2 2
wmw999

J D Vance, DEI Candidate

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, richravizza said:

You can assume anything you want. The passage of the 2022 ASA was timely,but like the jury "everyone knew he was a rapist" right. Some people also believe the OJ jury got it right,too. LOL

"Among the [Article] 130 claims are rape, sexual abuse and forcible touching," he said. "Therefore, in order for Ms. Carroll to prevail on the statute of limitations, she needed to prove [by a preponderance of the evidence] that she was the victim of rape or sexual abuse or forcible touching."Any one of the three would have sufficed. The jury found two of the three applied, but not rape." Clinton-esque.

 

 

So how many did he pay off a la Stormy? How many NDAs were signed? How many stories did the National Enquirer kill on his behalf? There was quite an extensive list of women claiming the creep molested them one way or another, including his ex wife. And that doesn't even address what might have gone on with Epstein...where there's smoke there's fire. And in Donnys case, its a bloody big forest fire producing lots of smoke.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, richravizza said:

If you repeat a lie, what does that make you, a suka or the loser?

Unproven, perhaps, but what makes you declare so confidently that it's a lie?

Given what he thought was appropriate to say in public to his supporters about Sen. McCain it's entirely consistent that he would say those things in private.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, richravizza said:

You can assume anything you want. The passage of the 2022 ASA was timely,but like the jury "everyone knew he was a rapist" right. Some people also believe the OJ jury got it right,too.

Well, according to you, OJ didn't kill his wife since he was never convicted of murder.

I don't know about "everyone" - but two separate and independent juries certainly thought he forcibly penetrated her against her will.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 7/28/2024 at 10:54 PM, obelixtim said:

So how many did he pay off a la Stormy? How many NDAs were signed? How many stories did the National Enquirer kill on his behalf? There was quite an extensive list of women claiming the creep molested them one way or another, including his ex wife. And that doesn't even address what might have gone on with Epstein...where there's smoke there's fire. And in Donnys case, its a bloody big forest fire producing lots of smoke.  

 And Bill, it was a stipid position to put myself in .... defending a real douche! LOL.

How I fell into the trap of reacting instead of responding. It's a practice I try and avoid. My point was with the actual accuracy, of the term rape, that's all.Specifically, because there are professors that forget to edit,while requiring others to note such specifics.

On 7/29/2024 at 5:35 AM, jakee said:

Unproven, perhaps, but what makes you declare so confidently that it's a lie?

Given what he thought was appropriate to say in public to his supporters about Sen. McCain it's entirely consistent that he would say those things in private.

Hi Jackee

 It's been a minute!...   relieved and  pleasantly surprised to see your typical spunky reply. It's a complement and I agree with You. Thank you for the acknowledgement of " Unproven perhaps". 

 Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, richravizza said:

How I fell into the trap of reacting instead of responding. It's a practice I try and avoid. My point was with the actual accuracy, of the term rape, that's all.

Agreed.  Fortunately in this case the judge clarified that point, and pointed out that what Trump did meets the common definition of "rape."  In his own words:

"The finding that Ms. Carroll failed 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 recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now JD Vance has fallen afoul of some of Trump's strongest supporters - white supremacists.

Nick Fuentes: “J.D. Vance also has an Indian wife and a kid named Vivek. All his kids have Indian names—so it’s like, what exactly are we getting here? And that’s not a dig at him just because I’m a racist or something. But who is this guy really?  Do we really expect the guy who has an Indian wife and named their kid Vivek is going to support White identity?"

O noes!  Not Trump's base!

(I love the "it's not like I'm a racist or anything!")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2024 at 4:59 AM, nigel99 said:

Onion Headline  “In recent interview Trump admitted he chose JD because he looks good in a dress”

Somewhere I read that when Trump saw the photo of JD Vance in drag, he mistook it for his ex-wife Marla Maples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ryoder said:

Somewhere I read that when Trump saw the photo of JD Vance in drag, he mistook it for his ex-wife Marla Maples.

Or was that the woman he raped?  Or who he paid the hush money to?  Or the woman he grabbed by the pussy?  So many to confuse him.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2