Troll Posted March 9, 2023 Report Share Posted March 9, 2023 4 hours ago, DBP66 said: wow...you did some homework here...you went all the way back to July of last year...nice work!!...🤡 Is that how long you were a ... Posted 6 hours ago On 7/21/2022 at 10:41 PM, DBP66 said: Jan. 6 committee shows video of Sen. Hawley running down hall of Capitol during siege Dylan Stableford and Christopher Wilson Thu, July 21, 2022 at 9:38 PM On Jan. 6, 2021, before a violent mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., was photographed with his fist raised in solidarity with the pro-Trump protesters who had gathered outside the security gates. During the House select committee’s primetime hearing on Thursday night, the panel showed surveillance video of Hawley running down the hall inside the Capitol as the rioters stormed the building. Laughter could be heard in the hearing room as the committee showed footage of Hawley running. He was also shown briskly walking down steps with other lawmakers as they were evacuated shortly after the joint session of Congress had been convened to certify Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 presidential election. An image of Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., showing support for pro-Trump protesters on Jan. 6, 2021. (Getty Images) Surveillance camera footage of Hawley running down a hall inside the Capitol on Jan. 6. (House TV) Hours later, Hawley was one of eight Republican senators to vote in favor of overturning the results in Pennsylvania and one of seven senators who voted to overturn the results in Arizona. Counting members of the House, 147 total Republican legislators voted against certification, perpetuating Trump’s false conspiracy theory that the election was stolen from him, one now shared by a majority of Republicans. Hawley was criticized for his actions on Jan. 6 from both sides of the aisle, including being disowned by his mentor, former Missouri Sen. John Danforth, who called supporting Hawley “the biggest mistake I’ve ever made.” Hawley stood by his actions and pulled in a massive fundraising haul for his efforts. “I will never apologize for giving voice to the millions of Missourians and Americans who have concerns about the integrity of our elections,” Hawley said in a Jan. 7, 2021, statement. “That’s my job, and I will keep doing it.” Expand LOL 🤡 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 9, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2023 34 minutes ago, Troll said: Is that how long you were a ... Posted 6 hours ago On 7/21/2022 at 10:41 PM, DBP66 said: Jan. 6 committee shows video of Sen. Hawley running down hall of Capitol during siege Dylan Stableford and Christopher Wilson Thu, July 21, 2022 at 9:38 PM On Jan. 6, 2021, before a violent mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., was photographed with his fist raised in solidarity with the pro-Trump protesters who had gathered outside the security gates. During the House select committee’s primetime hearing on Thursday night, the panel showed surveillance video of Hawley running down the hall inside the Capitol as the rioters stormed the building. Laughter could be heard in the hearing room as the committee showed footage of Hawley running. He was also shown briskly walking down steps with other lawmakers as they were evacuated shortly after the joint session of Congress had been convened to certify Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 presidential election. An image of Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., showing support for pro-Trump protesters on Jan. 6, 2021. (Getty Images) Surveillance camera footage of Hawley running down a hall inside the Capitol on Jan. 6. (House TV) Hours later, Hawley was one of eight Republican senators to vote in favor of overturning the results in Pennsylvania and one of seven senators who voted to overturn the results in Arizona. Counting members of the House, 147 total Republican legislators voted against certification, perpetuating Trump’s false conspiracy theory that the election was stolen from him, one now shared by a majority of Republicans. Hawley was criticized for his actions on Jan. 6 from both sides of the aisle, including being disowned by his mentor, former Missouri Sen. John Danforth, who called supporting Hawley “the biggest mistake I’ve ever made.” Hawley stood by his actions and pulled in a massive fundraising haul for his efforts. “I will never apologize for giving voice to the millions of Missourians and Americans who have concerns about the integrity of our elections,” Hawley said in a Jan. 7, 2021, statement. “That’s my job, and I will keep doing it.” Expand LOL 🤡 what's your point here??...he wasn't actually running that day??...he wasn't scared of the mob??...🤡 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted March 9, 2023 Report Share Posted March 9, 2023 33 minutes ago, DBP66 said: what's your point here??...he wasn't actually running that day??...he wasn't scared of the mob??...🤡 sticking to your narrative, when proven the sucker 🍭??? LOLOL 🤡 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 9 more boxes of classified docs found in Boston. The boxes were moved before the FBI searched the Biden Penn Center. Let that sink in. If this was Trump DP would be about 3 pages deep by now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 53 minutes ago, Warrior said: 9 more boxes of classified docs found in Boston. The boxes were moved before the FBI searched the Biden Penn Center. Let that sink in. If this was Trump DP would be about 3 pages deep by now. you know that Trump lied about having files when they knew he had them...they begged him for over a year to turn them over...then he had his lawyer attest all files were turned over last June...which was 100% B.S...he lied again..apples and oranges once again...nice try...🙄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 Manhattan DA invites Trump to testify in grand jury probe of Stormy Daniels payoff: Sources AARON KATERSKY and JOHN SANTUCCI Thu, March 9, 2023 at 7:12 PM EST The Manhattan district attorney's office has informed former President Donald Trump of his right to testify before a grand jury investigating his role in a payment to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election, sources familiar with the matter tell ABC News. In New York, potential targets of investigations are, by law, given the chance to appear before the grand jury hearing evidence. MORE: Kellyanne Conway meets with Manhattan prosecutors investigating Trump So-called "cross notice" was given to Trump in recent days, the sources said, and could be a sign that District Attorney Alvin Bragg is moving toward a charging decision. News of the development was first reported by The New York Times. "The Manhattan District Attorney's threat to indict President Trump is simply insane," a Trump spokesperson said in a statement. "President Trump was the victim of extortion then, just as he is now. It's an embarrassment to the Democrat prosecutors, and it's an embarrassment to New York City." PHOTO: Former President Donald Trump speaks to reporters before his speech at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Mar. 4, 2023, in National Harbor, Md. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) In recent weeks ABC News has reported on the witnesses who have appeared before the grand jury, including former Trump associates Kellyanne Conway, Hope Hicks and Michael Cohen. The district attorney has been probing whether Trump falsified business records in connection with a $130,000 payment made to Daniels before the 2016 election, which prosecutors allege was to keep her from talking about a long-denied affair, sources familiar with the matter have told ABC News. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 2 hours ago, DBP66 said: you know that Trump lied about having files when they knew he had them...they begged him for over a year to turn them over...then he had his lawyer attest all files were turned over last June...which was 100% B.S...he lied again..apples and oranges once again...nice try...🙄 You’re an easy mark. His attorney’s were in contact and working through the process openly. This was a setup and you bought it. We don’t have two parties anymore. Figure it out at some point. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 17 minutes ago, Warrior said: You’re an easy mark. His attorney’s were in contact and working through the process openly. This was a setup and you bought it. We don’t have two parties anymore. Figure it out at some point. you forgot his attorney lied.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 6 hours ago, DBP66 said: you forgot his attorney lied.... All 3? They all said the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/03/01/fbi-dispute-trump-mar-a-lago-raid/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Warrior said: All 3? They all said the same thing. one attorney wrote the lie and another sucker attorney signed off on it....and she's in big trouble...for....lying....imagine that!...apples and oranges....🙄 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 His past is coming back to haunt him...love it....😉 Report: Manhattan prosecutors signal criminal charges likely for Trump 2.4k Catherine Garcia, Night editor Thu, March 9, 2023 at 6:45 PM EST Donald Trump. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images Attorneys for former President Donald Trump have been told that Trump can testify before a Manhattan grand jury next week, four people familiar with the matter told The New York Times. The grand jury has been hearing evidence regarding Trump's role in making hush money payments to Stormy Daniels, a porn star who said she had an affair with him in 2006. This offer to testify is a strong sign an indictment is close, as potential defendants in New York have the right to testify before a grand jury prior to being indicted, and it's rare for a district attorney to notify a potential defendant without going on to seek charges, the Times reports. Most potential defendants choose not to appear before the grand jury. Trump's former attorney and fixer, Michael Cohen, paid Daniels $130,000 shortly before the 2016 presidential election, and was later reimbursed by Trump. Prosecutors in Manhattan began investigating the matter in 2018, and Cohen, who pleaded guilty to federal campaign finance charges for his role in the hush money payments, has spoken with them and is expected to testify before the grand jury. If Trump does become the first former American president to be indicted, "convicting him or sending him to prison will be challenging," the Times says, because the case would be based on "an untested and therefore risky legal theory" of combining the criminal charge falsifying business records with a violation of state election law; prosecutors would argue that the $130,000 payment was an improper donation to Trump's campaign, as Daniels' silence benefited Trump's candidacy. Read more at The New York Times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 6 hours ago, DBP66 said: one attorney wrote the lie and another sucker attorney signed off on it....and she's in big trouble...for....lying....imagine that!...apples and oranges....🙄 Spoon fed sheep 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 1 hour ago, Warrior said: Spoon fed sheep LOL...or just facts....it depends if you've been brainwashed or not....😉 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 What We Know About the Potential Indictment of Donald Trump 3.8k Ben Protess, Jonah E. Bromwich and William K. Rashbaum Fri, March 10, 2023 at 8:03 AM EST Former President Donald Trump at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Md. on March 4, 2023. (Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times) The revelation that the Manhattan district attorney’s office has indicated to Donald Trump’s lawyers that he could soon face criminal charges marked a major development in an inquiry that has loomed over the former president for nearly five years. It also raised a number of questions about the contours of the potential case against Trump, who could become the first former American president to be indicted. Alvin L. Bragg, the district attorney, is focused on Trump’s involvement in the payment of hush money to a porn star who said she had an affair with him. Michael D. Cohen, Trump’s fixer at the time, made the payment during the final days of the 2016 presidential campaign. While the facts are dramatic, the case against Trump would likely hinge on a complex interplay of laws. And a conviction is far from assured. Here’s what we know, and don’t know, about the longest running investigation into Trump. How did this all begin? In October 2016, during the final weeks of the presidential campaign, the porn star Stormy Daniels was trying to sell her story of an affair with Trump. At first, Daniels’ representatives contacted the National Enquirer to offer exclusive rights to her story. David Pecker, the tabloid’s publisher and a longtime ally of Trump, had agreed to look out for potentially damaging stories about him during the 2016 campaign, and at one point even agreed to buy the story of another woman’s affair with Trump and never publish it, a practice known as “catch and kill.” But Pecker didn’t purchase Daniels’ story. Instead, he and the tabloid’s top editor, Dylan Howard, helped broker a separate deal between Cohen and Daniels’ lawyer. Cohen paid $130,000, and Trump later reimbursed him from the White House. In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to a number of charges, including federal campaign finance crimes involving the hush money. The payment, federal prosecutors concluded, amounted to an improper donation to Trump’s campaign. In the days after Cohen’s guilty plea, the district attorney’s office opened its own criminal investigation into the matter. While the federal prosecutors were focused on Cohen, the district attorney’s inquiry would center on Trump. So what did Trump possibly do wrong? When pleading guilty in federal court, Cohen pointed the finger at his boss. It was Trump, he said, who directed him to pay off Daniels, a contention that prosecutors later corroborated. The prosecutors also said that Trump’s company “falsely accounted” for the monthly payments as legal expenses and that company records cited a retainer agreement with Cohen. Although Cohen was a lawyer, and became Trump’s personal attorney after he took office, there was no such retainer agreement and the reimbursement was unrelated to any legal services Cohen performed. Cohen has said that Trump knew about the phony retainer agreement, an accusation that could form the basis of the case against the former president. In New York, falsifying business records can amount to a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. To elevate the crime to a felony charge, Bragg’s prosecutors must show that Trump’s “intent to defraud” included an intent to commit or conceal a second crime. In this case, that second crime could be a violation of New York state election law. While hush money is not inherently illegal, the prosecutors could argue that the $130,000 payout effectively became an improper donation to Trump’s campaign, under the theory that it benefited his candidacy because it silenced Daniels. Will it be a tough case to prove? Even if Trump is indicted, convicting him or sending him to prison will be challenging. For one thing, Trump’s lawyers are sure to attack Cohen’s credibility by citing his criminal record. The case against the former president also likely hinges on an untested and therefore risky legal theory involving a complex interplay of laws. Combining the falsifying business records charge with a violation of state election law would be a novel legal theory for any criminal case, let alone one against the former president, raising the possibility that a judge or appellate court could throw it out or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor. And even if the felony charge remains, it amounts to a low-level felony. If Trump were ultimately convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of four years, though prison time would not be mandatory. How did prosecutors convey that charges are likely? Prosecutors in the district attorney’s office recently signaled to Trump’s lawyers that he could face criminal charges. They did this by offering Trump the chance to testify next week before the grand jury that has been hearing evidence in the potential case, people with knowledge of the matter said. Such offers almost always indicate an indictment is close; it would be unusual for prosecutors to notify a potential defendant without ultimately seeking charges against him. In New York, potential defendants have the right to answer questions in the grand jury before they are indicted, but they rarely testify, and Trump is likely to decline the offer. Will Trump definitely be indicted? It is still possible that Trump will not face charges. Trump’s lawyers could meet privately with the prosecutors in hopes of fending off criminal charges. And although Bragg’s prosecutors have already questioned at least six other people before the grand jury, they have not completed their presentation of evidence. Cohen, for example, has yet to appear before the panel. The prosecutors will then need to present the charges to the grand jurors, who will vote on an indictment. Until then, Bragg could decide to pump the brakes. As of now, however, that seems unlikely. What has Trump said in his defense? Trump has referred to the investigation as a “witch hunt” against him that began before he became president, and has called Bragg, who is Black and a Democrat, a “racist” who is motivated by politics. In a statement released Thursday night on Trump’s social network, Truth Social, he reiterated those claims, and denied he had ever had an affair with Daniels. He noted that prosecutors from various offices — including Bragg’s predecessor — had investigated the matter and had never before charged him with a crime. He wrote that the potential indictment was an attempt to thwart his presidential campaign. “They cannot win at the voter booth, so they have to go to a tool that has never been used in such a way in our country, weaponized law enforcement,” Trump wrote. Former Justice Department officials have accused Trump of ordering them to act in ways that aided him politically when he was in office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warrior Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 2 hours ago, DBP66 said: What We Know About the Potential Indictment of Donald Trump 3.8k Ben Protess, Jonah E. Bromwich and William K. Rashbaum Fri, March 10, 2023 at 8:03 AM EST Former President Donald Trump at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Md. on March 4, 2023. (Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times) The revelation that the Manhattan district attorney’s office has indicated to Donald Trump’s lawyers that he could soon face criminal charges marked a major development in an inquiry that has loomed over the former president for nearly five years. It also raised a number of questions about the contours of the potential case against Trump, who could become the first former American president to be indicted. Alvin L. Bragg, the district attorney, is focused on Trump’s involvement in the payment of hush money to a porn star who said she had an affair with him. Michael D. Cohen, Trump’s fixer at the time, made the payment during the final days of the 2016 presidential campaign. While the facts are dramatic, the case against Trump would likely hinge on a complex interplay of laws. And a conviction is far from assured. Here’s what we know, and don’t know, about the longest running investigation into Trump. How did this all begin? In October 2016, during the final weeks of the presidential campaign, the porn star Stormy Daniels was trying to sell her story of an affair with Trump. At first, Daniels’ representatives contacted the National Enquirer to offer exclusive rights to her story. David Pecker, the tabloid’s publisher and a longtime ally of Trump, had agreed to look out for potentially damaging stories about him during the 2016 campaign, and at one point even agreed to buy the story of another woman’s affair with Trump and never publish it, a practice known as “catch and kill.” But Pecker didn’t purchase Daniels’ story. Instead, he and the tabloid’s top editor, Dylan Howard, helped broker a separate deal between Cohen and Daniels’ lawyer. Cohen paid $130,000, and Trump later reimbursed him from the White House. In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to a number of charges, including federal campaign finance crimes involving the hush money. The payment, federal prosecutors concluded, amounted to an improper donation to Trump’s campaign. In the days after Cohen’s guilty plea, the district attorney’s office opened its own criminal investigation into the matter. While the federal prosecutors were focused on Cohen, the district attorney’s inquiry would center on Trump. So what did Trump possibly do wrong? When pleading guilty in federal court, Cohen pointed the finger at his boss. It was Trump, he said, who directed him to pay off Daniels, a contention that prosecutors later corroborated. The prosecutors also said that Trump’s company “falsely accounted” for the monthly payments as legal expenses and that company records cited a retainer agreement with Cohen. Although Cohen was a lawyer, and became Trump’s personal attorney after he took office, there was no such retainer agreement and the reimbursement was unrelated to any legal services Cohen performed. Cohen has said that Trump knew about the phony retainer agreement, an accusation that could form the basis of the case against the former president. In New York, falsifying business records can amount to a crime, albeit a misdemeanor. To elevate the crime to a felony charge, Bragg’s prosecutors must show that Trump’s “intent to defraud” included an intent to commit or conceal a second crime. In this case, that second crime could be a violation of New York state election law. While hush money is not inherently illegal, the prosecutors could argue that the $130,000 payout effectively became an improper donation to Trump’s campaign, under the theory that it benefited his candidacy because it silenced Daniels. Will it be a tough case to prove? Even if Trump is indicted, convicting him or sending him to prison will be challenging. For one thing, Trump’s lawyers are sure to attack Cohen’s credibility by citing his criminal record. The case against the former president also likely hinges on an untested and therefore risky legal theory involving a complex interplay of laws. Combining the falsifying business records charge with a violation of state election law would be a novel legal theory for any criminal case, let alone one against the former president, raising the possibility that a judge or appellate court could throw it out or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor. And even if the felony charge remains, it amounts to a low-level felony. If Trump were ultimately convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of four years, though prison time would not be mandatory. How did prosecutors convey that charges are likely? Prosecutors in the district attorney’s office recently signaled to Trump’s lawyers that he could face criminal charges. They did this by offering Trump the chance to testify next week before the grand jury that has been hearing evidence in the potential case, people with knowledge of the matter said. Such offers almost always indicate an indictment is close; it would be unusual for prosecutors to notify a potential defendant without ultimately seeking charges against him. In New York, potential defendants have the right to answer questions in the grand jury before they are indicted, but they rarely testify, and Trump is likely to decline the offer. Will Trump definitely be indicted? It is still possible that Trump will not face charges. Trump’s lawyers could meet privately with the prosecutors in hopes of fending off criminal charges. And although Bragg’s prosecutors have already questioned at least six other people before the grand jury, they have not completed their presentation of evidence. Cohen, for example, has yet to appear before the panel. The prosecutors will then need to present the charges to the grand jurors, who will vote on an indictment. Until then, Bragg could decide to pump the brakes. As of now, however, that seems unlikely. What has Trump said in his defense? Trump has referred to the investigation as a “witch hunt” against him that began before he became president, and has called Bragg, who is Black and a Democrat, a “racist” who is motivated by politics. In a statement released Thursday night on Trump’s social network, Truth Social, he reiterated those claims, and denied he had ever had an affair with Daniels. He noted that prosecutors from various offices — including Bragg’s predecessor — had investigated the matter and had never before charged him with a crime. He wrote that the potential indictment was an attempt to thwart his presidential campaign. “They cannot win at the voter booth, so they have to go to a tool that has never been used in such a way in our country, weaponized law enforcement,” Trump wrote. Former Justice Department officials have accused Trump of ordering them to act in ways that aided him politically when he was in office. This has got to be it after 100 plus pages of “get Trump”. TDS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted March 10, 2023 Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 16 minutes ago, Warrior said: This has got to be it after 100 plus pages of “get Trump”. TDS They'll ship Liz Cheney's sorry ass to NYC and appoint her judge and call it non-partisan. 🤣 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 17 minutes ago, Warrior said: This has got to be it after 100 plus pages of “get Trump”. TDS he was "invited" to meet with a grand jury....😉 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2023 6 minutes ago, concha said: They'll ship Liz Cheney's sorry ass to NYC and appoint her judge and call it non-partisan. 🤣 what's partisan about campaign violation??.....the checks are in black and white....LOL....I bet Stormy is a Republican too....🤡 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBP66 Posted March 11, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2023 Judge Denies Trump’s Attempt To Block ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape From Defamation Trial Judge Denies Trump’s Attempt To Block ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape From Defamation Trial 12 Taiyler S. Mitchell Fri, March 10, 2023 at 5:13 PM EST The judge in writer E. Jean Carroll’s defamation and battery case against Donald Trump denied the former president’s request to omit certain evidence from trial, according to court documents released Friday. Carroll is seeking to present jurors with a notorious 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape, as well as testimony from two other women alleging misconduct, at April’s trial in New York City. Carroll has accused Trump of raping her in a dressing room at a high-end Manhattan department store in the 1990s, and she alleges that Trump defamed her by claiming she was lying about the incident. Trump’s attorneys previously argued that a hot-mic recording from TV’s “Access Hollywood,” which came to light weeks before his victory in the 2016 presidential election, was “irrelevant and highly prejudicial.” They also claimed that testimony from the two other accusers “will offer no relevant or meaningful insight into the central question” of the case. But Carroll’s attorneys maintained that their testimony would be vital to illustrating the former president’s “modus operandi of forcing himself on nonconsenting women.” U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled Friday that the “Access Hollywood” recording and the testimony could be presented at trial. Testimony from Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff would aim to “show that Mr. Trump has a propensity for such behavior,” Kaplan wrote in the court documents. Kaplan added that the former president, who launched a new bid for the White House last year, still has a right to deny the accusations from the women, as he has done previously. In 2016, Leeds accused Trump of grabbing her breasts and other inappropriate touching on an airplane decades prior. Around the same time, Stoynoff alleged that he had kissed her without her consent during an interview in December 2005. Amid filming for an “Access Hollywood” appearance in 2005, Trump raved about being able to do anything he wanted to women he found attractive. “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” he said in the recording. “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything,” added Trump, who was then best known as a real estate mogul and the host of NBC’s “The Apprentice.” Following her accusations, Trump has said that Carroll is not his “type,” but he’s also mistaken her for an ex-wife. “We maintain the utmost confidence that our client will be vindicated at the upcoming trial,” attorney Alina Habba, who represents Trump, told HuffPost in a statement Friday. An attorney for Carroll declined to comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolebull813 Posted March 11, 2023 Report Share Posted March 11, 2023 20 minutes ago, DBP66 said: Judge Denies Trump’s Attempt To Block ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape From Defamation Trial Judge Denies Trump’s Attempt To Block ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape From Defamation Trial 12 Taiyler S. Mitchell Fri, March 10, 2023 at 5:13 PM EST The judge in writer E. Jean Carroll’s defamation and battery case against Donald Trump denied the former president’s request to omit certain evidence from trial, according to court documents released Friday. Carroll is seeking to present jurors with a notorious 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape, as well as testimony from two other women alleging misconduct, at April’s trial in New York City. Carroll has accused Trump of raping her in a dressing room at a high-end Manhattan department store in the 1990s, and she alleges that Trump defamed her by claiming she was lying about the incident. Trump’s attorneys previously argued that a hot-mic recording from TV’s “Access Hollywood,” which came to light weeks before his victory in the 2016 presidential election, was “irrelevant and highly prejudicial.” They also claimed that testimony from the two other accusers “will offer no relevant or meaningful insight into the central question” of the case. But Carroll’s attorneys maintained that their testimony would be vital to illustrating the former president’s “modus operandi of forcing himself on nonconsenting women.” U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled Friday that the “Access Hollywood” recording and the testimony could be presented at trial. Testimony from Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff would aim to “show that Mr. Trump has a propensity for such behavior,” Kaplan wrote in the court documents. Kaplan added that the former president, who launched a new bid for the White House last year, still has a right to deny the accusations from the women, as he has done previously. In 2016, Leeds accused Trump of grabbing her breasts and other inappropriate touching on an airplane decades prior. Around the same time, Stoynoff alleged that he had kissed her without her consent during an interview in December 2005. Amid filming for an “Access Hollywood” appearance in 2005, Trump raved about being able to do anything he wanted to women he found attractive. “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” he said in the recording. “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything,” added Trump, who was then best known as a real estate mogul and the host of NBC’s “The Apprentice.” Following her accusations, Trump has said that Carroll is not his “type,” but he’s also mistaken her for an ex-wife. “We maintain the utmost confidence that our client will be vindicated at the upcoming trial,” attorney Alina Habba, who represents Trump, told HuffPost in a statement Friday. An attorney for Carroll declined to comment. Is this from HuffPost? holy shit there’s no going back from that 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nolebull813 Posted March 11, 2023 Report Share Posted March 11, 2023 23 minutes ago, DBP66 said: Judge Denies Trump’s Attempt To Block ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape From Defamation Trial Judge Denies Trump’s Attempt To Block ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape From Defamation Trial 12 Taiyler S. Mitchell Fri, March 10, 2023 at 5:13 PM EST The judge in writer E. Jean Carroll’s defamation and battery case against Donald Trump denied the former president’s request to omit certain evidence from trial, according to court documents released Friday. Carroll is seeking to present jurors with a notorious 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape, as well as testimony from two other women alleging misconduct, at April’s trial in New York City. Carroll has accused Trump of raping her in a dressing room at a high-end Manhattan department store in the 1990s, and she alleges that Trump defamed her by claiming she was lying about the incident. Trump’s attorneys previously argued that a hot-mic recording from TV’s “Access Hollywood,” which came to light weeks before his victory in the 2016 presidential election, was “irrelevant and highly prejudicial.” They also claimed that testimony from the two other accusers “will offer no relevant or meaningful insight into the central question” of the case. But Carroll’s attorneys maintained that their testimony would be vital to illustrating the former president’s “modus operandi of forcing himself on nonconsenting women.” U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled Friday that the “Access Hollywood” recording and the testimony could be presented at trial. Testimony from Jessica Leeds and Natasha Stoynoff would aim to “show that Mr. Trump has a propensity for such behavior,” Kaplan wrote in the court documents. Kaplan added that the former president, who launched a new bid for the White House last year, still has a right to deny the accusations from the women, as he has done previously. In 2016, Leeds accused Trump of grabbing her breasts and other inappropriate touching on an airplane decades prior. Around the same time, Stoynoff alleged that he had kissed her without her consent during an interview in December 2005. Amid filming for an “Access Hollywood” appearance in 2005, Trump raved about being able to do anything he wanted to women he found attractive. “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” he said in the recording. “Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything,” added Trump, who was then best known as a real estate mogul and the host of NBC’s “The Apprentice.” Following her accusations, Trump has said that Carroll is not his “type,” but he’s also mistaken her for an ex-wife. “We maintain the utmost confidence that our client will be vindicated at the upcoming trial,” attorney Alina Habba, who represents Trump, told HuffPost in a statement Friday. An attorney for Carroll declined to comment. You do realize that HuffPost is the liberal version of The Onion and Babylon Bee right? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troll Posted March 11, 2023 Report Share Posted March 11, 2023 12 minutes ago, Nolebull813 said: Is this from HuffPost? holy shit there’s no going back from that his favorite actually.... 🤡 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.