The stories you want. The opinions that matter.
No, thanks
Tag: verdict
By Suing ABC's Stephanopoulos, Trump Renews Attention To Carroll Rape Verdict

By Suing ABC's Stephanopoulos, Trump Renews Attention To Carroll Rape Verdict

Donald Trump is facing criticism for suing ABC News and George Stephanopoulos for defamation after the host said the ex-president had been found liable for “rape.”

“In an interview on This Week, Stephanopoulos pressed Republican Rep. Nancy Mace, a rape survivor, over her continued support of Trump after a jury found he sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll in 1996, awarding her $88 million for battery and defamation,” CNN reports. “Stephanopoulos asserted multiple times in the interview with Mace that Trump had ‘raped’ Carroll.”

“You endorsed Donald Trump for president. 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 that we just saw?” Stephanopoulos asked Mace, as CNN reported.

A federal jury did not find Carroll had proved Trump had raped her, but Senior U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan later “concluded that the claim Trump raped Carroll was ‘substantially true,'” according to CNN.

“Indeed, the jury’s verdict in Carroll II establishes, as against Mr Trump, the fact that Mr Trump ‘raped her’, albeit digitally rather than with his penis. Thus, it establishes against him the substantial truth of Ms Carroll’s ‘rape’ accusations,” Judge Kaplan wrote.

Attorney George Conway took Trump to task while offering some legal insight.

“The theory of Trump’s complaint here is that, since the jury in Carroll II, the case tried last year, unanimously found that Trump forcibly and without consent penetrated Carroll’s vagina with his fingers and not his penis, and since this constituted sexual assault and not rape as defined by the New York Penal Code, Stephanopoulos libeled him by saying he had been held liable for ‘rape,’ even though the judge in the Carroll case has held multiple times since the verdict that in common parlance (and the law of most other jurisdictions) forcible digital penetration is rape,” Conway writes.

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Thailand Court Ousts Prime Minister After Abuse-Of-Power Verdict

Thailand Court Ousts Prime Minister After Abuse-Of-Power Verdict

By Simon Roughneen and Shashank Bengali, Los Angeles Times

BANGKOK — In a controversial ruling that deepened Thailand’s political crisis, the country’s Constitutional Court on Wednesday ordered Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to leave office, ruling that she abused her powers when she transferred a government official from his post three years ago.

The court also demanded the removal of several of Yingluck’s cabinet ministers who it said were complicit in the transfer, throwing the status of her caretaker government into uncertainty ahead of elections scheduled for July.

Two dozen other ministers remain in their posts, including Deputy Prime Minister Niwatthamrong Boonsongpaisan, who was named Thailand’s new acting leader.

Shinawatra’s opponents had accused her of transferring the official, National Security Council head Thawil Pliensri, in order to install a member of her influential family in that post. Appearing in court on Tuesday, she denied any wrongdoing, saying she “never benefited from any transfer of civil servants.”

The ruling sparked fears of new violence between Shinawatra’s mainly rural supporters, known as Red Shirts, and the mainly urban and southern anti-government protesters who have massed in Bangkok in recent months demanding her ouster. More than 20 people have been killed since November.

The protests have waned in recent months, but Thailand remains bitterly divided between the rival camps. Shinwatra’s opponents accusing her of being a stand-in for her brother, ousted former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who has lived in exile since 2008 to escape a jail sentence in a separate abuse of power case.

Yingluck Shinawatra has led a caretaker administration with few powers since December, when she dissolved parliament and called elections that her Pheu Thai party was expected to win. But the Constitutional Court annuled a vote held in February after anti-government protesters blocked polling places in one-fifth of voting districts nationwide.

The court’s unanimous ruling on Wednesday prompted new allegations that the judiciary is on the side of the anti-government protesters. The constitutional court has dealt several setbacks to the Pheu Thai party in recent years, including forcing two Thaksin-backed prime ministers from office in 2008.

Suchit Bunbongkarn, a retired constitutional court judge, said the ruling was appropriate.

“The court tried to play the game by the rules,” Bunbongkarn said. “It is a question of political legitimacy.”

The ruling buoyed the flagging anti-government movement, and within hours, protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban marched with supporters triumphantly to their main protest site at Bangkok’s Lumpini Park.

One protestor, Tikamporn Wonglangka, who hails from Chaing Rai in northern Thailand, welcomed the court’s decision and said she hoped the rest of the cabinet would be removed when the national anti-corruption body rules on a Shinawatra-backed rice-subsidy scheme. Opponents say the subsidies, which have cost billions of dollars, were a bid to buy support for the government among farmers in the populous northeast.

“I want elections but this all has to finish first,” she said. “I want reform first.”

Adisorn Piengkes, a former lawmaker from the Pheu Thai party, said the court’s decision was “based on emotion.”

“The decision was not legal. The court is not for the people; it is for the upper class.”

Asked whether Yingluck’s supporters would take to the streets to protest the ruling, Adisorn said, “The people of Thailand must fight for democracy in the future.”

 A China via Flickr

The Art Of Celebrating Blago’s Demise

Former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich was convicted on 17 out of 20 federal corruption charges yesterday, including conspiring to sell Obama’s old U.S. Senate seat. It closes a “sordid chapter”–as two different Illinois politicians, U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D) and State Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno (R) put it in their statements responding to the verdict–in recent history.

The other current U.S. Senator from Illinois, Mark Kirk (R), merely referred to it an “unfortunate chapter.” Or maybe it a “long, embarassing chapter?” That was from the State Treasurer Dan Rutherford, who also added that Blagojevich “deserves everything he’s going to get.”

Blago’s successor, Governor Pat Quinn (D), said that his old boss had “deceived everyone” but allowed himself a moment of reflection. “I’ve known his wife for many years. She’s a very good person,” he said about Patti Blagojevich (who once was caught yelling, “Hold up that [expletive] Cubs [expletive],” as part of a rant implying that the Tribune should fire its editorial writers in order to get help.)

The Senate President called it both “sad but necessary” and “another sad event for Illinois,” while a reform advocate called Blagojevich a “pox on the Illinois political system.”

But there was also joy in Springfield–Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka, his 2006 Republican opponent, said that she was “personally pleased to see him [Blagojevich] held responsible.”

And then there was the ex-Governor’s response, which no one else — except for maybe his wife — shared. “Frankly, I am stunned,” he told the press after the verdict was handed down. [Chicago Sun-Times]