Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: ABC settles "rape" claim re: Pres. Elect.
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:26:44 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 115
Message-ID: <vk9ll4$nssq$5@dont-email.me>
References: <cm60mjhbvhu5konplgv0mj5iu13s0m4g83@4ax.com>
 <vjpom7$17gl4$2@dont-email.me> <kmr2mj58bbl1s4onjf5a5n3b8thcu4dkok@4ax.com>
 <vjsahg$1qjmm$4@dont-email.me> <mtf5mjlb1bt0btrh12bgpu02olfu3u4g4q@4ax.com>
 <vjuqvo$11fs4$2@solani.org> <ad48mjpnhn7pqr9vvabui3j0kvo0dpccos@4ax.com>
 <vk1kt7$2uqie$3@dont-email.me> <jenamjpnj7gvl8kle6aprtb96bsgpt3jj0@4ax.com>
 <vk4cdp$3ifl6$5@dont-email.me> <35ndmj91mc14b2eumun869idcm3gc910lm@4ax.com>
 <vk6rbl$4akb$5@dont-email.me> <tqbgmj9o58l29rqcgag4erommtf2q4f277@4ax.com>
Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 19:26:45 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="66174220c29871dc7149aaa7feb2086b";
	logging-data="783258"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19IIV84RPBgLIF3e4GTlfN8kBEBMcN90J0="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9Ou8+WhrZ7ynrjkuMHDaCBT+LiI=
In-Reply-To: <tqbgmj9o58l29rqcgag4erommtf2q4f277@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6538

On 12/22/2024 10:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 11:45:40 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 12/21/2024 10:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 13:18:31 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/20/2024 7:07 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:24:55 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/19/2024 7:29 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 07:50:15 -0800, suzeeq <suzeeq@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/18/2024 4:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 11:57:19 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/17/2024 7:31 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 12:40:22 -0500, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/16/2024 7:22 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Dec 2024 16:54:39 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> George Snuffalapogous had stated Mr. Trump (not President
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at that time) had been found guilty of "rape", when, well,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we all know the legal technicalities and definition and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific legal issues.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He did not say "guilty".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 	Donald Trump has been found liable for defaming the victim of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 	that rape by a jury. It's been affirmed by a judge.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The NBC Blue Network will pay $15 million to... his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Presidential library...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-abc-george-stephanopoulos-lawsuit-defamation-b2664508.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not buying what the judge wrote last year that the plaintiff proved
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "rape" as commonly understood by the public even though no rape had
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> occurred using the legal definition of "rape". The jury was asked to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make a specific finding of "rape" and they said no. She still won the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case on other points even if not on that point. The judge was wrong to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> second guess the jury here on the finding they made on a specific set of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> facts.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        From your cited article:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "“Donald Trump has been found liable for defaming the victim of that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> rape by a jury,” Stephonopoulos said on ABC’s This Week at the time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> “It’s been affirmed by a judge.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juries in New York found Trump liable for defaming and sexually
>>>>>>>>>>>>> abusing E Jean Carroll after he repeatedly called her a liar for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> speaking publicly about allegations that he assaulted her in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1990s. Trump has appealed the nearly $90 million in judgments against
>>>>>>>>>>>>> him.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Last year, the judge overseeing those cases wrote that Carroll’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure to “prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New
>>>>>>>>>>>>> York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr Trump
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> “Indeed, as the evidence at trial ... makes clear, the jury found that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mr Trump in fact did exactly that,” US District Judge Lewis Kaplan
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Honestly Trump has a case against the judge as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What redeeming aspect of Trump's character did George falsely besmirch?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you need the facts of ABC admitted lie explained to you, you're not
>>>>>>>>>>> worth the bytes it would take.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your President-elect forcibly finger fucked her.  Explain *that* fact.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Trump was not convicted of rape.  ABC said he was.  They lied.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> End of story.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In other jurisdictions it's considered rape/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No one cares.  He was charge and found not guilty.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> End of story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, you're right that not many care about the technical 'not guilty'.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not technical.  It's fact.  Trying to spin otherwise is engaging
>>>>> in technicalities.
>>>>
>>>> It's a fact that NY law makes a misleading technical distinction.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Laughter.
>>>
>>> Go ahead and explain it for us.
>>
>> We think you don't really want an explanation.
>>
> 
> It's your claim.  If you can't explain it, then we all understand that
> you're lying.

We all recognize a genuine request for explanation when we all hear one.