BillStime Posted September 9, 2020 Author Posted September 9, 2020 (edited) 7 hours ago, I am the egg man said: So many posts of your own under your own thread, doesn't concern you as being self serving? It’s newsworthy - especially now that BARR/DOJ is taking over the case so Trump doesn’t have to use his own money to defend. The Justice Department seeks to intervene in a lawsuit brought by Trump's rape accuser, which would leave taxpayers footing the legal bills Highly unusual for DOJ to intervene in a case that began over 12 years before his term began, straight up intimidation tactics and retaliation. Where is Ken Starr on this? His DNA on her dress is enough. Edited September 9, 2020 by BillStime
SectionC3 Posted September 9, 2020 Posted September 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, BillStime said: It’s newsworthy - especially now that BARR/DOJ is taking over the case so Trump doesn’t have to use his own money to defend. The Justice Department seeks to intervene in a lawsuit brought by Trump's rape accuser, which would leave taxpayers footing the legal bills Highly unusual for DOJ to intervene in a case that began over 12 years before his term began, straight up intimidation tactics and retaliation. Where is Ken Starr on this? His DNA on her dress is enough. It's a disgrace. A flat disgrace that taxpayers have to pay for this.
ALF Posted September 9, 2020 Posted September 9, 2020 Justice Department wants to defend Trump in E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit (CNN)The US Justice Department, in an extraordinary move on Tuesday, asked to take over the defense of President Donald Trump in a defamation lawsuit filed against him by E. Jean Carroll, a woman who has accused Trump of sexual assault. While the alleged sexual assault occurred long before Trump became President, the Justice Department argued that it must take over because Trump's comments spurring the defamation lawsuit came while he was in office. The move -- defending Trump at taxpayer expense -- comes amid ongoing criticism that the Justice Department has acted in the President's personal interests. The request and possible change of lawyers could further delay the lawsuit, or even kill it entirely. Should the Justice Department be allowed to take over, it could mean the end of Carroll's lawsuit as the federal government can't be sued for defamation, noted CNN legal analyst and University of Texas law school professor Steve Vladeck. https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/08/politics/e-jean-carroll-trump-lawsuit/index.html
Numark3 Posted September 9, 2020 Posted September 9, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, ALF said: Justice Department wants to defend Trump in E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit (CNN)The US Justice Department, in an extraordinary move on Tuesday, asked to take over the defense of President Donald Trump in a defamation lawsuit filed against him by E. Jean Carroll, a woman who has accused Trump of sexual assault. While the alleged sexual assault occurred long before Trump became President, the Justice Department argued that it must take over because Trump's comments spurring the defamation lawsuit came while he was in office. The move -- defending Trump at taxpayer expense -- comes amid ongoing criticism that the Justice Department has acted in the President's personal interests. The request and possible change of lawyers could further delay the lawsuit, or even kill it entirely. Should the Justice Department be allowed to take over, it could mean the end of Carroll's lawsuit as the federal government can't be sued for defamation, noted CNN legal analyst and University of Texas law school professor Steve Vladeck. https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/08/politics/e-jean-carroll-trump-lawsuit/index.html I don’t anything about this specifically, but the idea that the case would go away if the DOJ steps in on immunity grounds because the feds can’t be sued directly seems wildly unfounded. I have never heard of immunity being created by representation...it doesn’t change the parties. but that’s honestly an uneducated guess, more of a smell test. Edited September 9, 2020 by Crayola64
Tiberius Posted September 9, 2020 Posted September 9, 2020 Add to list The Justice Department on Tuesday intervened in the defamation lawsuit brought by a woman who says President Trump raped her years ago, moving the matter to federal court and signaling it wants to make the U.S. government — rather than Trump himself — the defendant in the case. In filings in federal court in Manhattan, the Justice Department asserted that Trump was “acting within the scope of his office as President of the United States” when he denied during interviews in 2019 that he had raped journalist E. Jean Carroll more than two decades ago in a New York City department store. Carroll sued Trump over that denial in November. The maneuver removes the case — at least for now — from state court in New York, where a judge last month had rejected Trump’s bid for a delay and put Carroll’s team back on course to seek a DNA sample and an under-oath interview from the president. It also means that Justice Department lawyers will be essentially aiding Trump’s defense, and taxpayers could be on the hook for any potential damages, if the U.S. government is allowed to stand in for Trump. Winning damages against the government, though, would be more unlikely than in a suit against Trump, as the notion of “sovereign immunity” gives the government and its employees broad protection from lawsuits.
Buffalo_Gal Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 On 9/9/2020 at 9:33 AM, ALF said: Justice Department wants to defend Trump in E. Jean Carroll defamation lawsuit (CNN)The US Justice Department, in an extraordinary move on Tuesday, asked to take over the defense of President Donald Trump in a defamation lawsuit filed against him by E. Jean Carroll, a woman who has accused Trump of sexual assault. While the alleged sexual assault occurred long before Trump became President, the Justice Department argued that it must take over because Trump's comments spurring the defamation lawsuit came while he was in office. The move -- defending Trump at taxpayer expense -- comes amid ongoing criticism that the Justice Department has acted in the President's personal interests. The request and possible change of lawyers could further delay the lawsuit, or even kill it entirely. Should the Justice Department be allowed to take over, it could mean the end of Carroll's lawsuit as the federal government can't be sued for defamation, noted CNN legal analyst and University of Texas law school professor Steve Vladeck. https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/08/politics/e-jean-carroll-trump-lawsuit/index.html 2
IDBillzFan Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 I'm guessing Tara Reade could not be reached for comment. 1 1
Q-baby! Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 Trump is the greatest rapist! Never has there been such a great rapist!
RochesterRob Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 9 minutes ago, Q-baby! said: Trump is the greatest rapist! Never has there been such a great rapist! And that bull plop statement is the greatest evidence there is showing why Trump is not a dictator. If he were you would have long since been held in a secret facility awaiting prosecution outside of a due process setting.
Doc Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 23 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: If this goes to trial, I hope they put her on the stand.
Q-baby! Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 11 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: And that bull plop statement is the greatest evidence there is showing why Trump is not a dictator. If he were you would have long since been held in a secret facility awaiting prosecution outside of a due process setting. I said he was a rapist, not a dictator. Keep up!
RochesterRob Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Q-baby! said: I said he was a rapist, not a dictator. Keep up! I'm free to set my own direction while you are wholly owned by the liberal establishment. Your (dog) collar must be getting tight while pulling on the leash and barking at me. 1
B-Man Posted September 10, 2020 Posted September 10, 2020 THE LATEST ANTI-TRUMP “TEMPEST” DEBUNKED The Justice Department has intervened in a lawsuit brought against President Trump by E. Jean Carroll. She’s the journalist who claims that Trump raped her 25 years ago. Carroll’s suit isn’t about the alleged rape. It’s a defamation suit based on Trump’s denial of her allegation. To those unschooled in the law, it probably seems odd that the DOJ would substitute itself for Trump as the defendant in a suit about statements Trump made. The Washington Post wants to capitalize on that sentiment. Its lead editorial today claims that the DOJ is “sink[ing] to a new low” by acting as Trump’s “personal law firm.” E.J. Dionne chimes in, calling the DOJ “Trump’s corrupt law firm.” (Both headlines from paper edition) But Trump denied Carroll’s allegation while he was president (and, in all likelihood wouldn’t have been asked about alleged ancient misconduct, had he not been president). The fact that the allegedly defamatory statement was uttered during Trump’s presidency justifies the DOJ’s involvement under the law. That’s not my opinion (I had none because I’m unschooled in this area of the law). It’s the opinion of two well known law professors interviewed by the Washington Post. Steven Vladek, from the left, called the Justice Department’s legal position “a plausible argument” because courts have interpreted the scope of federal employment “very broadly, almost to the point where anything you do while on the job, courts usually treat as scope of employment.” This doctrine supports the DOJ’s position, Vladek acknowledged. He complains only about the timing of the Department’s action, not its legal merit. From the center, Jonathan Turley agrees that the Justice Department’s legal position is sound. He dislikes the DOJ’s move, but says it is legal and, therefore, likely to be upheld in court. Post reporters Devlin Barrett and Matt Zapotosky do not quote any scholar who disagrees with the assessments of Vladek and Turley. Given the Post’s editorial position, I doubt it was for lack of trying to find one. I should also note that neither the Post’s editors nor Dionne cited anyone who dissented on legal grounds, either. {snip} Thus does another Washington Post/Democratic talking point go up in flames. 1
3rdnlng Posted September 11, 2020 Posted September 11, 2020 22 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: E. Jean Carroll will make a fine witness. If she can hit on Anderson Cooper will she try it with the judge? Actually I view her as a less attractive woman who could play the wacko part in Fatal Attraction.
US Egg Posted September 12, 2020 Posted September 12, 2020 28 minutes ago, BillStime said: No chance So Tea Pain is your new super hero. Call DC comics for him to audition ? 1
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted September 12, 2020 Posted September 12, 2020 On 9/10/2020 at 1:55 PM, Doc said: If this goes to trial, I hope they put her on the stand. ....is it true that Section3 is his defense attorney???................. 1
Q-baby! Posted September 12, 2020 Posted September 12, 2020 7 minutes ago, BillStime said: um you rally behind Trump - I’d stfu if I were you @B-Man That has to be fake? Did that ***** re tard actually post that?
Recommended Posts