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

[Dadoalex]

totally wrong, if the law was applied equally, Bill Clinton the Hillary would be in jail, as would Menendez. Trump committed no crime, the idiot DA in NY cannot even say what crime they are trying him for right now. Biden is guilty of taking bribes from foreign entities, obvious treason proven by bank records. Why is he not under indictment?

Trump is charged with crimes and is free with no bail
DESPITE
this being a national security issue
DESPITE
making threats against judges, court staff, and witnesses
DESPITE
Having the means to escape prosecution

The Clintons were never charged with any crimes despite your fantasies.

It is HILARIOUS that you refuse to believe the evidence against Trump while manufacturing fantasies in your mind about Biden crimes.

there's a word for that bit of self delusion.
"Projection is a psychological phenomenon where feelings directed towards the self are displaced towards other people. Psychoanalysts regard projection as a defence mechanism of alterity concerning "inside" content mistaken to be coming from the "outside" Other."

Of course I just call it what it is

 

[Stryder50]

So your claim is that violating a woman’s private parts with your fingers is different that doing that with your dick?

Would you feel that way if it were your daughter or wife or mother?

So this woman didn't loudly object to such at the time, didn't try to physically resist, nor were any of the clothes she wore getting in the way ?

This case sounds like a total fabrication and near impossibility*, not to mention the many implausibles.

* I don't recall any occasions when I was able to touch and/or "violate" a woman's "private parts" in such a manner that I didn't have her consent and co-operation.

 

[Stryder50]

So you’re fine with what Trump did.

Imagine him doing it to your daughter

We have yet to see PROOF that Trump did what this wack-job woman claims.

 

[Stryder50]

Wrong. A jury found that he did

Jury's aren't always correct.
That is why there are so many appeals.

 

[Lesh]

Jury's aren't always correct.
That is why there are so many appeals.

Appeals generally happen because of new evidence or some issue with how a trial was conducted. Not just “I didn’t like the verdict”

 

[eagle1462010]

Appeals generally happen because of new evidence or some issue with how a trial was conducted. Not just “I didn’t like the verdict”

I dont like the BS law allowing it way after limitations kicked in.

Violates the speedy trial issue.

Without hard evidence even within that time would have been He said She said

Stinks to the high heavens

 

[Stryder50]

Would you vote for a man who did that to your wife or daughter?

Not the issue since such didn't really happen.
However, there are scores of photos showing Joe Biden inappropriately touching women and girls and it seems the loony Left of this country voted for him.

 

[eagle1462010]

So you do consider it rape then

LIAR

 

[ThisIsMe]

Ask the jury

As I said you would say “ask the jury”.

The jury doesn’t know either as they also have seen no evidence.

 

[Nostra]

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?

Your Vegetable Messiah diddled his own daughter, and you will vote for him.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

These people on here are ridiculously incompetent in their attempts to “get” Trump

 

[Independent thinker]

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?

The fact is, NY purposely changed it's laws to go after Trump on this and in an all blue area, they came up with jurors for the case. The prosecutors could present any testimony they wanted while Trump was barred from giving the testimony he wanted. The judge made sure the case was rigged and, since it was not a criminal case, a jury decision of 51% to 49% is all you need to win.

 

[Muhammed]

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?

There is absolutely zero evidence that Trump assaulted that greedy lying scuzball.

 

[Dragonlady]

The verdict was no rape period.

I just posted the jury finding.

The judge is just another Trump Hater like you.

Once again, you use weasel words to defend the lying criminal rapist and fraud artist.

Trump admits to raping women. He has NEVER denied raping women. He has never said "I would never rape a woman.". He has denied raping specific women, because they're "not his type".

Why do YOU deny his own words.

 

[Dragonlady]

The fact is, NY purposely changed it's laws to go after Trump on this and in an all blue area, they came up with jurors for the case. The prosecutors could present any testimony they wanted while Trump was barred from giving the testimony he wanted. The judge made sure the case was rigged and, since it was not a criminal case, a jury decision of 51% to 49% is all you need to win.

No they did not. Trump had NOTHING to do with the change in the law.

 

[Billiejeens]

Any of those guys been found to have committed rape by a judge and jury?
No?
There ya go sparkless.

The jury actually found not guilty on.hhe rape

How do you not know that?

 

[Billiejeens]

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?

You need mental help.
Mass quantities .

 

[BackAgain]

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?

The judge was wrong.

The term “rape” has its meaning. And the jury said no to it. Explicitly.

 

[Billiejeens]

Any comments about a voting base who continue to support someone who has been found to have sexually abused a woman by a jury? Or would you prefer to avoid the matter altogether?

No reasonable person thinks that actually happened.

 

[Billiejeens]

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?

There are 2 choices
Vote to continue the destruction of the country.
Vote to stop it.
The ones that don't Vote to stop it are as bad and the ones that Vote to continue it.