New in PJ Media:
The election is over, Trump has been reelected, but the lawfare continues nonetheless. On Monday, a federal appeals court that must have been under the influence of some psychotropic drug upheld Trump’s liability for supposedly sexually abusing the partisan fantasist E. Jean Carroll in a Bloomingdale’s dressing room sometime in the 1990s. Carroll’s story has more holes than a slice of Swiss cheese that has been used for target practice, but despite lacking any evidence, she keeps winning in court — believe all women, doncha know, even the crazy mendacious ones. Trump’s team is going to keep on appealing, and that’s good. Maybe sanity will prevail at some point.
Fox News reported Monday that the appeals court’s is “a blow to the president-elect,” and leaves him “on the hook for the $5 million payout ordered by the jury.” An unnamed panel of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which consists of 27 judges in all, issued an unsigned ruling claiming that Trump’s attorneys had not succeeded in establishing “that the district court erred in any of the challenged rulings.” The Trump team “has not carried his burden to show that any claimed error or combination of claimed errors affected his substantial rights as required to warrant a new trial.”
In the immortal words of Peter Lorre in the cinematic classic “All Through the Night,” “But that’s silly!” Back in Sept. 2024, the Post Millennial reported that Trump attorney Will Scharf, “speaking at Trump Tower in New York City after a hearing to ask to overturn the final verdict against Trump in the E Jean Carroll case,” pointed out quite correctly that the alleged victim’s story “at its heart is an utterly implausible, he said she said story.”
Serious allegations of this kind are supposed to be established on the basis of evidence and witnesses, but Scharf noted that in this case, there was “no corroboration for anything” that Carroll claimed about what went on between her and Trump. The fix was in from the beginning: Carroll’s attorneys never produced any “corroborating witnesses” or “confirmatory DNA.” She filed no police report at the time of the supposed incident, and couldn’t even say when exactly her encounter with Trump was supposed to have happened. “No surveillance evidence or witnesses have ever been found or come forward confirming any asked of E Jean Carroll’s story.”
Even worse, the case only went to court in the first place because corrupt leftists changed the rules so that they could get Trump. As PJM’s Ben Bartee noted back in Apr. 2023, Carroll was only able to file her case at all because of “an exception carved out in the New York state legal code that many speculate was crafted especially to enable the prosecution of Trump.”
There is more. Read the rest here.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
While Trump may well be able to afford it, he should fight this out to the end. Otherwise it sets a dangerous precedent – that statutes of limitations can be conveniently set aside whenever desired for people who are uniquely unpopular
There also needs to be a serious pushback towards feminist supremacy
40 rounds says
We all suffer at the hands of incompetent and biased judges, here in the US and Europe. They are going to get a lot of us killed and destroy what’s left of western civilization
40 rounds says
Plus the fact that she is a total nut job and skank makes it all the more infuriating
Troybeam says
So no rape, yet Trump to pay 5 million for a beefed up charge by a woman that has a habit of charging men with sexual abuse that did not do anything followed by a judge that is making his Judicial judgement based on personal feelings of Trump.
Fight Fight Fight! Do not pay, sue the judge and the woman.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
I doubt that the judge can be sued. Normally, he should be impeachable, but that requires such high numbers that a majority of Democrats too would be needed to pull that off
40 rounds says
The nice thing about being president is that you can make it very uncomfortable for individuals who have screwed you over in the past
WPM says
For a case of an” encounter ” either in the fall of 1995 or the spring of 1996 no telling what day of the week either ,or time of day?. First reported to the press about around 2022 ,no police report ,no witnesses ,no DNA evidence no security footage from in the store or from the street? In an interview with Anderson Cooper after the trial she said she (Ms Carol) found rape and the idea of rape sexy ,or a turn on? Trump ask that the trial be moved out of Manhattan to either Westchester NY or Staten Island ,because Manhattan voted over 80 percent for Biden in 2020 and they knew Trump could not get a fair trial there.
somehistory says
Although the jury said there was no ‘rape,’ the “judge” in the case said Mr. Trump committed rape because ‘assault’ is the same thing as rape. (he doesn’t know the Law, or doesn’t care to speak Truth)
The case should never have been heard since the year it supposedly happened was last century. A real rape by a serial rapist can’t be prosecuted if the statute runs out before he is caught. To counter that problem…in actual rapes…the law provided for DNA to be put in the place of a name on an arrest warrant.
This is still just a ‘get-Trump’ campaign, in whatever way they can. It shows the level of corruption to which his enemies have slunk.
Clearsighted says
Hard to believe.
James Lincoln says
I’m surprised that there have not been even more bogus cases like this against Pres. Trump.