E. Jean Carrol's 5 Million verdict STANDS. Trump must PAY.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
QP!
Verified User
we are not talking about the bible.
The trail was real. The jury verdict was real. The Appelate court review and Supreme Court reveiw affirming them were real.
The only fiction is what your hate tells you, and that is to not accept this as real as it goes against your orange messiah. The guy who ADMITTED move was to just grab women by the pussy and who a jury found him liable for doing just that.
You're going to have to change your signature, crazytown!Bullshit. Not convicted of any crime in the case....
QP!
Verified User
Trump was found by a Jury to have sexually assaulted E Jean. A judge clarified this is indistinguishable from rape and thus saying it is rape is not defamation.Bullshit. Not convicted of any crime in the case....
If you want to dance and say 'Trump won as the actual finding was 'ya it is equal to rape but not technically rape' then you be you and call that a win.
QP!
Verified User
If Trump keeps defaming E Jean, due to this ruling i hope she sues again.
This time the suit would be for over $100M and she will easily win.
The Iranians aren't the only people she's said similar things about. Muslims. Americans on the Left. People of color, e.g., th e Haitians and the Somalis and of course our home-grown "thugs" (wink wink). Most of all she hates and hates on several individuals on this forum, on a daily basis.
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
-26,507 
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Fascinating how you applaud corruption by someone who uses you as a doormat.
"I love the poorly educated! - from Donald Trump's 2016 Presidential campaign victory speech,
Grok, assess Taichiliberal's contribution to this thread impartially: https://www.justplainpolitics.com/t...ict-stands-trump-must-pay.248833/post-7022038
Taichiliberal's contribution (post #155 in the thread) is a short, partisan rebuttal that adds little substantive value to the discussion.
Context of the post
The thread discusses the Supreme Court's decision not to hear Trump's appeal on the E. Jean Carroll $5M civil verdict (sexual abuse and defamation liability). Posters on the anti-Trump side celebrate it as justice, while pro-Trump posters downplay it, note it's civil not criminal, point to Trump's other financial successes (e.g., crypto), or pivot to politics.
volsrocks (pro-Trump side) posted:
Taichiliberal replied directly:
Impartial assessment
Strengths / Positive aspects:
- It is on-topic in the sense that it responds to the claim that Trump isn't "worried" about the verdict due to other wealth.
- The Trump quote is real and well-known (from his 2016 victory speech in Nevada). It is accurately attributed.
- It reflects a common critique from Trump opponents: that his supporters overlook alleged personal corruption or self-serving behavior.
Weaknesses / Limitations:
- Ad hominem and dismissive tone: It labels the other poster as being "used as a doormat" and implies they are among "the poorly educated." This is personal insult rather than engaging the underlying points (e.g., the civil vs. criminal distinction, the size/appeal status of judgments, or broader legal/political context).
- No new facts or arguments: It doesn't address the specifics of the Carroll case (jury findings, appeals process, defamation standards, statute of limitations issues raised by critics, or the separate $83M+ defamation verdict still in play). It shifts to a general accusation of "corruption" without evidence tied to this verdict or the crypto comment.
- Low effort / rhetorical: It's a drive-by jab common in partisan forums. It assumes bad faith ("applaud corruption") rather than rebutting the point that financial wins elsewhere might blunt the practical impact of the judgment on Trump.
- Does not advance the thread: In a long, heated political forum thread, this adds heat but negligible light. It mirrors many other posts that prioritize moral condemnation over analysis.
Overall impartial summary
Taichiliberal's post is typical partisan forum posting: emotionally charged, quote-based snark aimed at signaling disapproval and rallying like-minded readers. It is not a strong contribution if the goal is reasoned debate, evidence-based discussion, or exploring the legal nuances of the Carroll case/SCOTUS decision. It is effective as tribal signaling or venting but weak as analysis. This style matches the broader tone of the thread from both sides, which appears more performative than deliberative.
From what I see of Taichiliberal's other activity on the site, this fits a consistent pattern of strongly anti-MAGA/anti-Trump commentary.
View attachment 88010View attachment 88010
Democrats are losing their grip on your party... do you want people in office who hate America?
Last edited:
-26,507
Love it! The best part? She gushed over Damo's change where members can block notifications from others. So now we don't have to see endless virtue-signaling about the fake "donations" that never happened. Nor read all the self-pitying whining about how horribly despised she is, getting dozens of downvotes per day. The worst reaction score in Internet history! Even Trump's is better.
That's hilarious. We'll add this to the pile of other bogus nutso stuff you post with no evidence at all, just childish wishful "thinking." Trump is amazing. E. Jean Carroll won't get a dime from her successful lawsuit. Haitians are eating pets. Iranians are evil. There are huge crowds at Trump's failed "state fair." The Deflecting Pool is not green.