5 Comments
User's avatar
Peter Burkard's avatar

Can't believe his attorneys claim that defaming Ms. Carroll was "well within the scope of his federal office"! What will they claim next...and what does it take to be dis-barred??

Dennis Wall's avatar

You write that the jury verdict was "an $83.3 Million defamation penalty." I am sure that you did not mean to demean it by calling it a penalty, but call it by its true name: It was a jury verdict.

Thank you for the post about August 2, 1943 and JFK's courage. You wrote it well and it was good to read including the part you added that at least JFK did not have to suffer bone spurs after saving that sailor's life.

Donna Nehrich's avatar

I filled out my ballot and a postal worker was leaving a UPS store. I asked if he could take it. He said of course. I said are you sure it will get there. He said I’ll guard it with my life against the orange prune. That turned into a 30 min Trump bash. There are intelligent people in Fl.

Janet Robinson's avatar

I think it's disgusting that Trump and also the DOG, I mean DOJ, are wasting our taxpayer money so that Trump doesn't have to pay his debts. And the concept that Trump is immune from past criminal activities since he is now president is absurd. Too bad, Nixon didn't work that angle!

Claudia Kiburz's avatar

I am a little confused: "Both argue that Trump’s statements against Carroll — who claims the Republican leader sexually assaulted her in the Bergdorf Goodman department store — fall within the bounds of his office’s immunity."

What part of this is within the scope of Trump's federal office? Trump's omniscient abilities to foresee his presidency? A president must be submitted to at all points in his life. Is no one allowed to say anything about a felon's past life?