by LoveUniHateExams 77 Replies latest social current
You sure have a lot of strong opinions about a country you don't live in. Not arguing, just commenting that I find it a bit odd - why do you find this odd?
The US is the leader of the free world. What goes on over there eventually comes to other countries.
If I have lots of strong opinions, then what, do you have weak opinions?
https://www.churchofengland.org/news-and-media/news-and-statements/response-open-letter-abortion#na
I'm hoping that this link will work.
A couple of you asked about my church's stance on abortion. Well when l thought about it , l didn't know !!
So a bit of Googling later - this letter sums it up .
Jan
Thanks Jan, reason I asked was because I was thinking back to a conversation I had with someone probably 20 years ago and the person didn't see a problem with using abortion as birth control. Their sister had had 13 abortions and was still quite young so who knows in total? and someone else they knew had had 8. I was shocked.
So Trump has been found likely responsible for sexual assault (but not rape), and making false and defamatory statements with malice, and ordered to pay the victim nearly $5m.
It's a civil case not a criminal one and Trump has, of course, said he will fight the verdict, but as someone living outside the USA (who is frankly amazed he even came near the White House), I wonder what do our US members think will be the likely impact on his chances of being President again? And/or the effect on the Republican choice for candidate to run against Biden (assuming the old man makes it himself!)
Ordinarily, I would say that this sinks his chances, but he won in 2016 in spite of things like his "grab them by the pussy" remark. I felt like the other comments he made during that conversation (where he explained that he was trying to seduce a married woman for no other reason than "want[ing] to fuck her") should have done much more damage with the Protestant voters that he was relying on, but it didn't seem to have any effect.
On the other hand, his 2016 antics may have been seen as a more earnest approach than the usual slick and dishonest blather that we are used to from politicians. Which would mean that the act will not have the same impact now, and things like the lawsuit --and his refusal to let the 2020 election go-- may make prospective voters feel as if he is too distracted now. He's also quite old, but that won't hurt him if he's running against Biden.
Trump has been found likely responsible for sexual assault (but not rape), and making false and defamatory statements with malice, and ordered to pay the victim nearly $5m - but surely sexual assault that's not rape still warrants a custodial sentence.
Is 'likely responsible' the same as 'guilty'?
Is this genuine, or is it politically-motivated by Trump's many enemies?
Don't wish to downplay sexual assault by any means, just trying to work stuff out ...
All this is part of the fantasy show of Politics.
Whilst we focus on it with our tribal lenses in, we'll never be free of the lie that is encapsulated within the media. Never be free to see the world as it really is but stuck perpetually in a tribal quagmire of struggle before death.
It's all a sham but sadly these bar stewards ruin our lives and we don't really have a say in it.
I loathe politicians.
Is 'likely responsible' the same as 'guilty'?
To be honest, I struggled with that definition and that choice of words was mine. I originally wrote "guilty" in my opening sentence, but then checking the wording carefully in all the US news outlets in the immediate aftermath of the verdict, they were all using the phrase "liable" and the presenter of the BBC news coverage I watched was very precise about spelling out the difference - because it is a civil case not a criminal one, they were avoiding the term "guilty".
I don't know the exact wording in US statutes, but it's similar to the UK where the criminal standard has to be "proved beyond reasonable doubt" to declare a guilty verdict, whereas civil cases only have to be "on the balance of probabilities" to find against someone.
But of course, while technically in law that may be the case, in practice that's nonsense: if you're found "liable" in a case brought by someone claiming you committed a sexual assault, that's essentially saying you did it. And I notice that now, hours later, more news sources are using the word "guilty" in their headlines. Perhaps they were waiting to double-check with their legal teams first!
Is this genuine, or is it politically-motivated by Trump's many enemies?
I don't know, but one US lawyer and former federal prosecutor that I saw interviewed said that any claim by Trump's legal team to have the verdict declared biased and overturned could be made more difficult given that the jury did not find against him on all counts. They threw out the claim of rape. However, it appears that it came down to them finding Trump a less credible and believable witness than Carroll (not surprisingly, in my view!)
Trump “forcibly touched” this Soros backed Twat that looks like Julie Andrews on crack… Sure…
Trump is no Saint but c’mon man! A real sexual assault victim knows exactly when and where they were assaulted. This bimbo couldn’t remember and then magically remembers before an upcoming Election?? Get real…
DD
"I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait,”
“When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything."
“I did try and fuck her. She was married. I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. … I moved on her like a bitch, but I couldn’t get there and she was married.”
Yeah it's hard to work out why he has so little credibility when it comes to his behaviour around women.
