The E. Jean Carroll case involves a alleged act so old she can't even remember exactly when it happened, specifying it only as "late 1995 or early 1996". (This alone tell me it never happened because any normal person would anchor it in time to something like, "before Christmas", "between Christmas and New Year's", or "just after New Year's". Bad scriptwriting is to blame.)
So due to no popular pressure whatsoever, along comes the State of New York's Adult Survivors Act:
The Adult Survivors Act (ASA) is a New York State law enacted in May 2022 which amends the state's statute of limitations to allow alleged victims of sexual offenses such as sexual assault and unwanted sexual contact in the workplace to file civil suits....
"Well IDK," you're saying to yourself, "maybe these poor people really do need justice, even after all this time." Perish the thought! "They" do not give a rat's ass about any such victims, and their hand is tipped by the finish of that quote:
... between November 24, 2022, and November 24, 2023.
Uh, so "justice" now has a brief window? But let's cement the coffin lid shut on this "legislation" with the very next sentence on the wiki:
On the day the law took effect, it was utilized by the writer E. Jean Carroll in expanding her litigation against businessman and politician Donald Trump from a defamation charge to one for battery as well.
Do you think we'll see even a single other case filed under the terms of this Act before it expires? Me neither! No lawyer would take such a case unless it was all cash up front, and maybe not even then.
The whole thing is so astoundingly transparent, compounding by how crisply they write it up for us on wiki. Once again we find that They don't need to keep many secrets these days, because They know no one is looking. Even the few that look do not recognize what they see.
(For the wider context, note that this is all a workaround for the Constitutional restriction: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed".)
UPDATE: Apparently, word was getting out about the loophole they constructed, so they decided to get ahead of it by talking about how great the law is:
E. Jean Carroll Admits She Helped New York Dems Change Law So She Could Sue Trump (Daily Caller 5/10/2023)
Their praise is absurd, of course, because they avoid saying why such a great law should expire. CNN’s Poppy Harlow plays her part by not asking. Then she throws in this double-whammy admission/omission:
“They passed it just a few years ago. Were it not for that law, you never would have been able to bring this case.”
She admits it was only this law that enabled the suit against Trump, but first misdirects us with the "few years ago" preamble. No it wasn't. It was passed May 2022. It's all about Trump.
Heh, I had no idea. This is honestly pretty amazing.
This is the state of the world.
She gave an interview stating she helped change the law. Why isn't that unethical?
E. Jean Carroll Admits She Helped New York Dems Change Law So She Could Sue Trump (Daily Caller 5/10/2023)
Here's the key quote:
The old rule is: if you can't cover it up, turn it up.
Ex Post Facto.
Great investigative work.
Any way Trump could appeal the decision and argue that the law is bullshit?
Someone else mentioned that the law is ex post facto, which I know to be illegal under the Constitution.
I guess the argument could be made that the law only amends the statute of limitations so it's not really ex post facto.
I mean, you'd think so, but then again there's no way any of it it should have even got off the ground. Can you even imagine calling up your state legislator: "Hey listen, there was this thing that happened to me, ohhh, almost 30 years ago now, and anyway..." <click>. We're just so far beyond the looking glass that any idea of rationality, reason, or even precedent is off the table, (D)epending on the circumstance, of course.
No one talked about it at the time, but during Trump's impeachment (2 of 2), although the Constitution specifies that the Chief Justice must preside over it. John Roberts refused. Even a compromised guy can have limits, it seems. So the Democrats just designated someone from the prosecution. How did they justify it? Well, Trump would no longer be President by the time time the proceeding to remove him from the Presidency convened,
One of my conclusions is that Trump is playing a deeper game (yes, 4D-chess! lol). He never talks about it because, c'mon, look around and you'll see that most people just would not get it. I think he knows that if he's successful, in the end, all this desperate penny-ante bullshit simply will not matter and be quickly forgotten.
Normies are still convinced Trump is controlled opposition, even though the entire establishment has been attacking him constantly from about every angle possible for 4+ years now. I've never in my life seen the media, the intelligence agencies, etc go after 1 man like this.
Don’t you know how utterly and obviously gameable such a situation is?
Do you think they are REALLY going after Trump do you? Or do you think Trump might just be the pantomime/WWF villain in their scripted show.
If all it took to drive support to one person and cause a schism in society was to relentlessly and unfairly attack someone who is supposed to represent a chunk of the population, do you really think it beyond the wit of the powers that be to install their own straw man as the opposition?
Lenin said so, Albert Pike - Donald’s Masonic hero also said so. This is a tactic from the playbook.
Ratchet up sympathy by portraying someone as unfairly maligned in an over-the-top cartoonish manner so that it becomes obvious to lots of people, driving them to support the puppet on the puppetmasters other hand.
Stop taking things at face value. There’s plenty to be critical of Trump on - absolutely NONE of which you will hear from his supposed mortal enemies in the media.
And there’s a reason for that…
YOU are being the ‘normie’ here…
Well it has worked for a good chunk of the population. They have poisoned the Trump brand in the mind's of a lot of people.
Exactly. There are people who are opposed to Trump with every fibre of their being and there are those who support Trump and deify him. Two extreme views. By design.
Schism. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Trump is just one Pied Piper figurehead to enable the destruction of America/the west even though he presents himself as its saviour.
He is clearly nothing of the sort but is instead very much a controlled opposition.
If a viable candidate came out against Trump I would expect the democrat smear machine to attack them in a similar fashion. In fact we already saw this with Brett Kavanaugh who had a 30 year impeccable career. He runs for supreme court then suddenly he's accused of rape.
Can the US go any more banana republic? They might as well put Soros's statue on the Lincoln Memorial and be done with it.
Limited is better than keeping laws like this around, they'll just be used against us when some whore wants us gone.
Perceivable LAW (land - air - water) implies constant change, while suggested laws tempt those consenting to ignore change, hence to remain subdued, at rest; unresistant to laws enforced upon mind (law-enforce-ment), hence malleable; transformable; exploitable...
Sleight of hand: "I (life) fought the law (inception towards death)...and the law won".
It's all about silencing your opponent. Joe Biden and the Democrats know this very well, based on history. Joseph Stalin has done it, Adolf Hitler has done it, and so did Mao Tse-tung.
He'll win the acquittal. It would shock the rest of society. If a rape victim won by fantasising about rape and thinking it is sexy. Her testimony is baseless.
But who knows today. I don't think this conversation is over. I don't think it has had justice.
When this shill has the best take on the subject just realize it's time to lose your arms at the bottom of lake. Dude has been the most obvious shill for over a year.
How so? Sometimes his responses seem like they used AI but it’s hard to say with him.
I’d say your more suspect tbh.
The jury apparently had only like 7 people? And they tried to get someone removed for liking Tim pool?
Woke and stupid narrative infused. The next court, tell me about the next court?
Despite what the idiot jurors did. The press has just shown his accuser to have no repute. None whatsoever. Begging how this nonsense ever went to trial. It is from supposedly decades ago. Why is it tried today. It's a mockery of justice. The entire sham, should've never gone to court.
It seemingly wouldn't have mattered in that court. It was a kangaroo lynch mob of tribal justice.
But the next court is different. Isn't it a higher court, in the tier system? Who knows. I don't understand it.
The conversation around this today needs to look at how. How these trials are being opened and why. It was obviously conducted on the whims of hearsay. Convicted anecdotally. What evidence was there. It has undoubtedly been proven false.
Welp, Trump. Should have impaled your enemies instead of being a puss and boomer fist pumping to YMCA at pep rallies like a faggot.
Trump rather pardon any nigger drug dealer Kim Kardashian tells him to instead of destroy the new world order and jew goblin synagogue of satan kikes.
What enemies? They’re all cut from the same cloth, acting out the script they’ve written.
Donald Trump called out fake news when he himself is also fake news.
Thanks, I'll vote for Biden then, he's such a stand up guy