DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Jury finds against Trump in E Jean Carroll Trail

Certainly not my hero. He was found liable. Some people can't handle that isn't being found guilty.

Let me knowwhn he is required to be on the sex offenders list.

Exactly.

In other words the Jury thought he was guilty.

In other words - the court found him liable because the jury believed him guilty of that of which he was accused.

Still defending him lol….Awwwww that’s sweet, You don’t need you worry your little head he’ll make the list eventually. Besides trump doesn’t need to be on a list. We all know what he is. He’s even admitted, he has the power and can do what he wants to women. Liable = Guilty in a civil case and now he must pay the consequences. 5mil. Guilty guilty guilty. The sex predator must pay the lady he assaulted = liable = Guilty. Potato …pootato. Pay the fine and shut up.

But they did not FIND him guilty like you said. Had they found him guilty he they would have assigned a level and he would go on the sex offenders register. Thinking he is guilty is not the same as finding him guilty, which was your original statement and it is still incorrect.

However, you wish to look at it the results are he has to pay up.

What is important is that the results of the trial again prove the absence of character.

Just like when he was impeached twice. The fact the Senate was spineless does not change he was impeached.

trump U was a fraud. He paid up.

He is under an indictment now. He will be indicted for the document theft. He will be indicted in Ga. for trying to coerce officials to throw the election with fake electors.

He will be indicted for Jan 6th. For Jan 6th he should be exiled from after being tried for treason.

Liable is the negative outcome for the defendant in a civil case. Guilty is the negative outcome in a criminal case. They are not the same thing and produce different results.

Are you talking about my original post in this thread or the first statement in my last comment?

If you need to go back to my first comment in this thread - WHICH I HAVE ALREADY CLARIFIED - then you are one sad little poster with a need to be "right" instead of have a conversation and are here trolling simply to argue.

I am talking about the whole thread. My response seems to have sparked the whole debate where people keep trying to spin he was found guilty.

You do realize I am not the only one in this? Everyone that can't accept he was found liable and not guilty must be sat too right? Nice of you to mention it that way. I really expect nothing less from you though.

You are trolling. Just look at what you've written, endlessly.

I don't know who all is still talking - but I do know most of the comments I have seen - just like mine since the moment you first commented - have said he was not "found guilty" and that it is not a guilty verdict. However you keep spinning comments and trying so hard to fight about this ... when people make comments about what the Jury decided and thought: which is they decided he did what he was accused of, which is - in every day vernacular - the exact same thing as saying the jury thought he was guilty.

It is only YOU that wants to try and bur the difference between what posters are saying regarding what the jury said and thought (Yes - he did it) and what the court ruling/verdict actually is (libel).

Perfect example is your last response to me. I haven't called it a guilty verdict since you corrected me with your first post. But here we are 20+ comments between us, and in order to try and fight you have to reference my very first post ignoring everything since.

He's trolling??

35-40 posts arguing with him over something most of us learned in grade school?

You all are just whiney because Frank doesn't roll over when the bullies run onto the playground.

This argument is, was, and will always be summed up best right here:

If this was Ben Rothlisberger we were talking about no one would be argueing the semantics of the word guilty.
Just sayin.

What was he found guilty of?

By found guilty I mean what court returned a verdict of guilty against him?

Most comments have been this "yeah, he's liable so he's guilty" like those are one and the same.

Sure..spin it all you like. You did the old "well technically but" spin. It's like people can't possibly wrap their minds around the idea he's not actually guilty of something. I know you've been dying for the day you can stand in the street and bang pots over it, but this was not it.

Trolling is now repeating fact that is not part of the zeitgeist of the blind hate here.

Nothing. That wasn’t the point.
The point is if Ben was found ‘liable’ for being the rapey creep in this case, we’d all be calling him guilty. But it’s not a common enemy so semantic battles occur.

I’m out. Ben is a rapey creep. So is donny. In my mind, they’re both guilty. Call it what you want. I’m not getting dragged into this back and forth any further.
I came to make a point. I did. I’m out.

They certainly found him to be guilty. Just not in criminal court. If they didn't find he was guilty, why did they assign he pay her millions of dollars? What finding did they reach in order to award her that money? It was stated plainly on the jury form why they did so.


There is no criminal penalty in a civil trial. The jury does however decide what a defendant did as to the grounds of what the payment should be. Saying he did it means they concluded he was guilty of doing it. Just like they did here.

Nah, they just hand out millions of dollars in settlements for things they haven't concluded the defendant is guilty of, right?

You keep resting on the verdict and not the findings which the verdict was predicated on. And you know it. Their findings were that he is guilty. That's the very reason he was found libel and it says so on the jury forms which shows what their finding were.

You keep missing words have meanings. You don't get to reassign those to suit you. The finding is when the jury returns the verdict to the judge or when a judge makes decides the outcome. Therefore, and read this slow like, the finding was he was liable. The finding was not he was guilty.

Their findings is what they base the verdict on. Yes, words do have meaning. A jury listens to the evidence to come to a resolution as to who is credible. Those are the findings of facts they use with which to reach a verdict. since you like this source so much......

In a jury trial: the jury is the fact finder that decides what really happened in the case at hand. In a bench trial: the judge is the fact finder that decides what really happened. In an official investigation: an agent or committee may be appointed to determine the facts.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fact_finder

You are just picking nits

I won't say I lie it so much, but it is useful.

Interesting you posted a link to something not really in question.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/verdict

.

There finding was he is liable. Not that he was guilty. That was not on the table here. This is irrespective of whether he did something or not. He was responsible for it. So they found him liable.

Ironically you, in your condescending tone, explained it to me like you came up with it then when I pointed out that had been what I said you pivoted. But you can't possibly be here to fight, you are just saving the bots.

No, in their finding of the facts they stated he did in fact commit sexual abuse against Ms. Carrol. Based on those findings they reached the verdict that he was libel and gave her a hefty settlement of 2 million dollars based on that fact.

I'm trying to save you but I fear you are beyond help. Anyone can plainly see that a verdict is determined on the finding of the facts.

The said she "proved through a preponderance of evidence he committed sexual assault" They did not say he was "guilty" of sexual assualt. Can you guess why? Because they did not find him guilty. See how simple that is? It is plain and simple.

So he did it but he's not guilty of it? Yeah, seeing through that is pretty easy.

so, Trump is libel for defaming the woman.

What's the freakin idiot do? Goes on a nationally televised town hall (more like one of his rallies) and defames her again.

This guy is an idiot.

Hey Peen, there are 26 other women out there saying he did the same to them, they however decided NOT to come after him then or now. And don't forget , Trump said he can do those things because he's a STAR.

The only one chirping around here are those, like you, who can't stop defending a dumb ass like Trump.

Correct. Glad you finally get it.

This thread is proof that we need to bring back schoolhouse rock.

You are a REALLY bad loser. Everything you said is wrong... What I quoted is most especially wrong.

I'm starting to actually feel sorry for you.

Here's a clue... Whether they found him libel or not. It doesn't change what I think of Trump and it doesn't change who he is. It doesn't make me happy or sad. It is what it is.

Only one person spinning here. That would be you.

Take care and good luck with whatever is going on in your life that's making you so unstable.

Aww, you feel sorry for me? At least I'm not some sanctimonious...

Just for fun- lets compare who's involved, what they did, and their support bases- our QB, Watson and Trump- one a successful QB, one a FORMER President of US and billionaire?- Watson likes massages and "might" have exposed himself, Trump - he's got lots of women claiming sexual rape, assault, brags about grabbing them by the P word- both are found guilty by law, support bases- Watson vilified by general public- he stated he always honored women- Trump is adored by millions, on national TV abuses his victim again AND brags he can do anything- he's a star....WOW, only in America- where are the REAL leaders- how do millions follow the idiot. At least Watson was forced to get some help, Trump, he keeps on giving.

But you absolutely are.

The good ol "I know you what am I"

Can you sink lower than that?

Did you consider yourself "sad" since you seem to not be able to let this go?

Yet here you are not letting it go. lmao

I wasn't the one that called someone sad for not letting it go.

Okay.

I said i feel sorry for you. And i do. In order to carry on arguing, you had to ignore about a dozen of my posts and talk about my very first post. Its like when you had to write one more post in order to tell me you'd let me have the last word 🤣. Seriously.... Ignore a days worth of posts and conversation and randomly go back to my first comment which I'd already acknowledged was inaccurate. Smh.

What ive said in my posts - after my first post, which you commented on and correctEd me - has been correct and yet you've tried to needle and troll continuously. You also started the passive aggressive insults. But its all good because thats very much expected.

So me answering other people is needling and trolling you? You really are kidding right? Tell me you think the world revolves around you without saying you think the world revolves around you.

Losing is tough. ……Boo hooo

What did I lose? Did you convince yourself that me being right is me losing?

Totally wacko I tell ya.

Yep, but of course the trump brigade will skip out again.