A federal appeals court has rejected President Donald Trump’s request to rehear a jury verdict in favor of E. Jean Carroll.
Save you a click
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
A federal appeals court has rejected President Donald Trump’s request to rehear a jury verdict in favor of E. Jean Carroll.
Save you a click
The decision was 8-2. There are 13 judges, so 3 abstained. 5 were nominated by Trump. 2+3=5. Hard to believe that is a coincidence.
So, we now officially have a "Rapist in Chief"?
🌍👨🚀🔫👨🚀
2 justices dissented. Let that sink in a bit.
2 justices that were appointed by the accused.
Rapists of a feather.
A rapist is a rapist is a rapist?
Fuck you, Cunt
(There's got to be a better way to write that.)
Are we not still doing "phrasing"?!
There's got to be a better way to phrase that? You're right. I should have written it that way.