• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donald Trump Again Accused of Rape in New Federal Lawsuit [DOCUMENTS]

I'll take your 10 points, as I know you only said that to dissuade anyone from bringing up Juanita Broderick and the fact that Clinton supporters condone rape, as long as their fair haired boy is the one who committed it.
Broaddrick? The woman who never filed suit and the same woman who signed under penalty of perjury an affidavit that stated she wasn't sexually assaulted by Clinton.

That Broaddrick?

Clinton also has connections to a noted pedophile who sold underage girls to political big wigs. Clinton visited his residence several times.

Trump also has connections to a noted pedophile who sold underage girls to political big wigs. Trump visited his residence several times.

Trump is the one being sued. Focus.
 
Can't say it is.

Can't say it isn't either.

They are asking for a jury trial. Summons have been delivered to Trump and Epstein.

Does it matter that the statute of limitations has since run on this?
 
I'll take your 10 points, as I know you only said that to dissuade anyone from bringing up Juanita Broderick and the fact that Clinton supporters condone rape, as long as their fair haired boy is the one who committed it.


Clinton also has connections to a noted pedophile who sold underage girls to political big wigs. Clinton visited his residence several times.

Hmm, imagine that; hypocrisy on the behalf of the left, I'm wholeheartedly not surprised!!

Indeed.

I'm just waiting for a Clinton, Soros, or David Brock connection to just miraculously pop up.

Legitimate? :roll:
 
Broaddrick? The woman who never filed suit and the same woman who signed under penalty of perjury an affidavit that stated she wasn't sexually assaulted by Clinton.

That Broaddrick?



Trump also has connections to a noted pedophile who sold underage girls to political big wigs. Trump visited his residence several times.

Trump is the one being sued. Focus.

Oh yes, feign moral outrage now that Trump is being accused! Never mind that the accuser's law suit was tossed in April by a judge in California, when the plaintiff was seeking $100,000,000 in damages.
Or that she filed a second lawsuit in New York for $75,000, after all she is flat broke and admitted it during the California suit. Hey, some free money is better than no free money, she's hoping Trump will cough up the $75k to make her go away.

Oh and the real clincher in your case, "Katie Johnson" alleges she was raped in 1994, and just now got around to doing something about it in 2016 when she filed her first lawsuit. Who waits 22 years before realizing they need $100 million for their pain and suffering?
-----
Juanita Broadderick never sought financial compensation, or criminal recourse against Bill Clinton. In fact, she reluctantly was pulled into voicing her allegations,

"In the fall of 1997, Paula Jones’s private investigators tried to talk to Broaddrick at her home, also secretly taping the conversation. Broaddrick refused to discuss the incident, saying “it was just a horrible horrible thing,” and that she “wouldn’t relive it for anything.”The investigators told her she would likely be subpoenaed if she would not talk to them. Broaddrick said she would deny everything, saying “you can’t get to him, and I’m not going to ruin my good name to do it… there’s just absolutely no way anyone can get to him, he’s just too vicious.” Broaddrick was subpoenaed in the Jones suit soon after and submitted an affidavit denying that Clinton had made “any sexual advances”.The recording of Broaddrick’s conversation with the investigators was leaked to the press, but Broaddrick continued to refuse to speak to reporters.

Broadderick denied that she'd been raped because she feared the wrath of the Clintons, calling Bill "vicious".

Juanita Broadderick is a vastly more believable woman that some chick that pops up and demands $100,000,000 while admitting she's completely broke!
 
I think there should be a statute of limitations on all crimes except murder. This is 22 years old....how boring. Just another DNC dirty politics ploy.

Which leads me to ask this question.....



 
Does it matter that the statute of limitations has since run on this?


I think you need to read the suit.

The judge could waive the statute of limitations.

She is asking it be waved because of her fear of death threats from the defendants.

in New York the Statute of Limitations is rather complex; particularly concerning sexual assault on a minor.

She has also asked the Police Commissioner of NY for help.


Johnson letter to Bratton.pdf.


BY OVERNIGHT FOR DELIVERY WEDNESDAY, MAY 25


May 24,2016
William Bratton, Jr. Commissioner


Dear Commissioner Bratton:
I was violently raped by Donald J. Trump and Jeffrey E. Epstein in New York City, in related yet separate incidents, at age 13.

Their sexual assaults against me and other minors, more than the rapes alone, occurred on multiple occasions at
the residence of Mr. Epstein in Manhattan during June-September, 1994.
The incidents are detailed in my claims filed April 26, 2016 in U.S. District Court in Riverside, California visible
online here: Donald Trump Lawsuit. I had assistance from friends
with that filing and in composing this letter.

All of my factual claims in my federal lawsuit filing and herein are true and correct, including with regard to
multiple threats to my life and to the lives of my loved ones from Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein. The address I
used for the federal filing (6634 Desert Queen Avenue, Twenty-Nine Palms, California), therefore, was that of a
recent rental home in which I lived, but not the place I am currently hiding from Mssrs. Trump and Epstein (for
fear that they or their agents may seek to kill me).

Besides Mssrs. Trump and Epstein, each of whom was witness in some way to the crimes of the other, there are
other witnesses besides me who know of their wrongdoing. In my federal complaint, some are referred to as
"Jane Doe," "Maria Doe" and "Tiffany Doe." Eyewitness Tiffany, at least, has assured me that she will testify as
to the truth and factuality of my claims.

Like other survivors of rape, sexual assault, child abuse or sex trafficking, I have tried to repress the memories,
to heal and somehow move on. When Mr. Trump began to look like a serious contender for the Presidency late
last year, however, I resolved that I must tell the truth about what he and Mr. Epstein did to me.

...

One nice attorney, contradicting prior attorneys, recently indicated that there is another problem with my civil claims
apart from my inability as of April 26 to pay the filing fee.

If she's correct, the federal and New York statutes of limitation protect Mssrs. Trump and Epstein from any civil
damages for raping me and other children 22 years ago. She wrote us that "New York has no criminal statute of
limitations for rape/criminal sexual act/ aggravated sexual conduct against a child. Accordingly, should Ms.
Johnson desire to contact prosecutors about her allegations, she is free to do so. But with respect to a CIVIL
lawsuit in New York for monetary damages against defendants alleged to have sexually assaulted the plaintiff,
the statute of limitations has run."

I have no good reason to doubt her, but I am still trying to find a civil attorney who knows for sure. Maybe she is
correct, maybe the earlier attorneys are correct. It appears, however, that I may never receive any financial
compensation from Mssrs. Trump or Epstein for what they did to me and stole from me: My innocence, my
virginity, my happiness.

If the civil statutes of limitations are up for child rape -I can't quite believe it's true, but it may be-- I can live
with that. One way or another ....

<snip>

As I said under risk of federal perjury penalties in my April 26 filing, Mssrs. Trump and Epstein threatened me
and my family, and I am in fear for my life right now. Twelve-year-old "Maria Doe," mentioned in my filing, went
missing during 1994 and in the course of their threats to me, Mssrs. Trump and Epstein implied to me that she
was murdered.

To help prevent anything like that from happening to me, I recorded around an hour of (private, unreleased)
video testimony in early February about my horrible experiences with Mssrs. Trump and Epstein.

... I now realize, however, that I won't be able to hide forever.
Commissioner Bratton, I do not want to die and I do not want to be famous....
Mr. Bratton, please help me.
Thank you for listening to me and taking me seriously.

<signed> Katie johnson

Public Documents: Not subject to copyright.
 
I think there should be a statute of limitations on all crimes except murder. This is 22 years old....how boring. Just another DNC dirty politics ploy.

...

Said the guy who started a thread slamming Clinton for the 20 year old Juanita Broaddrick allegations.

A woman who never filed suit and claimed under oath she was not sexually assaulted.
 
Epstein is also one of Bill Clintons buddies and had at least 20 numbers he could reach Clinton at. Not to mention Bill was on his private(Epsteins) island many times. I doubt the Democrats will persue this.

I think there should be a statute of limitations on all crimes except murder. This is 22 years old....how boring. Just another DNC dirty politics ploy.

Which leads me to ask this question.....



<snip>
Why is it assumed the DNC is the puppet-master here, rather than the RNC/establishment or one of the other Republican candidates?

The timing (if it indeed is a political event) would seem best suited for the RNC convention, rather than the election.
 
First "glimpse" and small snippet of the woman accusing Trump of raping her at 13 years old:

 
How convenient....... :coffeepap

It is the same BS that they pulled on Herman Cain when he was running.
they brought up a bunch of bogus sexual harassment claims. none of them
where true but that didn't stop them from running his name through the mud.
 
I don't care. I am just telling you what the right wing will do with it. Payback is Hell.

This might be the right wing payback.
 
It is the same BS that they pulled on Herman Cain when he was running.
they brought up a bunch of bogus sexual harassment claims. none of them
where true but that didn't stop them from running his name through the mud.

Which one filed a federal lawsuit?
 
Does it matter that the statute of limitations has since run on this?

There's a statute of limitations on child molestation in the US?
What a barbaric concept. How long is it?
 
Which one filed a federal lawsuit?

anyone can file a federal lawsuit that doesn't make it any more true than
the other time it was filed and dismissed.
 
Why is it assumed the DNC is the puppet-master here, rather than the RNC/establishment or one of the other Republican candidates?

The timing (if it indeed is a political event) would seem best suited for the RNC convention, rather than the election.

I agree. The right wing of the Republican Party might have more reason to sling mud at Trump than the Democratic Party.
Trumps a bigger threat to the GOP than he is to the Democrats, for one thing.
 
There's a statute of limitations on child molestation in the US?
What a barbaric concept. How long is it?

It varies state to state.
 
But there is one in each state?

Again depends on the state. some are 10 years other are up to 20 years.
some have no limitation at all.

however it is up to the state prosecutor to bring the charges.

in this case it is a civil suit not a criminal suit. the judge could still say that
allegations should have been filed sooner.
 
I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant when the charges of crimes committed 22 years ago arise.
 
I agree. The right wing of the Republican Party might have more reason to sling mud at Trump than the Democratic Party.
Trumps a bigger threat to the GOP than he is to the Democrats, for one thing.
Yeah - this could be the result of anybody or anything at this time (including Clinton or simply the plaintiff), and let's face it: Trump has a lot of enemies and a lot of people who would like to get a chunk of his change!
 
OK. So it might not go anywhere, but it's active. I would think DB'ers would want to know.

You'd want to know, don't you?

The suit alleges:

"Trump and [Jefferey] Epstein sexually assaulted an underage girl at a series of Manhattan sex parties Epstein hosted in 1994.

“Immediately following this rape, Defendant Trump threatened me that, were I ever to reveal any of the details of Defendant Trump’s sexual and physical abuse of me, my family and I would be physically harmed if not killed,” the plaintiff said in an affidavit."

The woman has a witness who has sworn under oath she will testify on the veracity of the claims.

Rape lawsuit against Donald Trump resurfaces in New York court - NY Daily News

Heavy provides the Documents: Donald Trump Again Accused of Rape in New Federal Lawsuit [DOCUMENTS]



10 points to the first person who mentions Clinton.

Intresting. I wonder how this'll turn out.
 
I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant when the charges of crimes committed 22 years ago arise.

As do I.

The witness (long time employee of Epstein) that claims she will back her up in civil and criminal suits tips me a little over to *wondering* territory.
 
Back
Top Bottom