Donald Trump Trial! Why did he LOSE? Body Language & Legal Analysts React
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 сен 2024
- Donald Trump was on trial this week. The 45th president of the United States and real estate mogul was sued by author E. Jean Carroll. Why did the jury find Trump liable for $5 million dollars, What was his biggest mistake during his deposition and what does his body language reveal? Find out now!
Become a member of The Behavioral Arts and receive a custom badge and other perks here: www.youtube.co...
Check out my favorite books on how to read body language (affiliate links):
amzn.to/3TNNYdf
amzn.to/3cW844w
amzn.to/3Jmff3z
Find me on:
TikTok: vm.tiktok.com/...
Instagram: / spideyhypnosis
facebook: / spideymagic
twitter: / spideyhypnosis
RESSOURCES
The 9 Symptoms of Narcissism (SPECIAL ME)
www.dukehealth...
All Documents Pertaining to the Case
www.courtliste...
Research on the Fallacies of Memory
Memory distortion: an adaptive perspective
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
The Neuroscience of Memory: Implications for the Courtroom
www.ncbi.nlm.n...
The Science of Shrugging
• What Can THIS Gesture ...
The Science of Adapters/Pacifiers
• Why Do We Do This Gest...
TIMESTAMPS
00:27 Why Was Donald Trump Being Sued?
06:42 Donald Trump Body Language Baseline
12:22 Why did Trump Lie About This?
22:25 Why Does He Keep Saying This?
26:54 The Mistake That Cost him The Case
35:46 How to Get the Truth out of a Narcissist
44:04 Should This be Allowed in Court?
#bodylanguage #behavioralpsychology #psychology #donaldtrump #trump #liedetection #thebehavioralarts #howtoreadbodylanguage #howtocatchaliar
Appreciate the disclaimer! Just because you like someone doesn’t mean they’re innocent. And just because you don’t like someone doesn’t mean they’re guilty. 👏
I had to dig and dig for his full CNN speech until I found it on Mess of media..Then I had to "sort by date"
I want a fair game. I want his full speech available so I can make up my own mind. Don't tell me what to think.
@@lullaby218 It's suspicious to me when they censor these kinds of things. It's better to critique with more information instead of hiding what you don't like. Always question.
@Donäld Trump no
@@lullaby218 Go to law and crime or Rekieta and you can see it.
“It’s like waving at consent as it drives by” YES! Thank you for speaking about consent issues especially as men your voices are very powerful on these issues.
Really? How would you define the word "consent"?
I define it as allowing something to happen without objection or with expressed or implied permission granted (ie by word or action).
He is talking about when a woman is alone with him in a particular scenario and they get close together. Does she move away and indicate she doesn't want anything? Does she stay in place and keep talking? Maybe lower her volume? Maybe change the angle of her body next to his? Lots of ways to indicate consent.
And there are some very simple and clear ways to express no consent given. Ambiguous consent is often confused with acceptance and offering consent because women in real life seldom say "yes good sir, I consent to your placing your hand on my public region" and in most cases will just lean back and wait for more kisses.
This is ten times more true for the 1990s.
@@eschelar
If you aren't sure, just ask. It really doesn't take that much when you think about it and could spare you a lot of aggro further on. So yeah.
Just ask.
@@eschelar Ask. Assuming leads you to overstep consent.
Getting consent is getting a "yes" before doing anything. It's not about it taking a "no" for you to stop.
@eschelar In Denmark, consent isn't implied. It's explicit. Passivity or inactive movement actions or otherwise is no consent. Usually our speech is a lot more direct and outspoken than most other cultures so talking about sex and consent is normal. Only a tiny minority take offense by openly talking about sex and sexuality, rape and assault.
@@eschelar Often you won't be able to get out of a situation, even if you are uncomfortable and would like to say no, you just go along with it out of politeness, especially if you are a bit of a shy, meek person with low confidence. That can happen for women and men likewise, and not just in situations that have to do with sex. Any peer group pressure situation is like that for young people. Think about situations where you maybe did something you didn't really want to do just to not lose face in front of a "friend".
If you care about consent - what ideally everyone should do - they should absolutely communicate and talk and offer a way out for the other person in an authentic and open way, not manipulative.
This was a great example of how to keep things even handed and neutral! I’m impressed guys. I’m sure it wasn’t an easy choice to even do it at all! 👏🏻 👏🏻
There’s no evidence he did anything
@@gabelincoln3608 thanks for another voice of sanity,
@@mizread it’s hard to find lol
@@gabelincoln3608 never a truer word 👌🏻
A total contrast from the Behaviour Panel discussing this deposition. THIS was a lot more neutral and professional analysis.
I love when you have Rob on your channel to explore both legal and behavioral issues. I think y’all compliment each other and make each other stronger. Also, it’s such an example to RUclips viewers not to shy away from difficult topics (presidents, duchesses, etc), but to instead model how to navigate the topics with calm objectivity and grace. ❤
Q: "You were seeing women outside of your marriage?" A: "I don't know" said nobody ever 🤣
Spot on!!
Trump seems to be a person/topic that nobody is able to approach and cover without being biased. I am so insanely impressed with the genuine, legitimately genuine, way in which Spidey took this on and did so without allowing opinion, leaning or influence alter the video or analysis. Bravo
They did a pretty good job. Bias was shown with the defamation silliness though and spidey gave some gentle pushback on this.
Kinda weird that the lawyer thinks it's defamation for him to say that the woman is lying... Oh but then he clarifies it because Trump kept adding to it for motive.
And?
Clearly there is a motive behind this case. That was completely left out of the context.
This is a case that has no actual evidence. It's waaaaaayyyyyyyyy past the statute of limitations. But the case was made possible by a literal change in the law to allow cases of sexual abuse to be brought even way after the statute of limitations has expired.
Which sounds like a nice law to get tough on sexual abuse, right?
Except that the exception in law is literally only for one year, which is ordinarily not enough time to get a case like this started and pushed through to the courts, so they added another part that adds priority to these cases to get them processed extra quickly.
Which is a bit odd. Because now you have a situation where it looks very much like there is literally only a single case that can possibly result from this law, with gathering evidence, paying the expensive lawyers to work super fast and take advantage of this brand new, super short-lived law and smash it through the courts in lightning speed.
One lawyer pointed out that there don't appear to be any other cases on the books using this law. Who else could afford it? Especially with a case that will almost definitely lose because there is basically no evidence that could be admissible 30 years after the fact.
So yeah, is this a case of grift and corruption in the legislative branch to try to go after Trump, with no real benefit to any *actual* survivors of sexual abuse because the law expires before anyone else could realistically use it?
I think this is a bit of a stretch to say the least.
But Trump makes the assertion and while it's not defamation to say he didn't do it, it's defamation to say that the woman was grifiting...
Yeah that's when you realize that this lawyer guy is pretty heavily biased. He didn't say anything about this.
@@eschelar It's interesting how you're obsessing about the motives of people that have literally nothing to do with the case. The question is: Is Donald Trump a person who Sexually assaulted a women in a department store dressing room.
If the answer is yes, literally everything you said is entirely irrelevant. If the answer is no, then everything you said is only MOSTLY irrelevant.
Now, then, if we consider your 2 somewhat relevant points we have:
*_Kinda weird that the lawyer thinks it's defamation for him to say that the woman is lying_*
Which is an incredibly dishonest way of pointing out that Donald Trump has perpetuated an ongoing campaign of slander against miss Carroll for over a year, calling her names and attacking her personally in the most disgusting ways imaginable. He talks about her constantly, and goes out of his way to assault her character calling her not only a liar, but "crazy", "a slut", "ugly and old," and, as you have just generously demonstrated a part of "a political conspiracy" that would be aimed at denigrating his person. The creative and diverse methods by which Mr Trump has indeed attacked the motives and the person of Ms. Carrol has been staggering, so No. It is not surprising at all that a lawyer would suggest defamation, especially since defamation and intent to defame has already been demonstrated.
*_Especially with a case that will almost definitely lose because there is basically no evidence that could be admissible 30 years after the fact._*
And yet, it didn't lose. Primarily because Donald Trump didn't so much as raise a finger in his own defense. He offered no witnesses, no evidence and his lawyers rested their case at the first opportunity. Ms Carrol, on the other hand, apparently did the impossible, providing a well of evidence that dated back 30 years. 2 other women also testified that they were sexually assaulted by Mr Trump and were able to recount their stories before the court, and used trump's own words as evidence.
Also, couple of points sparky.
One, the law does not require the case conclude within a year, meaning that, once filed, you can pursue your case to it's conclusion, so that stuff about the "cost" is nonsense.
Second, neither grift, nor corruption are terms that apply, even if what you say is true, unless you allege that Ms Carroll somehow paid for the law to be written for her? At best, this is just normal politics. Also, the New York STATE legislator (and governor) are state institutions. Wasn't sure you were aware. Also, also, at least one ACTUAL survivor of sexual abuse did benefit from the law. Just in case you missed it. Also, also, everything you said? That applies to EJC 1, not this case EJC 2. This is a straight defamation case. No laws were changed or rewritten at all, in order to facilitate Trump being forced to own up to his slander.
@@eschelarI don't think he was necessarily biased; his definition of defamation is consistent with the case law, as well as recent trials on the subject. including the Depp v. Heard case ( "abuse hoax")
He also questioned the allowance of the "consent" video and pointed out you can use one incident to prove an unrelated incident.
I watched The Behavior Panel cover this (they did a great job) and then I watched this. What blows me away is how there is SO MUCH HERE that was not covered in their video. Obviously legally, but also behaviorally. And even logistic details of edits and things that happen in deposition. Also, agree with the commenters, ALWAYS love it when Rob is on the channel!
I agree . The behavior panel didn’t seem as comfortable reviewing depo
Agreed 100%. I walked away with a lot more from this video.
Same I was curious why behavior channel didn’t do statement analysis. Left some big rocks in turned. I’m usually a big fan of theirs but that felt off. Thank goodness for spider and rob. Loved pointing out his power play up down baseline, that may not be deceptive “just” him being him. So helpful to have pointed out. Thanks rob and spidey!
And it was quite obvious that The Behavior Panel was biased. When a choice arose, Trump was always given the benefit of the doubt, very unlike others they have analyzed.
I watched the behaviour panel once and found they missed quite a lot. To me they aren't nearly as good as Spidey.
“She’s not my type” is not a defense for SA.
SA is about power, not attraction.
"She's not my type" is closer to an admission of SA if she were, certainly together with him mistaking Carroll for Marla, and the rancid "just grab them by the pussy" comment.
Nope! it’s not a defense, but Trump thinks it is a good defense and the jury didn’t agree with him.
@@liladance3506 oh lila u are definitely biased.
@@RobbieJayOne nyc jury is biased. Nyc is heavily against President Trump
Sexual Assault at burgdorf and Goodman is heavily crowded and has a lot of security. So no one heard anything?? Bullshit
You and Rob are such gentlemen, it was a pleasure to watch this analysis, especially because it's such a hot topic, and you made some excellent points, without your personal opinions on Trump getting in the way, which I loved. At the end of the day, I can't say if you are pro Trump or not, and it's honestly refreshing to see. Great job you guys, and thank you for some valuable inputs from a legal and behavioral standpoint. I'm here for it!
Nothing hot about it. More mental illness and anti-Trump bullshit. You’re telling me you get raped but you don’t even know what year it happened.
News media could learn something from this.
@@yorkiemom7996 media does know this, but they're all about sensationalism.
As a survivor of childhood SA and SA as a young teenager, it took me a long time to disclose what happened to me. And even now at 50 years old, I am still very reluctant to name my monsters. With being said, I want to thank you both for being sensitive to people that have been victimized. Men can be victims as well. And they often live in silence forever. I think you handled this sensitive issue very well. You both gained a new sub tonight. ❤
Go talk to some Hells Angel's or other motorcycle clubs. They have some support groups that will help you feel safe.
My sister is both a rape victim and someone who has fabricated rape allegations (drugs are bad kids).
She also didn't name and charge her rapist. And she knows that he has raped other women since too.
You're not helping anyone by remaining silent, least of all yourself. It gnaws at you every day. It does for my sister and it makes it much harder for her to drop her final big addictions (method and alcohol still to go, heroin, tobacco conquered for more than ten years).
The truth will set you free.
But you don't have to face it alone. There are many who would tear the shirt off their back to support you.
@@eschelar my abuser is dead. So I know he isn’t hurting anyone. I at least have that comfort knowing he will never hurt anyone again.
I have talked openly about my abuse. But I have chosen not to mention my abuser to some people. I’m just not there in my healing. Because he is dead everyone has put him on this pedestal. We all heal at our own pace. 10 years ago, I couldn’t even talk about my sexual abuse.
I was a victim at 5 years old, and on my 25th birthday. Never once did I say what happened to me was sexy.
As someone it has happened to a couple times myself, the first time i didn't speak about until well in my 30's but the second time, i tried talking immediately after, and was labeled a liar by my step mother, because it was her brother in-law... now in saying i understand how horrid it is to be called a liar on something so damaging, i 1 also do know someone who 100% made it up, and even thankfully for the accuseds sake wrote about it in her diary, on how she would set him up, she disgust me after that, and not just cause of what that does to those who are telling the truth but because the turmoil that put the accused through, had him hang himself in my garage after it all... because his name was ruined, & he was truely beaten down while he awaited trial in South African prisons.
But 2, a question i have here with this case, its said there is an interview where she was asked her favourite tv show and what she watches, and she mentions "The Apprentice is pretty great", that was in 2021, now do any of you it has happened to, think you would be watching said persons tv shows and in a good light?
Also the fact that "she followed him into the dressing room, for him to try on ladies lingerie, cause she thought it would be funny"... huh, i don't even follow family members into the changing room, i sit out side the door and wait to be shown the item, so this really confused me too....
Spidey, your observation that Trump often answers questions of opinion with “Yes, but no” or “No, but yes” responses was SPOT ON 🙌💯
This is one reason he’s so polarizing: his statements confirm the biases of people on both sides 🤦♀️💐
Excellent point
He does this all the time and I find it so frustrating! I was so happy Spidey pointed it out!
And it means he's never wrong.
He’s not polarizing. Sober and informed people give him the support and respect he deserves. People who hate him do so either because they are ingorant, because the media has made it socially acceptable to do so, or because they are simply hateful malicious people themselves.
Well done Spidey and Rob!! 👏 👏 He’s an especially challenging personality to analyze in a meaningful and civil way and you are doing it. ❤
"Challenging Personality" is an understatement. I do like how well they did this. I don't hate or like Trump, but I can see how his deposition and demeanor definitely hurt his case.
Thank you both so much for your professional and in-depth review. I really appreciate you and Rob being so marvelous! 😊😊
Thank you for this analysis. It illustrates perfectly why I became a psychologist and not an attorney.
It's an extremely odd answer to SA to say, "I didn't do it cuz she's not my type." Instead of the usual defense "I would never do something like that." It's almost like saying I would do that but not to her cuz she's "not my type." Just thought I'd point out the inconsistency there more.
That's exactly why the 'she's not my type' defense is so offensive. I suspect DT genuinely doesn't understand that his behaviour in this incidents is offensive.
Spot on.
EXACTLY. I don't know why they didn't use that more!!! They could have said an innocent person wouldn't say they didn't do it bc they weren't their type -they'd just deny that they would ever do it OR they could have pointed out that serial abusers/rapists historically, according to the FBI do not have a type!!
Rape isn’t committed because of looks or your type or not. It’s about control, dominance and power. All the characteristics that trump shows every single day
@@Carolina-uf2ip lot of people show those characteristics that aren't rapists. Be Careful how you word things. That kind of thinking won't hold up in court. They kind of discussed that a bit in this video about showing trumps conversation with "locker room talk." If trumps guilty God will deal with him even if the courts don't.
Thank you Rob and Spidey. For having common sense and moral centers that the “behavioral panel” completely missed.
I was appalled by their bias.. their agenda was pretty evident. It has made me question every one of their videos now. I love the fact that Spidey sticks to the body language and not his personal opinions about the person...👍
@@juliefin1124 AND Visa Versa, clearly! My issue was the lack of explanation regarding his evasiveness when asked direct, simple answer, questions. Was it deception? Or was it his baseline? Spidey and Rob fully explained this... the BP just made excuses for Trump's dismissive answers, imho... stating only that he was not being deceitful, period. It was like they were generally judging and critiquing the person, and not the body language and their behaviours shown in this particular video. The answers (or lack of answers) Trump gave in this deposition, helped him to lose the case, pure and simple.
@@juliefin1124 The panel’s discussion and analysis of Trump and this deposition felt rather biased, favourable to him was far too lax to let him slide with a lot more than they have let others slide in their critiques. They appeared to actually justify or dismiss a lot of his blatant tells of misogyny, narcissism, megalomania, indifference, and flat out lies.
we don’t know but I’ve noticed that they are always more favourable to the right. They’re always leaning towards the right being more comfortable and telling the truth where the left are not as much. They had more glowing remarks for Pence over Harris. Same with the Trump/Clinton debate. Then Greg goes on Newsmax and yuks it up about Hillary.
Mark Bowden worked with the Canadian conservative ex-PM Stephen Harper and Greg Hartley was in Newsmax/Stinchfield laughing about Trudeau, calling him nervous, stress, and uncertain. Then calls the crazy interim conservative leader nutcase, Candace Bergen, who wears a Maga hat, the freedom convoy, who defended the truckers in the video calling them peace-loving patriots, and so on…truthful and and angry (fake outrage) at the PM for calling the convoy out. Then the host says he’d rather her lead than Trudeau (of course), Greg smiles and nods.
I still enjoy watching for entertainment but their bias shows.
@@juliefin1124 at least one of them supports trump, they didn’t say who, but during the last election they stated that’s one or more supports him
I think the, "She is not my type" comment is more about insulting her. He tends to call interviewers or opponents names when he dislikes what they are saying.
Yes. He had to hold back an insult to her appearance, comparing her to some sort of animal, as he's done with others. And who said he doesn't have self restraint!?
@@janicebooy1007 But he is the type to do that. He's a self admitted p-grabber.
Oh no one is going to argue against this. You’re absolutely right. Problem is, it came back to bite him in the ass. Also, while I do fully agree with you, he ALSO said it to serve as a defense “I’m not attracted to her, therefore why would I R her”. Then a moment later he insulted the lawyer by saying she was also not his type lmao. Dummy can’t get out of his own way.
@@janicebooy1007 exactly
People act like Trump is the only person to grab P... The Dems are guilty of so much more
Spectacular! Thank you both for taking time to analyze this legally and behaviorally. Thank you for being willing to risk the ire of some, to open up space for education. My wish for a legal analysis was granted ❤
I truly appreciate you and Rob.
Really proud of you for tackling this, it's an absolute minefield when dealing in any conversations around Trump and I honestly didn't think you would ever touch anything like this but I am so glad you did. Very well done guys
I do not blindly hate trump. I am very informed and am an objective person. My hate for trump is full, total & genuine and again well founded.
i dont like trump at all but hate leads to the dark side
Well there's help for your TDS. It's not healthy to spend so much energy and wasted time on hating someone who doesn't even know who you are.
@@asimhussain8716 you are SO wrong. If you dislike or hate someone it is totally is reasonable and logical… WTF are you saying??? If someone, like Trump: a divisive, corrupt, racist, self centered, morally bankrupt…. and his actions and words EVERY SINGLE DAY prove these things… it is totally LOGICAL and REASONABLE to not like him or even hate him. I think you’re projecting here. What is NOT logical or reasonable are YOUR views on this man. Either you’re not paying attention, or you just simply so delusional or don’t care that he’s such a deplorable human being. Says more about you, than the ones who dislike him.
I don't hate him at all. I grew up in New York, he has always been a narcissistic liar and that's just a truth. What makes me sad is that people don't want to recognize a basic truth. It's the same way I feel about R Kelly being a pedophile...
Very well done! Thank you Spidey & Rob for your analysis. Whether you like Trump or not I’m sure it can be respectfully agreed upon that some of his behaviors, comments & even actions haven’t been the best. We can only hope for better in the future.
Agreed!
What you see is what you get. Nothing has changed since DJT burst onto the scene in NYC in the 80s. His bad behavior is what his base is addicted to and why the networks gave him free airtime, essentially helping him get elected. They continue doing so now because love him or hate him he is ratings gold and that's their bottom line.
Narcissists don't change.
Hope for better from other candidates, you will never get better from Trump, he has no remorse, so he is very unlikely to want to change.
Yes, they haven’t been “the best”…some* might define his actions as “the worst” (some: Webster’s Dictionary). It is unfortunate yet understandable my favorite RUclipsrs cannot be 100% forthright in their beliefs in fear of ostracizing a large part of their viewers.
Trump's one sided smirk when he says of course he is a star, looks like a bit of contempt that she would even have to ask the question.
President Trump should've gotten an Oscar for "Home Alone 2" it was his greatest role 😞
You were wise to set parameters and expectations upfront, and you both handled this topic extremely well throughout the video. Congratulations!
Often you confirm what I've been getting intuitively about subjects whom you analyze here. I have zero training, otherwise, so that confirmation is invaluable to me, which made it very worthwhile to watch. Not because we mostly agree, but because now I can match my intuitive responses with the physical gestures, and understand it more on both levels. I learn from my misses, too. I hope that made sense.
If people are capable of detaching their feelings for an hour, whether pro or con, it was worth the watch! You have such a calming way about handling hot subjects, Spidey. Job well done by both of you! 👏👏👏
He did not want to be sued.....by a grifter
I waited to see this one because I'm an SA survivor and I knew it would cause some triggering memories. I like how you approached this with respect and kindness while letting people know that their feelings are valid. I find this depo a fascinating study of body language. Thank you, Spidey.
I’m sorry that you experienced that but since you did, don’t you think that E. Jean Carol would remember the year at the very least. I would think I would remember the year the day and the time because I would never be able to forget something like that and the way she laughed about it afterwards and went on that CNN interview and said that what RPE is fantasizing and sexual, and then she laughed and giggled with another CNN person about how are they going to spend the money. I’m sure you’ve never laughed about such a situation or would, am I correct? Have you watched any of the interviews with her and do you believe her? How don’t believe a word she says, and I think she was paid off by the Democratic party.
@@ChrissyGrace2611 I don't know what you're going on about. I was just thanking Spidey for his video.
I know this was a touchy one to do but thank you for doing it! It really felt unbiased and you addressed some critical things that seem to have been left out or glazed over in other reviews. Much appreciated!
@Mike Can you point out where it's biased?
@@Mad-Lad-Chad Everything is biased. Did they show the whole deposition? Did they show EJC's deposition? Did they go into excruciating detail over the history of the case, including the NY law's passing, trump's history of SA, the testimony at the trial? Did they highlight every single instance of body language contained within the tape?
All these things are forms of bias. Avoiding bias is impossible. People who whine about bias, rather than ethics, are generally admitting that they think the former is more important than the latter. It's another example of "if neither favor you, pound the table."
Honestly, I watch Rob and Spidey a lot and to this day I can’t gage which way you two lean politically. I think that speaks highly of your professionalism and your neutrality in the videos ❤
You need to watch when Rob is on with other law tubers. It will be clear.
Politics are irrelevant here. It’s a legal issue. He doesn’t win or lose an election over this. There are plenty of complete jerks who don’t do anything technically illegal and you can’t assume they broke the law because they’re jerks nor can you throw them in prison because you personally don’t like them or their politics. I say that as someone who hates Donald Trump and always has. The facts have to prevail. What does it say about me if I just want to see everyone I don’t personally like in prison? Most of Hollywood and almost all of DC would be in jail. But then I’m just as wrong as the people I don’t like, personally or politically. If he’s innocent, leave him alone unless he runs for president again. If he’s guilty, deal with it according to the law. I don’t like making up conspiracy theories where none exist.
Yay Rob! I love it when you bring in Rob. Love your great behavior analysis always Spidey!
Agreed!! ALWAYS make sure to when Robs a guest for some reason 🤷🏼♀️ he’s great and so is Spidey! I think I just like how they play off eachother… maybe that’s it 😊
You two are amazing. I thought you were opening a can of worms analyzing such a controversial individual and situation, but I appreciate how you both set the stage to begin and proceeded with a solid analysis of body language and legal points. Really appreciated this example of how important establishing a baseline is - made it clear in a new way for me. Thank you for taking this on, Spidey and Rob!
Maybe my life is not that interesting at the moment, but it sure is the best part of my week when I get a notification of a new video by Spidey xD
Your life is interesting, you have a craving for knowledge in a subject very few are "experts" in so please don't think because you love these uploads and learning makes your life uninteresting. I bet you're awesome ❤
One note here about the character evidence: I was listening to a legal podcast where this exact question came up and one of the hosts found that within this jurisdiction, there is an exception about character evidence in civil cases where sexual crimes are alleged.
I appreciate the way the two of you handled this. I loved the helmets, especially the 1st one with the beard. Very effective!
I really liked Rob's explanation about opening the question of a person's character in a trial. I'm glad he joined you for this video to help with the legal aspects. No matter how one may feel about the man, you both did a great job focusing on the subject matter without leaning one way or the other. I would love to hear a little more analysis regarding his response to 'did you write this?' I felt like there was something unusual about his tone for that answer. Keep up the great work, Spidey! I love your videos.
For non-New Yorkers, Bergdorf Goodman is impossible not to remember. For someone who likes nice things, expensive things, Bergdorf Goodman is like Yankee Stadium to baseball fans. You can’t not remember. If you went once, you’d know. If you went weekly, you’d know. It’s not Target vs Walmart, it’s its own unique place. You can buy pieces of art by famous artists there. A piece of jewelry for $1 million. Its laid out like you are wallking through a museum. Its for the very wealthy. It’s not forgettable.
Kind of like you don't forget if you cheated on any of your wives. Some things you just don't forget.
Thank you for explaining this , I have never been to New York , it sounds exactly like a place he would go to.
As someone who did the windows at Bergdorf, I respectfully disagree. It's not the top shop you view it as. It's not even in the top 5. And, it's most likely that you view it that way, because you're not wealthy.
@@pdxpete48 She's. mistaken. I have worked there. It's not what people who are not wealthy think it is.
Is it memorable for the very wealthy?
I freaking love a good Spidey and Rob collaboration!
Me, too!
RUclips is really screwed if an informational channel like this can’t talk about the news and instead has to say “the S A word” and “the R word” to avoid demonetization.
That's the way society is these days
Thank you for clarifying that I was wondering why. It's unfortunate that it had to be done for that reason. I think this should have been carefully explained in a way that would not have risked the demonetisation.
The reason seems ridiculous, but RUclips's intention was to stop users who were creating dangerous and harmful content, and to stay out of trouble with their advertisers with the least amount of effort. That means that a lot of innocent videos are restricted in their content.
@@Atis602 yeah I at first thought he was saying “the essay word” and was profoundly confused
See, I just assumed it was about being respectful of the viewers who had experienced either. 17.7m women in the United States have experienced sexual assault. This is why people with zero empathy think the people with empathy are "virtue signaling," "woke," etc. They assume that no one else feels empathy either, because they can't. It's telling you thought it was about avoiding "cancel culture" or "deplatforming," which are just funny ways to say the free market is working as intended.
As a regular viewer of both of your channels, I didn’t need the disclaimer bc you both are consistently objective on every topic you cover. This was a very fair and interesting analysis ✌🏼
4😊😊😊😊😊😊🎉😊😊🎉🎉😊
😊😊uiu 😊
😊h😊😊😊😊😊😅😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😅😊
Great analysis, Spidey! I may be one of the few who is "in the middle" about Trump, and I think you guys did a great job being objective. Appreciate you both! Oh, and I think the "she's not my type" also suggests that it was HIS choice that it didn't happen, and not her turning him down, for example
Great insight.
But it did happen.
I think the “she’s not my type” statement was trumps way of insulting her, he wanted to put her down and thought he was being smart. IMO it was a low blow and of course it was a false statement, she is his type. Well she was back then.
I dont think it happened. Type or not. He was a lot of bravado in his words, but i think she is trying to defame him. Her Amber to his Johnny.
@@ItsOnlyMeAgain maybe, but I think an important point to make is when he said that, he's thinking of the Carroll now and not necessarily the Carroll then. I don't think anybody really believes she would now be his type. Actually, she probably wasn't then either. Trump in the mid 90's would not have been attracted to a 50+ year old woman. The photograph of Trump, Ivana, Carroll and her husband was in the mid 80's so it's possible she's going to look similar to a Marla Maples of the 90's with similar hairstyles and such. It was an unnecessary comment, but his opinion nonetheless. After Ivana, Trump was attracted to much younger women.
Absolutely brilliant, Spidey. This is the only completely neutral video I’ve seen on this. Insightful, informative and Rob’s point about intent was well made.
I'm only a couple of minutes into it, and when I knew you were bringing in Rob, I shouted out loud with glee! You are the dynamic duo!
So pleased to have found you both. Pausing at post disclaimer. You're both so refreshing to those of us who are wanting to learn about the world around us in all situations and scenarios. I personally love the range of topics you cover from light hearted to serious, and your occasional, professional decline to cover certain other topics. Thank you both for being here!
30:00 "The photo is blurry" makes me think that his vision is not good, and he is too proud to wear glasses.
You hit the nail on the head with your comment. You can see Trump in many situations where he squints. And yet he refuses to wear glasses.
At his age, it’s the mostly likely scenario + being too proud to wear glasses.
I noticed that with a LOT of famous people.
That''s my first thought too.
He could afford laser surgery. If he also had cataracts (likely at his age) the lens replacement they do would give him either perfect vision close-up or far away vision, but not both. Since he's a golfer, he might choose far distance sight, therefore his close vision wouldn't be good. The only solution would be reading glasses.
That was a point I didn't realize until you mentioned it. The photo might have been a bit blurry for him, and it wasn't a lie.
Spidey AND Rob together, what a treat. Thank you gentlemen!
It's immensely helpful to hear thoughts from both your fields of expertise. I loved watching this video where I won't watch the deposition on its own.
In regards to Trump remembering cheating on Ivana, in 1989 the family was on a ski holiday in Colorado, , Marla Maples publicly approached Ivana telling Ivana that she loved her husband. It was all over the news, said in front of many witnesses and a part of the reason Ivana walked away with millions more than the pre-nup allowed. Ivana also wrote about it in her book. I guess I'd want to forget that too.
Spidey coming in clutch with two of my fave RUclipsrs to explain this video to me!! Thank you!
So his baseline is..."elusive"....at best... his rephrasing and non-answers are typical of him, and they drive me personally crazy. How are we meant to trust a person who is terminally elusive and so unforthcoming?...My caveman brain says "run!" Lol
I found the same thing. I appreciated the explanation here.
I thought the same.
Terminally elusive! Exactly!
By listening to your instinct, which knows... RUN!!!!!!
@@asimhussain8716 Yep... says one thing... does another? Smh... Nope. He's very sus... or sketch... as the kids say.
48:52 I respect and love you both. I love it when y’all team up for analysis. Thank you for handling a very challenging topic with grace. I agree with everything you have expressed in such a dignified manner. I have to say, listening to that audio is triggering as a survivor. I can feel my heart rate increase as I’m listening. So, I just paused to take a deep breath (inhale: peace, love, and healing and exhale: anger, doubt, and fear). Thank you gentleman for using your respective platforms to express such behavior is UNACCEPTABLE under any circumstance. For anyone reading my comment, I would like to provide you with some advice based on my life experience . If you ever hear someone talking like the example in the audio, get away from that person and cease contact. Thirty-eight years ago I was young and didn’t know any better. This subject is no laughing matter, but rather a RED FLAG. RUN as fast as you can!!! Sending love & light to all!!! ❤️💫❤️
It's a little crazy that he identified the picture of the plaintiff as his 2nd wife, but in a picture that actually included his 1st wife! I think they're all his type though.
Anyone think he might have "mental" problems? His mind isnt clear?
How come no one ever mentions that Ivanna is right there, clear as day?!
100% he did that on purpose... he's a bs "artisan" ... deliberatly throwing others off balance is something he probably even enjoys.
My first look at this deposition, was when the Behaviour Panel did their analysis. It left me with a lot of unanswered questions, such as "Why are they not seeing deception in Trump's non-answers?" You covered that off nicely. To me, that looked like someone behaving cagey, someone trying to hide something.
Spidey, your willingness to collaborate with others on your videos always makes your videos more perceptive than most. Having Rob with his legal insights was a great move. Combined you two offered a perspective I haven't had yet. Very, well done!
I, too, watched the Behavior Panel video and was left feeling disappointed they didn't point out some of the more pointed elements in their assessment. I am not a Trump fan in any way, shape, or form. But I didn't go in expecting either videos to be a non-stop bashing of him to make me feel better, either. I felt like there were some missed expressions that were dismissed as baseline yet one in particular screamed dupers delight to me (I don't think I saw the clip here).
Spidey & Rob always bring their A game without being offensive or offending ❤ Definitely my favorite dynmaic duo!
@@Luna_C77: I am neither a fan or hate the guy. I frankly know little about him other than I find him "off-putting" in how he insulted the opposing lawyer. He just comes off as having little class, and rude.
I agree that the Behaviour Panel left me feeling that in an effort to appear neutral didn't really offer much insight. Now I'm beginnings to see that it's possible Trump isn't lying, he's just taking control by not answering questions.... This, in the end didn't help as they ended up getting what they needed from the deposition.
I think they’re treading carefully because they don’t want to get sued themselves.
Sued by whom? That doesn’t make any sense to me. By Trump? Surely he already has more than enough upcoming court cases to deal with than to sue a RUclips channel that dared call him out. I don’t think he is that pugnacious and petty, or if he even is, he cannot have enough resources to endlessly fund attorneys.
I was thinking the same thing with the behavior panel video. For instance he is asked if he called ... and his response was it didn't happen so he didnt feel the need. That isn't an answer to the question asked.
I was waiting for them to pointthat out and they didn't. So i was disappointed. And that isn't the only question he didn't directly answer.
And i learned from them and Spidey that is a red flag. So i was left with why was it not addressed. 🤷♀️
I guess if part of his baseline is to not normally answer questions directly it make more sense that his nonanswrs don't mean anything.
Also he goes from saying its "locker room talk" to saying its historically accurate talk.
Good point!
As a Canadian I'm not as invested in this man as some; but I despise his lies and find some of the things he's done quite despicable. This was a fair and thorough analysis covering both the legal aspects as well as the body language nuances. Thank you Spidey and Rob!
Thank you both! I appreciate the dialectic here that an unbiased behavioral/legal analysis can still have human decency interwoven with it! Especially that you two did not ignore things such as consent and the overwhelming evidence that Trump is a narcissist-- while not "officially" diagnosed there's so much data there as he's a public figure to say beyond a doubt it's accurate clinically! I've worked with diagnosed narcissistic personality clients but only in the context of a prison or court system because they generally do not seek therapy on their own to ever even have the chance for any professional to diagnose them!
I wonder if the access Hollywood tape part was allowed because it's already so infamous and because Trump refused to testify so they could ask him directly about his thoughts on consent etc.?
Thank you Rob & Spidey for another enjoyable, digestible and informative collaboration! 🤗👏👏👏
Thank you for not attacking the attorney asking questions and focusing on that man's behaviour and body language.
I got such a sick feeling listening to the biased pannel tearing down another woman that had nothing to do with the subject's behaviour being discussed. You guys are always so professional.
With this as such a touchy and sensitive topic, I feel you guys did very well.
Having grown up in a high demand religion, where you're gaslit a lot, the picking apart and identification of various behaviors like the "no, yes" and "yes, no", and the "that didn't actually answer the question, it redirected it, and you filled it in yourself" are invaluable. It helps with building skills to better recognize and respond to those kinds of innately manipulative behaviors.
It was very interesting to me to watch you pull apart the behaviors with him in particular as I'm currently reading the book his niece, who is a licensed psychologist, wrote about how he most likely developed into the person he is today. Two of the core parts of that being the need from an early age to be his own cheerleader and him taking control because rules dont apply to him. You touch on both of these. In the part where he expresses pride in writing something himself, his focus is on gassing himself up, thats a core part to his view of himself. In another part where you pick out him rephrasing questions and how he manages his wording on his baseline as well as when he aligns himself with a star, noting that rules dont apply to him in his own mind. These are behaviors that began their development at a young age, having next to no parental attentions or affecrions, leading to acting out that's never addressed and continuously being above the law for the most part. Its fascinating seeing how these early behaviors are still so ingrained that down to his baseline, its manipulative, non commital speech, unless he sees it as a pro to himself.
Thank you again.
I had an experience some years ago that seems to resonate with your statement on upbringing contributing to narcissistic tendencies. I had a lady friend who was employed as a nanny and worked for a number of affluent families. She complained that she was occassionally scolded in her attempts to discipline their children. In one instance, for example, a young child took off running into the back yard toward an unfenced swimming pool and, knowing the child couldn't swim, she thought him in danger of falling in and drowning. My friend intervened, but, when she did, the child's mother ran over and angrily bellowed "Don't restrain my child!" The mother then began criticizing her, demanding she never to use the word "No" with her child or in any way to attempt to curtail or restrict his behaviours; that by doing so she was 'ruining his sense of initiative' and making him servile.
From her complaints over the years, it seemed a relatively universal expectation among the affluent families she worked for. Has anyone else observed this 'child rearing practice' among affluent families, esp. ones that produced narcissistic adults?
@Kevin Underhill that's super interesting. I know a few people who've nannies for affluent families who've shared similar stories, but I have no idea how things have turned out. That did remind me, though, that the book talks about how when his father did turn his attention towards him finally, he admired how trump could be so charismatic as it wasn't a trait he had himself, so his father encouraged and supported the negative behaviors.
@@zethcrownett2946 It's interesting you point that out, as charisma can be characteristic of an Antisocial Personality. Thank you, I'm definitely going to have to buy a copy of that book and give it a good read! 🙂
@@kevinunderhill3052 it's called Too Much and Never Enough by Mary l Trump
Fantastic video. I love the different perspectives from each profession applied. I do wish the clip of Trump calling the interviewer “not his type also and that they are a disgrace” was shown.
I think you missed the part that much of that video is edited.
He always walks back his answers, it’s a mechanism to deny any direct challenge to what he said later. He can always say “actually what I said was”. It’s like being vaguely responsive with a whatever shrugging off of things. Or tells you what he’s heard other people are saying to criticise but saying “I’m not saying it but other people are, maybe it’s true, I don’t know” but he’s the one making public statements.
He did that all the time regarding President Obama’s birth certificate. The “people are saying”. When he knows something isn’t true but wants to create questions in gullible people’s minds.
Nailed it!
Sincerely your channel is the only one I never miss. As always, love your impartial, kind and entertaining way of analyzing these. & love that you’re bravely taking on even more controversial topics. Your commentary on learning how to see things objectively is what this world needs right now 💛🙏
People with NPD are almost never diagnosed, because they don't usually cooperate with the psych evaluation process. The only times they do are when they're forced by some authority because of what they've done, and, when they have a lot on the line - usually money. My mother and father were both diagnosed with NPD; they lied about anything and everything, they would never, ever apologize, and you could never get a straight answer out of them - ever. They also tend to have severe anger issues and a violent personality; I have my degrees in psych, and I maintained that my parents could have easily murdered someone, or many people, and simply thought nothing about it. I found working with people with NPD more personally frightening than working with people with Antisocial Personality Disorder! In the deposition Trump's attorney, Ms. Habba, was there. At one point she interjects by trying to answer a question for Mr. Trump - something that she should not have done (very, very bad).
Beautifully, artfully done! I learned a great deal, thank you!
This was done in a way to say several arguments that could be made, so that no matter what side you're on. (If you have a side) When you hear your own thoughts and opinions voiced and addressed, it makes you feel calm and more willing to hear the other side of the argument because you feel that the person or persons have taken in your own concerns and thought about them. I don't think this would have hit the same without Rob. I hope he becomes a staple on the channel. Love what you do Spidey. Keep up the great work you two!
“I don’t think I ever shopped there… For myself.” Right. Because you shopped there for your mistresses. All of the shopping for you was done by paid help. Of course.
Wealthy men even have someone shop for their mistresses or give their mistresses money to shop for themselves.
What a joke he doesn't remember if he cheated on his wife!
His answer is good for legal terms. Because of several allegations. He cannot incriminate himself.
First off, I’m not a huge fan of Donald Trump. However, isn’t he in his 70s? Why does he not wear reading glasses??? If someone showed me a photo and I didn’t have glasses... it definitely would be very blurry and I am at least 20 years younger than he is. Secondly, I cannot remember what happened in the 90s and I was much less busy and again, 20 years younger. How is someone supposed to remember that far back???
It's weird looking at an old photo album and having zero memory of one event yet vivid memories of another photo around the same time period.
Great analysis! To me it sounds as if he is adding a "qualifier" to make the negation more honest: "I wasn't public about it", "I didn't shop FOR MYSELF"
The " I wasn't public about it" thing I think was because it was the media that was printing it, not him. So because he doesn't recall publicly announcing it, he doesn't consider himself being public about it, if that makes sense. So much of his life is played out in the press and he only has a limited amount of control over what's written.
Thank you for pointing out that his behavior in the last clip was objectively unacceptable. Sometimes, people who are trying hard to be "objective" shy away from standing up against anything whatsoever, no matter how wrong. Glad that you didn't just let these comments slide as if they meant nothing.
I completely understand why you are objective and why it needs to be that way. But oh boy it is hard to swallow. I was surprised at the disclaimer at the end about potential views that you were “picking” on him because I felt you both gave him waaaay more leeway than he deserves. I recognise that is my bias showing and the fact this video made me so uncomfortable shows you probably got the objectivity spot on. Grudgingly appreciated. 😂😂😂
Being biased by an overwhelming amount of evidence is proper, as that is the purpose of collecting evidence. To form an opinion.
Feigning neutrality is the opposite of what an unbiased reporter should do. Being unbiased means challenging both sides, rather than neither.
Great job guys! I truly can't see any bias from you guys and I truly appreciate that.
I love when you and Rob do a collab, it’s always so informative and fun, you make a great team.
I love your variety of helmets! Total gut laugh.. I can't imagine tackling this. You both rock. You both navigated this so professional. Humour certainly defused potential emotional land mines. Appreciate you both
He got Marla Pregnant while still married, then announced it in the newspapers, the same way he announced he was divorcing Marla. He brought her a newspaper, threw it in her lap and the front page said Trump files for divorce from Marla. If they had stayed married a couple more months, he would have to have paid several more millions, but made sure he got it in time.
Let's be honest, "she is not my type" is him saying she isn't good enough for him! Which is confirmed when he calls her sick, etc. And attacks the lawyer as being not being his type. Basically telling her she doesn't reach the level of supermodels and royalty he is used to "swooning". What a POS! If he didn't have Daddys money, he would be a twice divorced loser no woman would spend 5 minutes with because his personality is so toxic
I really love your coverage. Thank you. I think you did a great job of keeping it transparent and unbiased.
I watched another channel do a trump behavioral video and they were either being biased towards him or they were afraid of losing trump supporting viewers. I commend y'all on this video as it seemed unbiased in my opinion.
Thank you for inviting Rob - he gave some great insights that were not obvious.
You are so amazing! Your ability to be neutral and really really look as honestly as possible into very divisive people is incredible!!!
I am so glad you covered this. It seems like most people are too scared to really cover it. I love your ability to sepeate official analysis from your opinion, mostly lol.
My favs are always the ones with both of you. You can really tell the two of you are friends
My concern is he never says “I would not do this to anyone.”
Believe it or not, that's a common sentence looked for as deception. Spidey even mentions this. What he is looking for is a direct denial. A bold and clear statement with no hesitation - "I did not do this" or "it never happened". Both of which Trump freely and easily says, with no markers for deception.
There are many cases where killers refuse to give the direct denial but offer half statements like "I would never do this to anyone". In fact, watching police interviews, I think probably more than half of the interviews I have seen have some kind of deflection of this pattern.
If he had said that, it's more an indicator of deception, unless accompanied by a clear direct denial.
I think Chris Watts, Dalia Dippolito, that older police woman who killed an old friend, the curly haired guy who killed his neighbor, the old guy they hid the kids bodies in the attic before trying to move them to the sewer drains... Loads of them... "I would never do anything like that... To anyone"...
Guilty!
Thanks for ending this with a smile! Love the clear law info from Rob and your civility!!
Thanks Spidey and Rob. I love both your impartial and non political analysis of the body language or legal opinions. Looking forward to more collaborations and keep up the good work.
Spider know do an analysis on her (Jean E. Carroll) interview on CNN
*Spidey sorry autocorrect but I would love to see that analysis!
Yes!!! Where she tells Anderson Cooper that R is sexy. How is it that no one is talking about that?? As a surivor of R, I cannot fathom ever thinking that. She's disgusting
Find someone to look at you the way Rob looks at Spidey! :D I love the bromance between you two and I love when you guys do a collab!
Lying is this man’s baseline. He is expert at it. He lies about even innocuous things, and things that are easily fact checked. He is able to lie with impunity because he is a narcissist, has no shame and feels he is entitled to do whatever he likes without consequence.
Now let's do Biden, Clinton, and whoever else you support politically.
@@osupride97 I'll bring the popcorn!
@@osupride97 I don’t support any of them politically, I’m not in the U.S, so I don’t have a dog in this race, I just think he is an awful person. How sad that you assume my issues with him are political and not based on his obvious lack of moral character.
@@jollicrafts that's because the media only tells you what they want you to know. Trump has been a very generous, kind person all of his life. Many Americans love him because he has stood up to a media and government that has pushed propaganda on the us for many years and lied to us continually. We call them the deep state.
There was a major deflection/deception in DJT's treatment of the question about if he'd shopped or bought at Bergdorf's when he said that he didn't or wouldn't buy anything for himself there. According to E.J. Carroll DJT asked her to help him buy a gift for a lady friend - in the lingerie department. Bergdorf has separate stores for women and men. Unless you've been to the store/s there would be no way to know that. I bet the lawyer brought that up in closing.
Such a professional job well done. Thanks guys for being bold and honest enough to put this guy under the microscope and tell us truthfully, what you see and for giving an unbiased diagnosis.❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
I have been following you and Rob for close to a year now, I never comment, but always enjoy your shows. I appreciate that y'all were brave enough to tackle this very sensitive topic. Not only because it was Trump, but also the SA aspect as well. Y'all keep up the good work!
Hey Rob, the reason the video was allowed is because it’s Federal Court. In Federal Court you are can introduce evidence related to other situations to show the character of the person. That’s why the other witnesses were allowed to testify too to demonstrate a pattern of behavior.
You’re saying the Rules of Evidence don’t apply in federal court?
I think u may have misinterpreted his statement. I believe he meant we didn’t get to see the trial/not televised bc it was in federal court. But his point was he was clarifying that his comments are solely based on this depo as we all did not have the ability to see the entirety of all testimony. He’s a lawyer so I’m pretty sure he understands rules of evidence and which type of info from depositions are allowed.
I read that there are Exceptions to the Character rule 404. "Reputation" can be brought in as evidence: "Character is not the same as reputation. "Character" consists of the individual patterns of behavior and characteristics which make up and distinguish one person from another. "Reputation" is the general opinion of people in the community as to a person’s character traits, and is therefore evidence of (and a common way to prove) character. Reputation also may be independently relevant, as in a defamation case in which a party sues for damage to reputation." Perhaps that is the argument they made?
@@christinacaro6292 FRE 412 governs and contains the ability to admit after a weighing of probative value and prejudice
Alan Dershowitz, a lawyer and Harvard law professor of constitutional law, also said the Access Hollywood tape and other witnesses should not have been allowed and are very likely bases for appeal.
Thanks Spidey and Rob for analyzing this case with sensitivity and in a way that didn't feel politically charged at all. I almost didn't click on the video and I'm glad I did.
It looks like he will win on appeal. This case should never have been allowed to proceed. She clearly defamed him! The only reason she won was because of that Access Hollywood tape that should never have been allowed in. The only reason the case was allowed was because they temporarily changed the law to allow it. And this has made him more popular! Hopefully justice and commonsense will prevail and he will be granted an appeal and win it.
Love your call to respect for other people’s opinions!!! I, too, believe that conversation and dialogue among people with differing views both enriches and informs the debate!! Great work!!!
Im wondering… would it not make sense to also /in comparison analyze her testimony on this? Or is it not available?
It isn’t being televised and trump’s deposition is on video because he chose not to participate in person. Had he gone, we wouldn’t have this video.
I didn't need a body language expert to convince me DJT was a liar.
Maybe you guys are not aware of it, but good lord he bragged about cheating on Ivana.
It's also in Ivana's book.
And was on the front pages at the time.
Spidey: “I had some legal questions….”
*Rob enters the chat room*
Love it when you guys collaborate!!
This was.tough on Robbie...I see it.. And appreciate both of you trying to stay neutral
. I have no idea political leanings for either one...but he said in the beginning he deals with this type of litigation often and it's hard not to interject your own opinion if you've ever dealt with SA or R cased
3:50
@@janicebooy1007 I think because Rob 🦄 is such a kind soul*, and the brashness and entitlement expressed here by Trump deeply offend him.
*Not to mention that as a family law/domestic violence attorney, he sees lots of SA cases…and takes care not to become jaded 💐
55:29 Spidey is my favorite. This non biased exchange is exactly what people need to learn. ❤
Love it when you and Rob share a video! Great conversations! Thank you!
I really liked that this episode read so heavily into what was said and how it was said. Behavior is so often a matter of body language combined with verbal language. And context and environment are also extremely important as factors in how a person behaves physically.
I also REALLY appreciate that Rob made a point of defining battery as the physical touch. So many people make the mistake of considering assault as battery. It’s important to understand that they are different things and are different behaviors. Thanks Spidey
It’s exactly that .He didn’t feel the need to prepare , I feel he violated a lot of women. And he’s such a narcissist he doesn’t remember or care so even though he seen the photo he didn’t really look at it he didn’t even identify his first wife in that picture . He might not really just remember that woman and him doing that he’s old as hell. I can tell so many lies. How can I keep up with them all . Nobody’s as important as he is and nobody’s right like he is it must be wonderful to make no mistakes and never to be wrong or consider someone else’s viewpoint.
When he said he went to a lot of fundraising events and then he said no it is because it was not a social event to him, it was business.
Get ready for this comment guys, you’re the best! Thanks for taking this one on. I love how fair and reasonable you both are and thanks for leaving you political stances (whatever they are) out of it!