Social E. Jean Carroll Accuses Trump of Sexual Assault, Rape in Dressing Room 23-24 Years Ago

[ShadowRun]

You have a funny way of equating gold digging whores to a store.

To his standards, Kobe is a raper and so is the Duke Lacross team.

 

[DIDM]

you have an interesting way of defining every gal in a coffee lineup as a whore.

Trump said WHEN YOU ARE FAMOUS ENOUGH

Yes, gold digging whores will let you do anything, they are digging for gold. Do you think the term is made up? Do you think young women marry old men for the conversations they have?

 

[DIDM]

To his standards, Kobe is a raper and so is the Duke Lacross team.

It’s such a reach it’s hard to comprehend

 

[MikeMcMann]

Trump said WHEN YOU ARE FAMOUS ENOUGH

Yes, gold digging whores will let you do anything, they are digging for gold. Do you think the term is made up? Do you think young women marry old men for the conversations they have?

being famous enough means you will have SOME groupies, gold diggers and whores open to you, it DOES NOT MEAN all women are and that you can just walk up to any women in any location and grab her pussy assuming all women are like that.

You guys who keep arguing that famous guys can do that to any woman anywhere, because 'groupies' are just stupid.

 

[ShadowRun]

It’s such a reach it’s hard to comprehend

Yea, but it's because of indoctrinated MSM over kill tribal like thinking.

 

[ShadowRun]

being famous enough means you will have SOME groupies, gold diggers and whores open to you, it DOES NOT MEAN all women are and that you can just walk up to any women in any location and grab her pussy assuming all women are like that.

You guys who keep arguing that famous guys can do that to any woman anywhere, because 'groupies' are just stupid.

I have not seen a post were someone said "ALL"

 

[TheBlondBomber]

We've already went over this and you lost.

if a mob collector goes out to collect money from the Stores in the neighbourhood they demand protection money from, and just walks in and empties cash registers, and says to another mob collector 'you just walk in and take the money and walk out... they let you do it', that does not equal consent no matter how many times you say it does unless the store owner complain about it after.

your arguments that you cannot prove mens rea or the stores did not want him to take their money if they do not speak up therefore that equals de facto consent is just wrong.

You CANNOT say simply that 'they let me do it' equals consent. It does not.

Jesus Christ dude. You haven’t proved shit. Are you fucking dense? Your mob collector analogy is so dumb. A more appropriate analogy would be If a man walks up to a woman and kisses her, and she gives no indication that she doesn’t like it, doesn’t pull back and allows him to do it, that’s not illegal.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

you have an interesting way of defining every gal in a coffee lineup as a whore.

You literally compared a groupie allowing a famous guy to touch her to a store owner getting shaken down by the mob. Are you a troll?

 

[DIDM]

being famous enough means you will have SOME groupies, gold diggers and whores open to you, it DOES NOT MEAN all women are and that you can just walk up to any women in any location and grab her pussy assuming all women are like that.

You guys who keep arguing that famous guys can do that to any woman anywhere, because 'groupies' are just stupid.

Did he say I can go up to any woman an grab her pussy?
NO, he did not

The fuck are you going on about? Did Mr Trump grab your pussy by chance?

 

[BjPenn2017]

"Hey guys this lady is crazy, she said rape is sexy on national TV. But we DON'T KNOW what really happened between her and trump so we better just assume what shes saying is true, even though she's clearly nuts and looks like she's high on heroin or some kind of opiates. Here's a bunch of shitty analogies that make no sense to the subject at hand because I'm reaching for the skies on this one and I really hate Trump!!"

@MikeMcMann in this thread lmao

 

[MikeMcMann]

Did he say I can go up to any woman an grab her pussy?
NO, he did not

The fuck are you going on about? Did Mr Trump grab your pussy by chance?

I have not seen a post were someone said "ALL"

Ya go upthread and read it.

I posed, many times the scenario of ANY man walking up to ANY woman in ANY scenario (starbucks coffee lineup) and just grabbing her pussy and walking away.

He made it clear that if that woman does not try to stop you or complain after the fact and just keeps quiet you cannot then establish mens rea and since you do not know that she did not want it that is de facto consent.

DOn't blame me for his stupid arguments. I just own him on them.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

He made it clear that if that woman does not try to stop you or complain after the fact and just keeps quiet you cannot then establish mens rea and since you do not know that she did not want it that is de facto consent.

DOn't blame me for his stupid arguments. I just own him on them.

So are you saying that the requisite mental state is not required for a defendant to be found guilty anymore? (Assuming that the alleged victim isn't underage, mentally handicapped or otherwise incapacitated) Lol good luck with that one. You're really embarrassing yourself and you're so far out of your element.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

@MikeMcMann

My state's Sexual Battery Statute:

T. C. A. § 39-13-505
§ 39-13-505. Sexual battery
Currentness
(a) Sexual battery is unlawful sexual contact with a victim by the defendant or the defendant by a victim accompanied by any of the following circumstances:
(1) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the act;
(2) The sexual contact is accomplished without the consent of the victim and the defendant knows or has reason to know at the time of the contact that the victim did not consent;
(3) The defendant knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated or physically helpless; or
(4) The sexual contact is accomplished by fraud.
(b) As used in this section, “coercion” means the threat of kidnapping, extortion, force or violence to be performed immediately or in the future.
(c) Sexual battery is a Class E felony.

Seems to me like you're dead fucking wrong regarding Trump. There would need to be a reason for him to know that they did not consent to the touching, and if they gave no indication that they did not want him to do that, he would not be guilty.

If Trump goes up to a groupie and grabs her by the vagina and she allows him to do it, that would not be illegal. There is no force or coercion, she is not mentally defective or helpless, and it's not accomplished by fraud.

You should go into exile now.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I have not seen a post were someone said "ALL"

Did he say I can go up to any woman an grab her pussy?
NO, he did not

The fuck are you going on about? Did Mr Trump grab your pussy by chance?

So now you both see in his post above there is no denying it.

Again we discussed whether a man, any man, can walk up to any woman in any situation and just grab her pussy and it not be a crime.

he has argued again and again that if she says nothing or does nothing in reaction to it that is de facto consent. that the women by not reacting to the grab has now given consent. She must express her state of mind or consent is given.

He will try to back off that later when he realizes he is being pinned by his statements but if you push him enough he can't help but admit it again.

 

[MikeMcMann]

@MikeMcMann

My state's Sexual Battery Statute:

T. C. A. § 39-13-505
§ 39-13-505. Sexual battery
Currentness
(a) Sexual battery is unlawful sexual contact with a victim by the defendant or the defendant by a victim accompanied by any of the following circumstances:
(1) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the act;
(2) The sexual contact is accomplished without the consent of the victim and the defendant knows or has reason to know at the time of the contact that the victim did not consent;
(3) The defendant knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated or physically helpless; or
(4) The sexual contact is accomplished by fraud.
(b) As used in this section, “coercion” means the threat of kidnapping, extortion, force or violence to be performed immediately or in the future.
(c) Sexual battery is a Class E felony.

Seems to me like you're dead fucking wrong regarding Trump. There would need to be a reason for him to know that they did not consent to the touching, and if they gave no indication that they did not want him to do that, he would not be guilty.

If Trump goes up to a groupie and grabs her by the vagina and she allows him to do it, that would not be illegal. There is no force or coercion, she is not mentally defective or helpless, and it's not accomplished by fraud.

You should go into exile now.

lol at you claiming to be a lawyer and not understanding that is cumulative list and is list that lays out many ways sexual battery is determined.

I won't know BEFORE i walk up and grab the pussy of a woman who does not know me that she did not want me to. I will only find out after.

You are so stupid you read that statute and say 'sorry lady, you only let him know after and not before so that is not sexual assault'.

God god you are stupid. If you are, in fact a lawyer you should be ashamed.

 

[TheBlondBomber]

lol at you claiming to be a lawyer and not understanding that is cumulative list and is list that lays out many ways sexual battery is determined.

I won't know BEFORE i walk up and grab the pussy of a woman who does not know me that she did not want me to. I will only find out after.

You are so stupid you read that statute and say 'sorry lady, you only let him know after and not before so that is not sexual assault'.

God god you are stupid. If you are, in fact a lawyer you should be ashamed.

Get a load of this moron.

Dude, what? You have no idea about what you are talking about. Honestly, you should cut bait. You have NO IDEA how statutes work. That statute is defining what constitutes the elements required to be proven in order for a person to be guilty of sexual battery. In order for a sexual battery to have been committed, there must have been an intentional contact, along with one of those four scenarios.

"The elements of sexual battery are an unlawful sexual contact, as defined by statute, committed intentionally, and accompanied by either: (1) force or coercion; (2) lack of consent by the victim, if the defendant knows or has reason to know at the time of the contact that the victim did not consent; (3) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless; or (4) fraud used to accomplish the sexual contact." State v. Bowles, 2001, 52 S.W.3d 69, denial of post-conviction relief affirmed 2004 WL 1656476, appeal denied, denial of habeas corpus affirmed 2007 WL 1266594.

The fact that you don't understand statutory construction and then had the gall to call me dumb is mind blowing. Holy crap. I've met some nimrods before, but you take the cake.

Based off this statute, how can you say that Trump would be guilty of sexual battery?

I won't know BEFORE i walk up and grab the pussy of a woman who does not know me that she did not want me to. I will only find out after.

No shit, Sherlock. That's why the statute says at the time of the contact and not before. If at the time of the contact with her, i.e., while he is touching her, he knows or has reason to know that she is not consenting, it is battery. If she allows him to do it, he doesn't know and doesn't have a reason to know that she is not consenting.

 

[Rematch]

It’s such a reach it’s hard to comprehend

It's better to be morally right than factually right!

 

[MikeMcMann]

Get a load of this moron.

Dude, what? You have no idea about what you are talking about. Honestly, you should cut bait. You have NO IDEA how statutes work. That statute is defining what constitutes the elements required to be proven in order for a person to be guilty of sexual battery. In order for a sexual battery to have been committed, there must have been an intentional contact, along with one of those four scenarios.

"The elements of sexual battery are an unlawful sexual contact, as defined by statute, committed intentionally, and accompanied by either: (1) force or coercion; (2) lack of consent by the victim, if the defendant knows or has reason to know at the time of the contact that the victim did not consent; (3) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the victim is mentally defective, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless; or (4) fraud used to accomplish the sexual contact." State v. Bowles, 2001, 52 S.W.3d 69, denial of post-conviction relief affirmed 2004 WL 1656476, appeal denied, denial of habeas corpus affirmed 2007 WL 1266594.

The fact that you don't understand statutory construction and then had the gall to call me dumb is mind blowing. Holy crap. I've met some nimrods before, but you take the cake.

Based off this statute, how can you say that Trump would be guilty of sexual battery?



No shit, Sherlock. That's why the statute says at the time of the contact and not before. If at the time of the contact with her, i.e., while he is touching her, he knows or has reason to know that she is not consenting, it is battery. If she allows him to do it, he doesn't know and doesn't have a reason to know that she is not consenting.

You will never get past it. You will never win. You continue to be stupid and wrong.

IF today you walk up to a woman in starbucks and grab her pussy and leave and she says or does nothing, you do not gain de facto consent protection as you keep saying for that act.

If weeks later surveillance video pops up and the police approach her and she tells them what you did, that she did not know you and did not want it but only did not do anything as she felt threatened by confronting you in the moment and just wanted to forget it after and the police come to talk to you about and you say 'she consented via not saying anything about it', they will laugh you out of the room before arresting you.

You are stupid to think you have immunity and consent because she said or did nothing.

 

[Rematch]

You will never get past it. You will never win. You continue to be stupid and wrong.

IF today you walk up to a woman in starbucks and grab her pussy and leave and she says or does nothing, you do not gain de facto consent protection as you keep saying for that act.

If weeks later surveillance video pops up and the police approach her and she tells them what you did, that she did not know you and did not want it but only did not do anything as she felt threatened by confronting you in the moment and just wanted to forget it after and the police come to talk to you about and you say 'she consented via not saying anything about it', they will laugh you out of the room before arresting you.

You are stupid to think you have immunity and consent because she said or did nothing.

Yeah. Fuck what the law says.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Yeah. Fuck what the law says.

The law does not say that.

Again any man can't just walk up to any woman and grab them by the pussy and just walk out and if the woman does or says nothing proclaim her inaction equals defacto consent.

He is wrong to say and think that and so are you.