Trump-Carroll Fiasco: An Unprecedented Injustice Unraveled
Shared By Peter Boykin – American Political Commentator / Citizen Journalist / Political Candidate
Trump did not rape Carrol but the Jury wants Trump to pay
Trump-Carroll Fiasco: An Unprecedented Injustice Unraveled
In a jaw-dropping turn of events, former President Donald Trump has been ordered to pay an astounding $83 million to E. Jean Carroll, a second-rate advice columnist, for alleged defamation stemming from accusations of sexual assault in the 1990s. This verdict has erupted into what can only be deemed the most egregious miscarriage of justice in contemporary American history.
Jean Carroll’s case, characterized by its ludicrous nature, has unfolded as a series of hoaxes intended to hinder Trump’s potential return to the Oval Office in 2025. The dubious allegations, coupled with questionable testimony and a partisan legal process, underscore the glaring flaws in the American judicial system.
The ‘Rape’ Claim: A Tale Unraveling
During the trial, Carroll admitted to financial struggles and a motive to boost book sales. Her initial claim, detailed in a 2019 article, presented a shifting narrative of a supposed rape, occurring either in 1994 or the fall of 1995. The lack of specifics, refusal to produce key evidence for DNA testing, and inconsistencies in her story raise substantial doubts. Carroll’s history of accusing multiple men of sexual assault further undermines her credibility.
Law & Order Connection: A Curious Coincidence
Carroll, an avid fan of the TV show “Law & Order,” first made her allegations in a 2019 book, conveniently aligning with an episode discussing a simulated rape in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room. This peculiar connection adds an extra layer of suspicion to the timing and motivations behind her accusations.
‘Rape is Sexy’ Narrative: Unveiling Carroll’s Character
Critical evidence, including a revealing CNN clip, was barred from the trial. In the clip, Carroll shockingly claimed that “rape is sexy” and suggested that people fantasize about it. This disturbing perspective, along with Carroll’s posts about explicit topics and peculiar fantasies involving Trump, paints a picture of a character driven by bizarre sexual thoughts rather than a credible victim.
Behind the Scenes: Political Maneuvering and Funding
The questionable origins of Carroll’s lawsuit came to light during a gathering hosted by far-left blogger Molly Jong-Fast. With ties to anti-Trump sentiments, Jong-Fast played a role in convincing Carroll to sue Trump. Notably, lawyer Roberta Kaplan, involved in discrediting Governor Cuomo’s alleged victims, became Carroll’s attorney. The case received financial backing from LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, who has openly declared his commitment to defeating Trump.
The Expert Witness: A Partisan Charade
Roberta Kaplan’s choice of an “expert” witness, Ashlee Humphreys, revealed a glaring bias. Humphreys, a liberal professor with a history of donations to Democrat political groups, lacked real-world expertise in reputation repair. The trial exposed the overtly partisan nature of the proceedings.
Injustice Unveiled: A Show Trial in New York
The trial, marred by instances of selective evidence admission and a refusal to allow Trump to defend himself adequately, showcased a blatant disregard for due process. Carroll’s illegal possession of a firearm in New York State and the deletion of alleged death threats she received were dismissed, highlighting a prejudiced courtroom atmosphere.
In essence, the Trump-Carroll case stands as a chilling example of how a politically motivated accusation, supported by questionable legal maneuvers and biased experts, can result in an unprecedented miscarriage of justice. The implications of such a trial extend far beyond the courtroom, serving as a stark warning for the potential misuse of the legal system for political purposes.
Recap:
Let’s clear this E Jean Carroll situation up for everyone who doesn’t understand how things work:
– Trump has never been convicted or even investigated for what she accused him of.
– She doesn’t know what year it happened, and has even been caught in a few lies.
– She brought the dress forward, but the dress didn’t even exist in the years she claimed it happened.
– Trump was not on trial for this. He was on trial for calling her a liar and other names.
– The Jury is from a far left district, so Trump had no shot at a fair hearing.
– She didn’t make these accusations until 20 years later. She has even said she fantasized about it happening before.
– The only reason she could even sue was because democrats changed the laws for 1 year in New York. The law was changed the day Trump got out of office.
– She wasn’t going to sue until anti Trump people talked her into it and offered to pay for her legal counsel!
If these are the standards the libtarded, leftist, pedoocrats are going to use! It’s high time Republicans start using the same tactics, lies and cheats the pedocrats are using!
🇺🇲🇺🇲🤬🇺🇲🇺🇲🤬🇺🇲🇺🇲🤬🇺🇲🇺🇲
This Article is Brought to you by Go Right News and Edited by Peter Boykin
Visit GoRightNews.com for More Articles and Visit PeterBoykin.com to Learn more about Peter Boykin
