Moderation Questions

Right. Your opinion is worth so little to everybody here for a reason and not just because of your lack of education and lack of intelligence.

You made that statement, not me.

Well, I mean, those are pretty significant contributing factors.

The CJR article mentions the "largely lilywhite mainstream press..."

Not white, but lilywhite..

Maybe they'll soon post an article about the 'charcoal black press.'

Maybe 'yellow Asian press' is also in the works.

Just being honest and polite makes a big difference imo.

Fools like you say

when it applies to Trump but some dude thinks he is a women and you think its OK

I remember being told that a person who recently immigrated from Kenya and became a citizen wasn't an African-American.

I think you believe what you do on culture war issues because of your lack of intelligence and education. Prove me wrong.

Other people who are intelligent and educated can think the same thing as Lozen.

They wouldn't be.

:shocked:

Now then now then. 😀

Oh of course your smarter than me all you lefties are education wise no question.

It would be ironic if the guy that wrote the above sentence could provide us a detailed or lengthy analysis of what evidence was “weak” or what defense evidence was compelling that leads him to the conclusion the multi-week federal trial verdict was bullshit.

Trump wasn't found guilty of sexual assault. He was found liable for defamation in a civil action for denying Jean Carroll's allegations of sexual assault. The burden of proof is lower in a civil case, of course.

That said, I would be shocked if lozen could defend his characterization of the case as weak. All cases like this come down to credibility. Trump is a lot of things, but a credible witness is not one of those things. He would be the easiest person in the world to cross examine or depose because his initial instinct in every situation is to cast himself in the most favorable light, regardless of the actual facts. In other words, his initial instinct is to lie if necessary, regardless of how implausible or easy to disprove the lie may be.

My guess is that lozen doesn't think someone like Trump would need to assault someone like Jean Carroll in order to obtain sexual gratification. It's the same sort of "look at her" and "she's not my type" argument that Trump would make, and that argument is unpersuasive and problematic for a dozen different reasons. But it probably is compelling to someone like lozen.

He was found liable for defamation and liable for sexual assault

Unsure if liable is legally the same as guilty

That's true. There was also a claim for battery in the second case that she won. The burden of proof is lower in civil court ("preponderance of the evidence" (i.e., more likely than not) as opposed to "beyond a reasonable doubt"), but I stand corrected.

Liable is not the same thing as guilty. The former is mostly a civil term. The latter is strictly a criminal term.

The fact that this case would never go to a criminal trail, it happened 20 years ago , there is no physical or DNA evidence . I agree with Rocco this case comers down to credibility in a civil case and Trump has none. I still find it strange that Trump raped het in a change room in a department store and no witnesses and this lady comes forward 20 years later .

Why are you putting spaces before and after punctuation marks?

Of course there was no criminal trial. The statute of limitations had run.

I hate to break it to you, but sexual assault cases very often come down to credibility determinations, especially in cases where the sexual contact indisputably occurred and the only relevant question is whether the woman consented.

Why do you think it is that Trump has no credibility? The correct answer is because he lies constantly in exactly the way I described.

Didn't she make some pretty bizarre statements during a CNN interview? I don't know a lot about the case but the whole story of being raped in a Macy's dressing room is already pretty outlandish.

Exactly he lies and lies . I also think allowing that Access to Hollywood tape in was a horrible decision

It was Bergdorf Goodman, which is a much, much, much higher end department store than Macy's. The dressing rooms in the former would be much more private than the latter. I never watched any interviews related to her or the case.

I suspect that your real grievance is that the Federal Rules of Evidence 413 and 415 provide, in sexual assault cases, for an exception to the general ban against the admission of "propensity" evidence. The trial judge who issued the ruling is highly respected, and the decision to admit the evidence was upheld on appeal.

I don't know, did she?

idk, it just seems like you ought to familiarize yourself with the basic facts of the case (like where it happened) before deciding you think the rape victim made outlandish statements.