Trump Charged With Rape of Teen in Civil Court

[Paperview]

I'm not a Trump guy, never have been.
But I find the timing of this lawsuit and allegation a little too cutesy and partisan-political.

Lady, you claim to have been raped in 1994, but wait until 2016, when a guy is well into his Presidential campaign, to level the allegations?
Who does that?

Shabby, embarrassing (for the lady in question and her lawyer) useless, and utterly-lacking in credibility.

Next, please.
:doh

You should consider reading the documents in the lawsuit.

To add: She has the sworn testimony of an eye witness.

 

[Paperview]

Is this a moderator editing your post? No worry, all of your original unsubstantiated claims are well preserved in post #2. I hope that you at least did the research that resulted in the deletion of the other claims.

...Howard slinks out with tales between his legs...

You seem to be implying something here.

Likely the edit was because of copyright rules, not because they were "unsubstantiated."

All those snipped bullet points are true.

• Trump was named in Epstein’s “little black book.” Numerous times.
• Trump did fly on Epstein’s private plane. This was testified to in court.
• Trump and Epstein are named as sex abusers in a case with an under-aged girl

Trump's friendship with Epstein goes back to the late 80's.

In 2002 Trump called the pedophile rapist a "terrific guy" and bragged how he'd know him for 15 years.

 

[Paperview]

The Witness:



https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits

 

[Paperview]

...
You neglected to add a couple of other important quotes from the article including the subtitle:
"Allegations similar to those filed -- and dismissed -- in California by the same plaintiff"

They were not dismissed for lack of merit, but because of bad paperwork. She was filing pro-se.

"On April 26, a woman identified as “Katie Johnson” filed a similar rape complaint against Trump and Epstein in a California court. That case was dismissed in May because Johnson did not file the proper paperwork. The address she listed in California papers was found to be an abandoned property."...

Yes. She had rented that place previously, and had left.

"An attorney for the plaintiff, Thomas Meagher, did not immediately return requests seeking comment. The website for Meagher’s New Jersey-based firm indicates that it primarily specializes in intellectual property law." [my added bold]

You might think that a more specialized attorney would have taken this high profile case.

He offered his services when he learned she was having trouble money-wise finding a lawyer, and because other lawyers were scared off by Trump as defendant. By all accounts he is a highly regarded lawyer with exceptional litigation skills. The complaint was filed by a pro.

Bottom line, this seem to be full of gaping holes and I will await independent confirmation from a more reputable source...perhaps the Puffington Host or the DailyCause. [Note: sarcasm]

It was just filed; major media is treating it gingerly. As they should. It may very well go no where, as I stated in the thread I started, but it indeed an active suit, and Trump and Epstein have both been served with a summons.


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

Lawsuit Charges Donald Trump with Raping a 13-Year-Old Girl | SNOPES


Yes, Donald Trump Was Accused of Raping a 13 Year Old | LawNewz

 

[NoLeftNoRight]

Regardless.....

What this is after all the mud washes off......

Is more proof that the clinton foundation is a crime organization and Hillary Clinton is probably the most serious problem America will have if foolish enough to elect her.


I am 100% confident that this is nothing more than another dirty, under the belt smear attempt by the left....specifically the Clintons and their supporters

 

[Paperview]

Regardless.....

What this is after all the mud washes off......

Is more proof that the clinton foundation is a crime organization

lol. How truly bizarre. A lawsuit filed in federal by an indigent 35 year old CA woman, who claims she was raped - signed under penalty of perjury, along with an eyewitness affidavit -- is *proof!* PROOF I say, the Clinton Foundation is criminal.

LOL. <loco>

I am 100% confident that this is nothing more than another dirty, under the belt smear attempt by the left....specifically the Clintons and their supporters

Pretty high confidence lever there chap. Splain it to us how this is Hillary's doing.

Details, please.

 

[RenoCon]

They were not dismissed for lack of merit, but because of bad paperwork. She was filing pro-se.



Yes. She had rented that place previously, and had left.

He offered his services when he learned she was having trouble money-wise finding a lawyer, and because other lawyers were scared off by Trump as defendant. By all accounts he is a highly regarded lawyer with exceptional litigation skills. The complaint was filed by a pro.



It was just filed; major media is treating it gingerly. As they should. It may very well go no where, as I stated in the thread I started, but it indeed an active suit, and Trump and Epstein have both been served with a summons.


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

Lawsuit Charges Donald Trump with Raping a 13-Year-Old Girl | SNOPES


Yes, Donald Trump Was Accused of Raping a 13 Year Old | LawNewz

"Major media"? SNOPES, New York Daily News, really?

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[RenoCon]

You seem to be implying something here.

Likely the edit was because of copyright rules, not because they were "unsubstantiated."

That's news to me. I've never heard of that in DP. I think as long as you correctly quote the source there should not be a concern regarding "copyright rules." Besides if there are truly copyright issues that caused this editing why would your bullet point number one still be there?

BTW, a rather loose association with someone Trump knew 20 years ago does not imply guilt. Associations with unsavory characters certainly has not interfered with Bill and Hillary's careers.



Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[Groogrux]

I'm not a Trump guy, never have been.
But I find the timing of this lawsuit and allegation a little too cutesy and partisan-political.

Lady, you claim to have been raped in 1994, but wait until 2016, when a guy is well into his Presidential campaign, to level the allegations?
Who does that?

Shabby, embarrassing (for the lady in question and her lawyer) useless, and utterly-lacking in credibility.

Next, please.
:doh

Money-grab

 

[Cardinal]

It wouldn't be a campaign unless someone on the left tried to hang rape charges on one of the Republican candidates.

Irony is ironic.

 

[Patrickt]

Ummm...what part of Trump Charged With Rape of Teen in Civil Court did you not see?

Hmmm...do you use the definition of rape as you use the definition of charged? That would be to mean whatever you want it to mean.

 

[Patrickt]

I think Donald Trump is a liar, a huckster, a deadbeat and a liberal but this lawsuit is ridiculous. First, the "news source is a joke. Second, a similar lawsuit was dismissed in California so apparently this anonymous women is taking another shot and another liberal state.

Lawsuits can be filed for bood reason, bad reason, or no reason. So far, it's meaningless.

And saying charged in a civil court is as meaningless as news stories saying a whale or a gorilla was murdered. It's simply stupid.

 

[Paperview]

That's news to me. I've never heard of that in DP. I think as long as you correctly quote the source there should not be a concern regarding "copyright rules."

Read the rules. Pay attention the phrase "Fair Use."

Besides if there are truly copyright issues that caused this editing why would your bullet point number one still be there?

It's not my OP. The first bullet point remains, because: Rules.

See again: Fair Use.

 

[Paperview]

"Major media"? SNOPES, New York Daily News, really?

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Read my post again.

I was supplying you with some further links. I never called those sources major media.

 

[Mason66]

I, for the record, don't believe that Bill Cosby is innocent of drugging women and having sex with them.
But we'll have to wait for the legal hubbub to subside before we ever learn the truth.
But he'll probably drop dead before that ever happens, so, in the end, it'll be a jacked-up mess.

Re; Donald Trump, I don't have an opinion on whether or not he raped this woman back in 1994.
If he did it, he should suffer the consequences.
If he didn't do it, he should not suffer.

All I said was that the timing of this lawsuit is awfully suspect.
And sadly, predictably partisan-political.

I am a firm believer that people who claim to be victims of any crime should come forward right away.
When they don't, and they wait until the middle of a Presidential campaign, decades later?
It's usually bull$hit.

I just don't find the entire story particularly credible.
Is that fair enough?
:shock:

Maybe she didn't know where to find Trump in all this time.

We all know Trump is a very private guy.

 

[RenoCon]

Read my post again.

I was supplying you with some further links. I never called those sources major media.

And the major media sources are...?

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[Cardinal]

I think Donald Trump is a liar, a huckster, a deadbeat and a liberal but this lawsuit is ridiculous. First, the "news source is a joke. Second, a similar lawsuit was dismissed in California so apparently this anonymous women is taking another shot and another liberal state.

Lawsuits can be filed for bood reason, bad reason, or no reason. So far, it's meaningless.

And saying charged in a civil court is as meaningless as news stories saying a whale or a gorilla was murdered. It's simply stupid.

Why is it ridiculous? Do you know anything about her accusation that shows it to be implausible?

 

[RenoCon]

Read the rules. Pay attention the phrase "Fair Use."

It's not my OP. The first bullet point remains, because: Rules.

See again: Fair Use.

Thanks. I get it. The OP was rather long-winded. However, I have never had one of my long winded and quoted posts edited.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

 

[Howard]

"Major media"? SNOPES, New York Daily News, really?

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

Maybe she should write a book about it. From some of the posts on here, books are irrefutable evidence about Bill.

 

[Paperview]

And the major media sources are...?

Treating it gingerly, as I said -- and waiting for more solid information to be garnered.

It's a pretty fresh piece of legally filed information.

 

[Paperview]

Thanks. I get it. The OP was rather long-winded. However, I have never had one of my long winded and quoted posts edited.

If you quote more than a couple paragraphs from a copyrighted source, chances are you will be.

Your own commentary is not subject to copyright rules.

 

[DA60]

I would be surprised if it is true.

But I would not be shocked.

Ever since he mad chose bizarre comments about his eldest daughter (twice) I am not sure his head is screwed on tight (sexually speaking).

 

[DamnYankee]

No wonder he didn't go after Bill. Bill was only the subject of right wing rumors.

The closer we get to November, the more the left freaks out

 

[RenoCon]

Treating it gingerly, as I said -- and waiting for more solid information to be garnered.

It's a pretty fresh piece of legally filed information.

You said: "It was just filed; major media is treating it gingerly." Major media is not "treating it gingerly." They are not reporting it at all (though I would not be surprised to see it show up in the New York Times). I believe that even the liberal main stream press will give this obvious politically motivated claim little credence.

 

[Howard]

The closer we get to November, the more the left freaks out

OMG. I thought you were dead.