I am asking Trump supporters to engage in an intellectual exercise.

[berg80]

What Rape?

Now we're going around in circles. See post #1.

 

[HikerGuy83]

So now you try to change the subject.

Whether or not he actually did it is still a He Said She said verdict.

Her friends HERESAY NOT ADMISSIBLE in a Criminal case.

The state of New York basically bypassed existing law to allow her to file.

What a load of crap.

She wrote a book entitled "What do we need men for".

She's an opportunist.

 

[August West]

no

and the reason?

they were democrats.

Question: if your IQ doubled, would it reach double digits?

Are you telling us that all judges and jurors are Democrats?

 

[Rawley]

The essential facts underlying the question I'm asking are as follows. The jury in the Carroll case found that Trump had committed sexual abuse, which Carroll had accused him of committing. In NY state, only penetration by a penis constitutes rape. But as the judge pointed out, a less technical, more commonplace understanding of rape includes cramming a finger inside a non-consenting person, which was the jury's finding.

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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/

As Trumpists always do, most of you have chosen to assign bias as the motivating factor behind the verdict........because you must. The only alternative being to acknowledge the jury's finding of sexual abuse for finger cramming in a civil case makes the inveterately lying orange sack of shyte a man who raped a woman.

So, finally, the question I'd like you to think about is.......................

If a woman who is important in your life had a man force his stubby digit inside her, against her will (the jury's finding), would you vote for that man in a presidential election?

CArroll claimed Trump raped her. HE didn't. The jury found he didn't, The jury found she lied. SHe's a lying piece of shit

 

[Mac-7]

The essential facts underlying the question I'm asking are as follows. The jury in the Carroll case found that Trump had committed sexual abuse, which Carroll had accused him of committing. In NY state, only penetration by a penis constitutes rape. But as the judge pointed out, a less technical, more commonplace understanding of rape includes cramming a finger inside a non-consenting person, which was the jury's finding.

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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/

As Trumpists always do, most of you have chosen to assign bias as the motivating factor behind the verdict........because you must. The only alternative being to acknowledge the jury's finding of sexual abuse for finger cramming in a civil case makes the inveterately lying orange sack of shyte a man who raped a woman.

So, finally, the question I'd like you to think about is.......................

If a woman who is important in your life had a man force his stubby digit inside her, against her will (the jury's finding), would you vote for that man in a presidential election?

I find it incredible to believe that a 70 plus man would cram his finger into wrinkled old woman like Carrole

So I assume its fake news

This case should never have gone to court

 

[eagle1462010]

Ah yes, the warm embrace of deflection.

You keep dancing.

You havent proven anything but NY laws on Civil Trials are fucked up.

But Trial Lawyers are almost all Dems so it makes sense.

Hey lets pass a law to steal money 15 years after the statue of limitations is gone.

BS

 

[j-mac]

The essential facts underlying the question I'm asking are as follows. The jury in the Carroll case found that Trump had committed sexual abuse, which Carroll had accused him of committing. In NY state, only penetration by a penis constitutes rape. But as the judge pointed out, a less technical, more commonplace understanding of rape includes cramming a finger inside a non-consenting person, which was the jury's finding.

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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/

As Trumpists always do, most of you have chosen to assign bias as the motivating factor behind the verdict........because you must. The only alternative being to acknowledge the jury's finding of sexual abuse for finger cramming in a civil case makes the inveterately lying orange sack of shyte a man who raped a woman.

So, finally, the question I'd like you to think about is......................

If a woman who is important in your life had a man force his stubby digit inside her, against her will (the jury's finding), would you vote for that man in a presidential election?

I would tell here not to wait 30 years to go to court....That's one...And then I'd tell her she'd better have her story straight, and not be a kook.

How's that?

 

[HikerGuy83]

Blaming the victim of rape is not uncommon. But it's still sad to see you go down that road while still not answering the question I asked.

What's embarrassing is that you actually think you've posed an intellectual question.

Our education system has really failed us.

 

[eagle1462010]

Now we're going around in circles. See post #1.

Verdict. NOT RAPE.

 

[berg80]

Her friends HERESAY NOT ADMISSIBLE in a Criminal case.

It wasn't a criminal case. He has not legally been found guilty of rape in a criminal sense. He was found to have committed sexual abuse in a civil case. "Sexual abuse" that in other states would constitute rape.
Clearly this stuff is too complex for your simple mind.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Blaming the victim of rape is not uncommon. But it's still sad to see you go down that road while still not answering the question I asked.

You asked a question.

I asked a question.

I didn't blame anyone. I asked a question.

Please get off your upside-down barstool and concentrate on what it is you are posting.

 

[Crepitus]

no interest in voting for Trump, but do you have the same standard for those that voted for Kennedy. (JFK, or his brother), or Clinton, and by proxy, his wife, who supported him?

Which one of those folks was convicted of rape?

 

[eagle1462010]

It wasn't a criminal case. He has not legally been found guilty of rape in a criminal sense. He was found to have committed sexual abuse in a civil case. "Sexual abuse" that in other states would constitute rape.
Clearly this stuff is too complex for your simple mind.

Cleary from a BS law that should have never existed.

Yet abused during an election

 

[HikerGuy83]

It wasn't a criminal case. He has not legally been found guilty of rape in a criminal sense. He was found to have committed sexual abuse in a civil case. "Sexual abuse" that in other states would constitute rape.
Clearly this stuff is too complex for your simple mind.

The posited it happened.

There is not a shred of proof.

That you don't see the kangaroo court antics in this is beyond reason.

 

[berg80]

What's embarrassing is that you actually think you've posed an intellectual question.

Our education system has really failed us.

Intellectual exercise is an expression meaning "involving a person's ability to think and to understand ideas and information."

But, enough of your deflections. Care to answer the question?

Is the technical distinction between rape and sexual abuse in NY reason enough to support Don for prez?

 

[HikerGuy83]

Cleary from a BS law that should have never existed.

Yet abused during an election

You know how New York conveniently passed a law so she could file even though the statue of limitations had passed.

 

[eagle1462010]

Intellectual exercise is an expression meaning "involving a person's ability to think and to understand ideas and information."

But, enough of your deflections. Care to answer the question?

Is the technical distinction between rape and sexual abuse in NY reason enough to support Don for prez?

No Rape proved PERIOD TDS MAN.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Intellectual exercise is an expression meaning "involving a person's ability to think and to understand ideas and information."

But, enough of your deflections. Care to answer the question?

Is the technical distinction between rape and sexual abuse in NY reason enough to support Don for prez?

So engage in some intellectual exercises of your own. You are bypassing all kinds of information.

And I already told you that your approach isn't one that really seeks an intellectual answer. It pushes the answer in a certain direction through the use of pejorative phrases intended to get the answer you are looking for.

 

[eagle1462010]

You know how New York conveniently passed a law so she could file even though the statue of limitations had passed.

Nazi tactic.

But this isnt the 30s. Seems Berg and Dems from a different time.

 

[HikerGuy83]

No Rape proved PERIOD TDS MAN.

How many other unwelcomed sexual encounters have happened in dressing rooms in department stores.

Most women I know would scream the minute the guy walked in.