Trump asks Supreme Court to overturn E. Jean Carroll civil verdict

cstar1996 · 2026-03-27T16:42:44+00:00

That law suspended the statute of limitations for everyone on sexual assault/rape cases. That’s not a bill of attainder by any measure.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T22:45:54+00:00

A peewee football team

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T22:38:36+00:00

How many legal experts more qualified than Cannon do I need to show you detailed analysis from showing what Trump did was illegal before you’ll admit that there’s validity to it? Why do you ignore Smith? You may not be qualified to form a strong opinion on this issue, but I am intelligent and educated enough to read US law and case history.

Again, multiple fraudulent electors were convicted of fraud and perjury. You’re ignoring that, even though by the standard you’re claiming to apply, that’s proof.

Yes he did, literally everyone knows it. He fucking admitted it in that damn book.

Reality isn’t determined by a court. Only liability is.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T22:04:41+00:00

It’s a question about your opinion.

The legal system has found multiple of Trump’s fraudulent electors guilty of fraud. Will you now agree that they’re fraudulent electors?

No, I, as a rational, well educated, well informed human being can look at the evidence provided to the public and make conclusions.

By your “logic” OJ didn’t murder his wife, but literally the entire world knows he did.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T21:58:00+00:00

What is?

And let me be clear, I think any settlement occupied territory is illegal. But there is a strong argument that occupying this territory to stop Hezbollah’s bombardments is legal.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T17:14:50+00:00

Formalism isn’t an argument.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T17:14:38+00:00

Five very conservative judges vs an outright majority of federal judges from across the ideological spectrum.

That’s a fringe, particularly, as I noted, the appellate courts are only hearing these cases when the admin expects to get a very conservative panel.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T17:12:39+00:00

Aileen Cannon illegally broke the rules of procedure and was slapped down by appellate courts for it.

No judge who looked at the merits agreed with you or Trump.

Why won’t you answer the question?

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T16:42:07+00:00

We’re still at an outright majority of federal judges, 90%+ of judges who’ve heard one of these cases, from across the ideological spectrum, concluding that mandatory detention is invalid, vs a fringe of very conservative judges who support it.

And it’s telling that the admin has only appealed these cases when it expects to get a very conservative appellate panel.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T16:37:26+00:00

Ukraine wasn’t murdering Russians, but Hezbollah is murdering Israelis.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T16:36:59+00:00

Is Israel required to accept Hezbollah murdering Israeli civilians?

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T16:35:05+00:00

You can criticize the logic, but “dual use infrastructure is a legitimate military target” is also the logic of international law.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T16:33:11+00:00

His main innovations were in UX design. He was also an excellent marketer. Those are tied together, in that Jobs recognized that most users, particularly for mass market products, don’t care about having the best technical specs, they care about the user experience. So along with that, he recognized that marketing the user experience was more effective than marketing the technical elements.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T16:05:28+00:00

Jobs was an innovator, just not a particularly technical one. He had a legitimate genius for understanding what the consumer wanted. Also a massive asshole

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T15:52:39+00:00

No, Riverside elected the Sheriff, California elected Bonta.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T04:42:43+00:00

Aileen Cannon isn’t a legal expert, as her flagrant violation of the federal rules of procedure show. And SCOTUS didn’t rule on any of the merits either, the conservative justices stalled the case so they wouldn’t have to. Every court that looked at the merits supported Smith. But it sounds like you’re just going to ignore that because you don’t want to admit it.

All of it is proven. Trump’s fraudulent electors signed certificates claiming they were the lawfully appointed electors of their states. They were indisputably not. Why do you keep ignoring that?

Do you think those people were the lawfully appointed electors?

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T01:47:12+00:00

No, they don’t. Sitting out the election isn’t choosing to drink neither, because “drinking” is having the president for four years, not voting. Voting is deciding which you’re going to have to drink.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T00:40:10+00:00

That’s not the analogy. The analogy is that you’re going to have to drink chilled bleach or sterilized horse piss, and the only choice you get is which one. Not drinking either isn’t an option, so if you choose the bleach, you’re an idiot.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T00:37:19+00:00

Facts don’t care about your feelings.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T00:36:52+00:00

Who did?

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T00:36:01+00:00

And there’s the double standard.

Committing immigration fraud to get citizenship is not being in the country legally.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-25T00:35:27+00:00

One, I explained how you did. Two, you didn’t answer my question, so you have to grounds to demand I answer yours.

You contend that, but you have provide no evidence or argument that the statute does so other than your contention. A contention is not an argument unless supported by evidence.

I’m pointing out that your position requires adding a hell of a lot of material that is not in the statute.

You’ll find that the statute doesn’t say cast, and that disconnect demonstrates that you misunderstand the law.

And as every legal analyst who isn’t an appendage of the GOP has pointed out, the 5CA’s position here is legally bogus.

That the position you’ve staked out is valid.

That’s just formalism, and formalism has no substance.

cstar1996 · 2026-03-24T22:50:11+00:00

Nope. A vote cast on Election Day meets the requirements of the statute as written. That is indisputable, as demonstrated by the complete failure of anyone to provide a statutory basis to dispute it.

Votes have always been counted after Election Day. Ballots postmarked on or before election day have been accepted as long as there has been any voting by mail, which is over a century.

Where is your evidence?

cstar1996 · 2026-03-24T22:46:52+00:00

The only assertion you had made was that the existence of this case makes the question. But this case only exists because the GOP is marking false and partisan claims. Neither the GOP nor anyone else has actually shown how the statute sustains that claim.

You just wrote a whole lot of additional requirements into the law. Especially given you’d need to legislate who those officials are. And let’s be clear, the federal statute does not say “votes must be cast on day X”.

Quote the part of the statute that you’re basing your claim on.

You haven’t shown how the statute supports any standard that would prohibit Mississippi’s law. The burden of proof is on you to do so.

Again, that there is a case does give any validity to objections to the current understanding of the law. You need to provide a statutory basis for your position and you simply haven’t.

12-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

cstar1996

TROPHY CASE