George Stephanopoulos vs Nancy Mace
-
I saw that interview yesterday and thought Mace was the one that looked weak. She repeated the same non-answer about 12 times and at no point was George trying to "shame" her for her rape when she was 16. His point was very simple, how can you support someone who has been found guilty of rape? Even Mace says it's wrong to make a mockery about rape, when George is like... yeah that is my point, and you support someone who is making a mockery of it.
-
I saw that interview yesterday and thought Mace was the one that looked weak. She repeated the same non-answer about 12 times and at no point was George trying to "shame" her for her rape when she was 16. His point was very simple, how can you support someone who has been found guilty of rape? Even Mace says it's wrong to make a mockery about rape, when George is like... yeah that is my point, and you support someone who is making a mockery of it.
@89th said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
His point was very simple, how can you support someone who has been found guilty of rape?
Wrong.
He was not found "guilty." He was found, in a civil court, to be "liable," where the standard is 51%, as Kelly points out.
Is there any doubt that Horndog Bill assaulted these women ("You better put some ice on that")? No, there's not, especially when you look at the payouts.
And Steph has the absolute BALLS to condemn Mace?
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
I have to add to that I found the story of being raped in a Bergdorf's dressing room to be less than believable. I have no doubt he has been quite pushy with women in the past, but there's a world of difference between pushy and rape. Her claim that she froze instead of yelling is dubious.
-
As for Tiny George Steponallofus...Mace's teenage daughter was in the studio. What kind of toad goes down that interview path (she had not been forewarned any rape questions would be asked) in front of a woman's daughter?
I really want to see somebody defend this trespass beyond the bounds of common decency...
-
Heard her interviewed today. She had no idea she would be asked such a question. She was floored
-
Heard her interviewed today. She had no idea she would be asked such a question. She was floored
@Jolly said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
Heard her interviewed today. She had no idea she would be asked such a question. She was floored
Years ago, I saw a video of someone who was going to be "interviewed" by 60 Minutes. Their advice was to bring their own videographer and record EVERYTHING, because what you see on the air is not necessarily what actually transpired.
If they refuse to allow your own video, decline the interview.
-
What are videography and cinematography?
Their job is to capture footage.
Cinematography is also about getting good footage, but it differs from videography as it typically involves more strategic planning, artistic direction, or artistic decision-making, and requires a large crew or production team. The final production for a music video or high-end Hollywood movie is the work of a cinematographer.
https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/video/discover/videography-vs-cinematography.html
-
@89th said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
His point was very simple, how can you support someone who has been found guilty of rape?
Wrong.
He was not found "guilty." He was found, in a civil court, to be "liable," where the standard is 51%, as Kelly points out.
Is there any doubt that Horndog Bill assaulted these women ("You better put some ice on that")? No, there's not, especially when you look at the payouts.
And Steph has the absolute BALLS to condemn Mace?
@George-K said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
@89th said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
His point was very simple, how can you support someone who has been found guilty of rape?
Wrong.
He was not found "guilty." He was found, in a civil court, to be "liable," where the standard is 51%, as Kelly points out.
Sorry I didn't use the accurate summary, you are right. Not found guilty of rape. But see article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/
Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump was found to have raped E. Jean Carroll
After Donald Trump was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll, his legal team and his defenders lodged a frequent talking point.
Despite Carroll’s claims that Trump had raped her, they noted, the jury stopped short of saying he committed that particular offense. Instead, jurors opted for a second option: sexual abuse.
“This was a rape claim, this was a rape case all along, and the jury rejected that — made other findings,” his lawyer, Joe Tacopina, said outside the courthouse.
A judge has now clarified that this is basically a legal distinction without a real-world difference. He says that what the jury found Trump did was in fact rape, as commonly understood.
If you (the general you) can remove yourself from politics for a second. If you have someone who has been found liable for sexual abuse / rape, and you yourself have been raped, it is hard to understand how you could look past that... unless you simply don't believe anything of the sort happened.
-
@George-K said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
@89th said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
His point was very simple, how can you support someone who has been found guilty of rape?
Wrong.
He was not found "guilty." He was found, in a civil court, to be "liable," where the standard is 51%, as Kelly points out.
Sorry I didn't use the accurate summary, you are right. Not found guilty of rape. But see article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/
Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump was found to have raped E. Jean Carroll
After Donald Trump was found liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll, his legal team and his defenders lodged a frequent talking point.
Despite Carroll’s claims that Trump had raped her, they noted, the jury stopped short of saying he committed that particular offense. Instead, jurors opted for a second option: sexual abuse.
“This was a rape claim, this was a rape case all along, and the jury rejected that — made other findings,” his lawyer, Joe Tacopina, said outside the courthouse.
A judge has now clarified that this is basically a legal distinction without a real-world difference. He says that what the jury found Trump did was in fact rape, as commonly understood.
If you (the general you) can remove yourself from politics for a second. If you have someone who has been found liable for sexual abuse / rape, and you yourself have been raped, it is hard to understand how you could look past that... unless you simply don't believe anything of the sort happened.
@89th said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
If you (the general you) can remove yourself from politics for a second. If you have someone who has been found liable for sexual abuse / rape, and you yourself have defended the rapist and slandered the victim, it is hard to understand how you could look past that.
FIFY.
Oops. I mistyped. I should have said "victims."
-
First off there should be some statute of limitations involved. Not sure why there wasn’t. For injury cases in Ohio I think you have a year to initiate a suit. Suits for things that happened that long ago are likely impossible to develop credible evidence. If you can’t successfully prosecute when a crime is involved you should probably not be able to file a civil suit.
-
First off there should be some statute of limitations involved. Not sure why there wasn’t. For injury cases in Ohio I think you have a year to initiate a suit. Suits for things that happened that long ago are likely impossible to develop credible evidence. If you can’t successfully prosecute when a crime is involved you should probably not be able to file a civil suit.
@Mik said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
First off there should be some statute of limitations involved. Not sure why there wasn’t. For injury cases in Ohio I think you have a year to initiate a suit. Suits for things that happened that long ago are likely impossible to develop credible evidence. If you can’t successfully prosecute when a crime is involved you should probably not be able to file a civil suit.
Didn't New York have to pass a special law with a sunset clause.
-
@Mik said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
First off there should be some statute of limitations involved. Not sure why there wasn’t. For injury cases in Ohio I think you have a year to initiate a suit. Suits for things that happened that long ago are likely impossible to develop credible evidence. If you can’t successfully prosecute when a crime is involved you should probably not be able to file a civil suit.
Didn't New York have to pass a special law with a sunset clause.
@Jolly said in George Stephanopolous vs Nancy Mace:
Didn't New York have to pass a special law with a sunset clause.
You misspelled "targeted" clause.
new law in New York is behind the civil lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll against Donald Trump, and survivors hope the spotlight put on it by this week’s verdict against the former president means more people might use it.
The law opened a one-time window for adult sexual assault survivors in New York to file a civil case against an abuser or institution that protected the abuser — no matter when the assault took place, even if it’s outside the statute of limitations. But that window expires in six months.
“We want people who think they might want to utilize this very precious window that we opened for them to know that they need to act soon,” said Marissa Hoechstetter, who is among a group of survivors of sexual assault who volunteered their time for years to help get the Adult Survivors Act passed.
The law, which has a one-year window through late November, follows a 2019 law that expanded opportunities for survivors of child sexual assault to file civil lawsuits.
-
Trump sues for defamation:
Former President Donald Trump has filed a defamation lawsuit against ABC News and George Stephanopoulos, claiming his reputation was tarnished by the anchor saying multiple times on-air that Trump had been found liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll.
Trump filed the lawsuit in federal court in Miami on Monday over a viral interview between US Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) and Stephanopoulos on “This Week” on March 10, according to The Hill.
The suit takes aim at Stephanopoulos’ questioning for saying Trump had been found “liable for rape” when a jury in a Manhattan civil case last year only found Trump liable for sexual abuse under New York law.
“Judges and two separate juries have found him liable for rape and for defaming the victim of that rape. How do you square your endorsement of Donald Trump with the testimony we just saw? ” Stephanopoulos asked during the interview.
In a 20-page complaint, Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito, accused Stephanopoulos of making the false statements “with actual malice or with a reckless disregard for the truth.” The lawsuit claims the statements were distributed widely to third parties and repeated.
“Indeed, the jury expressly found that Plaintiff did not commit rape and, as demonstrated below, Defendant George Stephanopoulos was aware of the jury’s finding in this regard yet still falsely stated otherwise,” Brito continued.
The interview cited in the lawsuit between Stephanopoulos and Mace, a Republican who has spoken out about being raped as a teenager, quickly took off online. In it, Stephanopoulos questions how Mace can still back Trump after he was found “liable for rape.”
A New York jury in May said Trump must pay $5 million in damages for sexually abusing Carroll and defaming her by calling her a liar. In a subsequent defamation lawsuit brought by Carroll, a Manhattan jury ordered Trump to pay $83.3 million to Carroll. Trump has appealed.
Trump also attempted to countersue Carroll over her continuing to accuse Trump of rape on cable news.
Trump has previously filed multiple similar and unsuccessful defamation lawsuits against media outlets whose coverage he dislikes, including a $475 million case against CNN that was tossed by a federal judge in July.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
