the world and has consultative status with UN agencies.

Five pages in length with a 40-page appendix with 15 exhibits, the complaint is to be turned over to the chief judge in the federal appellate court in New York that oversees the trial court where Kaplan sits. The complaint is signed by an unprecedented number of legal organizations from approximately 80 countries collectively representing 500,000 lawyers.

The Chief Judge of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Robert Katzmann, has a duty to read the complaint and determine whether he will appoint a committee to investigate and issue findings.
The complaint could result in a censure of Kaplan or even his removal from the bench.

"We wrote this judicial complaint after studying the record in this case and coming to the conclusion that Judge Kaplan has been acting as a de facto lawyer for Chevron in this litigation. He has shown a shocking pattern of escalating efforts to harm Mr. Donziger for his advocacy of the rights of indigenous people in Ecuador spanning a 10-year period," said Jeanne Mirer, the President of the IADL. "The violations constitute a clear breach of the norms set out in the judicial canon of ethics that govern the behavior of judges in the United States. We believe the complaint demands urgent investigation by Judge Katzmann to stop this pattern of abuse and to prevent a highly regarded human rights lawyer from being unjustly convicted."

The complaint documents what its authors say is a pattern of ethics violations committed by Judge Kaplan, a former tobacco industry lawyer. Kaplan denied Donziger a jury, put in place a series of highly unusual courtroom tactics, severely restricted Donziger's ability to mount a defense, and through his had picked judge to try him for criminal contempt has had him detained him at home for more than one year on contempt charges that were rejected by the U.S. Attorney, and allowed him to be prosecuted by a private law firm that has Chevron as a client. He also imposed enormous fines on Donziger without a jury finding that have all but bankrupted him.
But yeah, because he wears a black robe at work we should never allow public discourse as to his plausible/documented/obvious/in-your-face history of corruption. He's not political at all.

Clown world.
Antoninus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bonfire.1996 said:

If the judge has donated to democrats, any democrats, since 2016, the fungibility of money says that the judge has donated money to impeach Donald Trump in 2019 and 2021, and to defeat him in 2024.
An entirely new cause of action in Anglo-American jurisprudence ... "vicarious corruption."
Funky Winkerbean
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Antoninus said:

Funky Winkerbean said:

Newsweek?
WTF difference does that make? Do you contend that he did not say it?


I'm calling you out for reading that tripe. And no, I have no doubt he said it and I also believe he's right. The case stinks to high heaven and only people like you think otherwise.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Antoninus said:

BMX Bandit said:

saying someone is "corrupt" without more is likely a colloquial hyperbole opinion that isn't going to rise to being defamatory.
I am not sure about that. "Public corruption" is a criminal offense, so Trump is accusing Kaplan of committing a felony.
Quote:

kaplan is never going to sue trump, so we will never find out
Almost certainly true, and it likely would not do any good anyway. A judgment for almost half a billion dollars (including interest) didn't shut him up. I doubt a judgment for a few million in favor or Kaplan would do so.
Since "public corruption" is a criminal offense, and someone accusing a public official of committing a felony could rise to being defamatory in your view, isn't this defamatory:

Since his first day as president, when Trump took the wholly unprecedented step of refusing to divest1 from his private businesses, his administration has been characterized by an unending effort by him, his family, and his senior advisers to abuse their political power for personal gain.

Looks to me like the Center for American Progress accused Trump of public corruption. So, do you think that he has a case to sue for defamation?
93MarineHorn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes, she is a liar and corrupt. The judge is at best incompetent for allowing the trial to move forward when the "victim" can't remember the year that it happened. It's impossible to provide a defense when no date of the "crime" was provided and there were no witnesses. Yes, the plaintiff and judge seem corrupt.
Gigem314
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Oh noes Trump said somethin' mean!! Alert the media!! Put him behind bars!!
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.