My favorite comic bit was when pouty butthurt Trump couldn’t resist telling Carroll’s female lawyer that she wasn’t his type and he wasn’t sexually interested in her.
I really wish she had responded with “Thank you for that, Mr. Trump. I feel much safer about walking to my car this evening”.
Closing statement from Trump’s lawyer:
“People have very strong feelings about Donald Trump. That’s obvious,” Tacopina said. “There’s a time and a secret place to do that: it’s called a ballot box during an election.”
“What they want is for you to hate him enough to ignore the facts,” Tacopina added. “All objective evidence cuts against her.”
What objective evidence? You didn’t present any, for God’s Sake!
The only thing Trump’s lawyer could come up with is that it’s possible that Trump is both a “rude and crude” person, and also “her story makes no sense.” Because they just assert that it makes no sense. With no evidence to back it up other than “nuh uh, she’s not the type I like to rape.”
It’s not even as effective as the Chewbacca Defense.
Concerning Trumps lack of supplying DNA and rape, couldn’t investagators use (or have used) a close relatives DNA to narrow down the suspect pool. Like say that daughter that doesn’t like him? Or because their was no rape charge this couldn’t be done?
tea leaves say jury starts deliberations at 11 ish today.
i’m reckoning on a verdict late today or early am tomorrow.
Neice. (?)
Mary Trump. And I think “doesn’t like” is a bit of an understatement.
That’s the one. Would she be able to provide enough of a DNA match to raise the probability that he is in fact the source of the seman in question?
But you also run the risk of degradation of the DNA sample over time, in which case you might get an ambiguous result.
I think the goal here was to get Trump to refuse to provide a DNA sample in a prompt manner: “Why is he refusing? If he knows that he didn’t assault Ms Carroll, wouldn’t he want to provide a sample as quickly as possible to rebut her claim? What is he hiding?”
So Trump is being sued for defamation for being called a liar and a political operative who made up a rape story for personal gain.
Are there any other court cases where the defence has won, by presenting no evidence other than saying that the plaintiff is a liar, a political operative who made up a rape story for personal gain?
I know that the truth is an affirmative defense to defamation, but Trump’s lawyer seems to be simply asserting this with little evidence.
ETA: Any recent cases where the tactic of “she didn’t scream therefore she wasn’t raped” has worked on a jury?
And just like clockwork, the lying sack of shit lies:
“Waiting for a jury decision on a False Accusation where I, despite being a current political candidate and leading all others in both parties, am not allowed to speak or defend myself, even as hard nosed reporters scream questions about this case at me,” the former president wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday. “In the meantime, the other side has a book falsely accusing me of Rape, & is working with the press. I will therefore not speak until after the trial, but will appeal the Unconstitutional silencing of me, as a candidate, no matter the outcome!”
I, despite being a current political candidate and leading all others in both parties, am not allowed to speak or defend myself,
What the actual fuck.
He can speak all he wants. He’s speaking now. He could have attended the trial. He could have taken the stand in the trial. The judge offered him a special window of time to come and testify at the trial, even after his own lawyers said he would not.
Jesus. The man cannot stop lying.
I like how he said he’s going to appeal, no matter the outcome. So even if the jury finds him not guilty, he’s going to appeal. Because he’s a fuckwit, and does not understand the basics of what is even going on.
After reading some examples of AI Chat, his nonsense really does read like a AI that kind of has an understanding of human communication, but is just a bit…off, and bullshits to fill in the gaps. Doesn’t grasp basic things that a human should in the expression of oneself.
They’ve reached a verdict. It will be read out at 3:00 p.m. ET.
That was quick. I guess decisions are easy when one side has nothing whatsoever to offer.
Trump has already telegraphed his lawyer’s plans; Appeal, appeal appeal.
Did you doubt it? It’s one of his main strategies.
Lie, Deny, Appeal, Refuse to Pay.
You totally know the drill. 
And the verdict is:
Liable for Battery.
So far I’m counting $3,300,000 in damages.
2 million for battery.