I owe Donald Trump and my fellow MAGAs an apology. On January 11, I wrote a post criticizing Donald Trump for “punching down” at Nikki Haley. I was the foolish one. I also thought it was weak sauce when Trump called Haley “Birdbrain. I was wrong. The proof is in the birdbrain’s droppings. I’ll eat crow.
As our Nina told you just two days ago, there were so many things wrong with the E. Jean case including:
What’s interesting about all this is that one of the donors to Nikki’s campaign, who was heavily involved in getting E. Jean Carroll’s case into the courts, is now running away from her.
Liberal billionaire Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, paused donations to pro-Nikki Haley super PAC in her bid to become the Republican 2024 presidential nominee after her loss to former President Donald Trump in the New Hampshire primary, a source familiar with the matter has told multiple outlets.
Hoffman has said he’ll vote for President Joe Biden in November but backed Haley financially because his “first priority is to defeat Trump.” The Democratic donor gave $250,000 to Stand For America Fund Inc. last year, a pro-Haley super PAC, the New York Times reported.
Somehow I don’t see Hoffman coming back into the Haley fold with another donation anytime soon.
By Birdbrain trusting this jury, she is endorsing lawfare. Warfare by stretching the law:
In the amended lawsuit, Carroll sues Trump for battery regarding the alleged rape in 1995 and defamation regarding the alleged false and degrading statements he made against Carroll on social media and in the press in the years following her claim that he raped her.
Carroll brings civil action under the act against Trump for her alleged rape committed by Trump in a New York City department store dressing room in 1995. In the complaint, Carroll stated that she did not report the rape at the time because she feared Trump would “ruin her life and livelihood” if she did.
New York’s Adult Survivor’s Act went into effect Thursday, allowing survivors of sexual assault or abuse who were 18 years or older at the time to file a civil lawsuit against their abuser past the state’s statute of limitations. The act was signed into law by Governor Kathy Hochul in May and amends the statute of limitations for civil actions related to sexual offenses committed against adults in the State of New York. Under the act, civil actions which were previously barred by the statute of limitations are now revived. Survivors now have a one-year window to file the allowed civil actions for cases of sexual assault for which they previously could not file suit past the time limitation placed on the crime.
Haley can’t see or understand that if she (God forbid) became a viable candidate lawfare and other salacious means would be used against her. Lawfare works. That’s not even the end of the problems with this case. E. Jean wasn’t sure the year and the dress she claimed she was wearing wasn’t manufactured at that time. The Judge didn’t allow Trump to put on evidence in his defense. Like that Carroll’s story was a tv episode.
But, Birdbrain ignored all that. From The Hill:
GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley said Sunday she “absolutely” trusts the jury in E. Jean Carroll defamation case against former President Trump but that the recent ruling should not bar him from the ballot.
“I absolutely trust the jury. And I think that they made their decision based on the evidence. I just don’t think that should take him off the ballot,” Haley said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
“I think the American people will take him off the ballot. I think that’s the best way to go forward, is not let him play the victim. Let him play the loser. That’s what we want him to do at the end of the day,” the former United Nations ambassador continued.
And in the 1:00 hour today, Birdbrain doubled down on trusting the jury.
Nikki Haley just doubled down and said she trusts the ultra liberal jurors who awarded E. Jean Carroll $84M in Trump’s defamation suit. Unreal. pic.twitter.com/9HwRwNLDRO
— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) January 29, 2024
There is no reason on the planet that Birdbrain couldn’t defend Trump against lawfare while still delineating her plans from his. Unless… she’s got nothing.
And, just a few minutes ago, Birdbrain said that Trump bought votes during Covid.
I dislike calling people RINOs, in general. Nikki is not a RINO. She is a Birdbrain. Nikkis is not even the dumbest bird in the nest. Go Trump.
Featured Image: Darleen Click original art for Victory Girls
John Shepherd says: Well, Birdbrain Trump ran his mouth once again and handed his enemies more ammunition.
And birdbrain Shepherd flapped his fingers once again to prove that he’s a weasel.
John Shepherd says: I get it. Birdbrains like Writing Observer are too stupid to understand that “mean tweets” have consequences. I think when the Donald said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his supporters would not care he was looking at Writing Observer when he said it.
Useful idiots like John Shepherd are too stupid to realize that they form the first layer in the mass graves when their usefulness expires.
John Shepherd says: Unuseful idiots like Writing Observer are to stupid to understand that if the nominate an unelectable candidate they might just get those mass graves they fear.
GWB says: And here’s the stupidest take on this (OK, one of the stupidest) – we have to get someone “electable”. Even if that means they’re just like their opponent! So… winning actually has absolutely zero effect on the things people want to effect.
Unless you’re advocating for someone to lie in the election about what they would do, then totally turn around and give the government a good wire-brushing with the Constitution? Because that would be terribly hypocritical of you, and very dishonest.
A reader says: For facts about the first E. Jean Carroll case, go here: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html
Summary: they didn’t present evidence, not because they weren’t “allowed” to present evidence. If that happened, it’s because there’s a legal procedure for doing so and they did not fulfill it. In the second, most recent defamation case, Habba kept trying to admit “evidence” but it was not allowed because it was submitted incorrectly. A good lawyer would know how to do this. Trump also could have testified in the first trial and chose not to. In the second trial, he was also under oath and unable to lie during his testimony which is why so much of it was stricken from the record. Any good lawyer or legal analyst could have told you all of this. Obviously Fox and Newsmax or wherever you get your news doesn’t employ such people.
And finally, this was a civil trial. The burden of proof is far less in a civil trial. Based on Trump’s taped deposition, the testimony of other victims, etc., the jury concluded that he sexually abused her. This is basically a legal technicality in terminology and as Judge Kaplan said, according to the commonly understood definition of rape, he raped her. The jury had to accept that as fact. They also saw his childish and disrespectful behavior in the courtroom.
Trump can appeal, but he would have to either put up the $83 million plus interest or get a bond for it. It’s unlikely given his past financial history, anyone would loan him the money, and he can’t use campaign donations. He is also likely to be even more in the hole later this week in the Leticia James NY fraud case. So it’s unlikely he’ll try to appeal.
This means that your chosen candidate is a liar according to a jury, a rapist and a tax cheat. He sounds like a winner!
GWB says: the jury concluded that he sexually abused her. This is basically a legal technicality in terminology and as Judge Kaplan said, according to the commonly understood definition of rape, he raped her.
Except that those things are NOT the same legally. And for a judge to claim they are is a mis-administration of the law.
I also wonder just how deeply you looked at those claims you make about evidence. You throw out this “Oh, I’m so much smarter than you for not getting my news from those people,” but you don’t then offer anything but received wisdom for your claim.
Anyone who has a decent understanding of how the law is supposed to work can see the lamentable state of it currently practiced in NY state via these Trump trials. The law used here is an absolute violation of “equal protection” and the James case… she really should be in prison for her malfeasance in that case.
And I don’t particularly like Trump, nor do I think he always hires the best people. But your claims are in contradiction of the evidence.
Liz says: How fortunate for Ms Carroll her accusations came out at the same time she was trying to promote her book. Tried by the mentor of the prosecuting attorney. During the year that the governor waved the statute of limitations…for 12 months. Almost as big of coincidence as how Lou Gehrig died!
I’m not sure how it is possible to prove a negative, but the “trial” helped so much as a civil suit requires no proof as the constitution would recognize it.
Hm…who holds the motive, means, and opportunity in this equation?
The judge who hates Trump, the governor who hates Trump enough to sign special legislation to target him, the accuser who stands to gain money and all she has to do is lie and convince a couple of friends…
or Trump, who, though a proven germaphobe (and doesn’t touch drugs or alcohol) just had to tap…um, that….21 years ago. In a public dressing room.
Justice served!
As with all things, this will bite Democrats in the backside eventually too.
Liz says: The “metoo” stuff started in the military (court martial process differs appreciably from the civilian process, which is why the Convening authority is required).
Congress (in particular democrats in congress) halted promotions for commanders based on them performing their duties and exercising judgment in those matters. The media was happy to promote misinformation to the ignorant public based on outright lies not just hyperbole.
It’s long part time for the democrats turn to get their own medicine.
GWB says: New York’s Adult Survivor’s Act went into effect Thursday, … past the state’s statute of limitations.
Yeah, there’s this bit in the Constitution about ex post facto laws….
This is one of those that should have been immediately sent to the Supreme Court and struck down as ex post facto. It’s a prime example of why we don’t allow them. (He can’t be tried criminally at this point, so there’s no trial outcome to wave in the jury’s face to say “Innocent!” So it’s all up to the innuendo and such allowed in a civil court, with its lesser evidentiary standard.)
Survivors now have a one-year window to file the allowed civil actions
Hmmm, why would there only be a one-year window? Maybe because they don’t want the burden it might place on other public figures when the rats come out of the woodwork.But it would be just long enough to get them in before the election this year….
That’s not even the end of the problems with this case.
Oh yeah, this whole thing has been a travesty of justice. It should lead to pitchforks and torches on the governor mansion lawn. (And the judge’s lawn, and the prosecutor’s, and a bunch of legislators’….) But we’re too timid of a people anymore to do what should be done.
she “absolutely” trusts the jury
No, she doesn’t. That’s a lie. She’s an elitist and doesn’t trust the people at all. She likes the outcome, though, as she dislikes the nasty, coarse Trump.
they made their decision based on the evidence
So you’re stupid AND ignorant.
That’s what we want him to do
Yep. You’re all about defeating Trump, instead of breaking the cabal that is turning our nation into a kleptocracy of the highest order and destroying American values and greatness. I disagree with Trump a LOT. And I’m not a fan of his style or much of his substance. But he, at least, seems to actually care about America and maybe stopping some of this insanity. And that puts him against almost every other candidate out there (except DeSantis, IMO).
Cameron says: The Christine Blassey Ford approach to sexual assault. Wait decades until it’s politically convenient to file a lawsuit.
13 Comments