Just In Case I Haven't Been Clear I DON'T Think That Trump Is A Sexual Predator

[AntonToo]

• Jury verdict: Sexually abused (yes), raped under law (no).
• Judge's clarification: Yes, he raped her under the common, broader & civil meaning of the word.

Now that's crazy lawfare.

In what way is it "lawfare" to clearify difference between legal statutes vs common understanding of terms?

As to this thread, sexual abuse clearly qualifies Trump as a sexual predator.

 

[Ropey]

In what way is it "lawfare" to clearify difference between legal statutes vs common understanding of terms?

As to this thread, sexual abuse clearly qualifies Trump as a sexual predator.

Not rape.

The judge had his own beliefs.

But they are not facts.

Facts:

The judge failed to find Trump guilty of rape and the jury disagreed with such a verdict being leveled.

And so, because of lawfare, he keeeps on with his beliefs since...


... he failed as there was not enough factual evidence to prove rape.

 

[ChristisKing]

He is recorded as bragging about being a sexual predator. In his own words.

Cultism is a fascinating thing.

How is grabbing somebody on the butt although perverted the same as rape?

This is your OP. In which you stated you wanted to make up your own mind.

I'm presenting you with the opportunity to do just that by presenting you with exactly what you asked for. Namely proof. Proof I don't have to guess about because I know what was presented a such.

I'm sorry, but "I really don't want to think about it to much" doesn't cut it. Either you want to decide for yourself, or you don't want to know. Those are not the same thing.

I will say that I do understand why you wouldn't want to know. It's perfectly understandable that looking at this objectively is about more than simply did Trump this, or did he do that.

Just too much thinking lol

Not rape.

The judge had his own beliefs.

But they are not facts.

Facts:

The judge failed to find Trump guilty of rape and the jury disagreed with such a verdict being leveled.

And so, because of lawfare, he keeeps on with his beliefs since...


... he failed as there was not enough factual evidence to prove rape.

And again I never said that Trump was a rapist. The complete opposite actually.

 

[Ropey]

How is grabbing somebody on the butt although perverted the same as rape?

He didn't grab anyone by the butt. Saying is NOT doing. There needs to be substantive proof.

Again, the demons want to initialize 'thought crime' ... penalize it and codify it.

And low-iq idiots are always useful in such cases....

Just too much thinking lol

Your head must be a wonderland.

And again I never said that Trump was a rapist. The complete opposite actually.

I never said that you said he was and I stand by the words I said about your pages of drivel.

 

[ChristisKing]

26 other women have corroborated that this is how he bahaves.

How do you know that they simply weren't just saying it after the fact?

 

[ChristisKing]

He didn't grab anyone by the butt. Saying is NOT doing. There needs to be substantive proof.

Well I guess that they could have possibly been saying it after the fact too, but it sounds like Trump. For he would grab somebody on the butt before sexually abusing/raping them.

 

[forkup]

Just too much thinking lol

I understand. Sit with it a bit.
I edited my last post before I saw the reply.

But I think the choice before you is simple, although I can only imagine how hard it is to actually make. "When do the things Trump does that I agree with and that feel important to my beliefs and political goals, get outweighed by the things I have to look away from about him as a person."

The only thing I can tell you is how I look at the world. No politician, friend or even family is worth the price of me betraying myself. That doesn't mean I'll never violate my own principles, it does mean there's a limit of how many I want to give up. I don't know if it's helpful to you, but it does help me.

Maybe it helps.

 

[Ropey]

Well I guess that they could have possibly been saying it after the fact too, but it sounds like Trump. For he would grab somebody on the butt before sexually abusing/raping them.

It's talking.

Damn, but some people are slow. Even 90 IQ should be able to suss it out. :|

In such cases, they are only thought crimes (which are NOT crimes).

And if thought crimes (which are not crimes) were in the realm of actual action and if those responsibilities tied to action were applied to thinking?

Come on, wake up.

 

[AntonToo]

Not rape.

The judge had his own beliefs.

But they are not facts.

Facts:

The judge failed to find Trump guilty of rape and the jury disagreed with such a verdict being leveled.

And so, because of lawfare, he keeeps on with his beliefs since...


... he failed as there was not enough factual evidence to prove rape.

Jury found that Trump has commited sexual abuse by forcing himself onto Carol and putting his hands into vagina against her objections. Which is, as judge correctly stated, is an act commonly understood as rape.

Whats the "lawfare"?

 

[Ropey]

Jury found that Trump has commited sexual abuse, which is commonly known as rape.

The jury did not find that "sexual abuse is commonly known as rape."

They followed the judge's instructions and explicitly rejected the rape label, while accepting the sexual abuse finding.

Kaplan was clear: the jury didn't find for "rape".

Whats the "lawfare"?

The lawfare is in the judges handling of the case using his own beliefs regarding a thought crime.

And applying them to the E.Jean case while working to nullify (by inserting his own personal opinions) vs the juries finding.

Again, this is about making thought crime an actual action in law.

Not the actual case itself.

But low-iq will never figure that out.

 

[AntonToo]

The jury did not find that "sexual abuse is commonly known as rape."

The jury found that Trump forced himself on Carol and put his hands into her vagina against her objections.

I don't know what YOU call such unwanted sexual forcing, but I, and people generally, call that....rape.

 

[Ropey]

The jury found that Trump forced himself on Carol and put his hands into her vagina against her objections.

The jury found that he was not culpable for rape.

This is why Bill Clinton's cigar act was not considered sex by Hillary or the Senate... but the demonic left were fine with it then.

I don't knwo

Clearly

what YOU call it, but I, and people generally, call that an act of rape.

See above.

 

[g5000]

• Jury verdict: Sexually abused (yes), raped under law (no).
• Judge's clarification: Yes, he raped her under the common, broader & civil meaning of the word.

Now that's crazy lawfare.

If a man finger-raped your daughter or sister or mother, you would be looking to behead him, yes?

So why do you cultists always parse and make exceptions and excuses for Trump?

That's what makes you a cult.

 

[Lockback]

If a man finger-raped your daughter or sister or mother, you would be looking to behead him, yes?

So why do you cultists always parse and make exceptions and excuses for Trump?

That's what makes you a cult.

The biggest cult in America and perhaps the world is the Democrat Party.

 

[g5000]

Now I do believe that that was just Trump running his mouth.

Of course you do. Because that is what Dear Leader told you to bleev. His lies over his actual words.

You and I both know if you heard Obama say those things, your pointy head would explode.

You know it, I know it, your entire cult knows it.

Your cult's mental illness has now metastasized to the point that Trump could ass rape a nun on the White House lawn and you'd find a way to blame the nun and say she had it coming.

 

[Ropey]

If a man finger-raped your daughter or sister or mother, you would be looking to behead him, yes?

So why do you cultists always parse and make exceptions and excuses for Trump?

That's what makes you a cult.

IF

Theoretical thought crime.

Be careful.

 

[g5000]

IF

Theoretical thought crime.

Be careful.

It's a FACT Trump was found guilty of finger-raping a woman in an elevator.

If someone did that to your daughter, wife, sister, or mother, you'd be looking to behead him.

I know it, you know it, everyone knows it.

And yet you parse, evade, and prevaricate like an insane person to defend your cult leader.

 

[berg80]

Did you read the rest of it? I had to say that because I can't prove it. Until it's been proven in court that is but that still doesn't change the fact that I think he's innocent.

If the accusations of 27 women and a 13 year old girl aren't enough to convince you nothing will.

 

[Ropey]

It's a FACT Trump was found guilty of finger-raping a woman in an elevator.

If someone did that to your daughter, wife, sister, or mother, you'd be looking to behead him.

I know it, you know it, everyone knows it.

And yet you parse, evade, and prevaricate like an insane person to defend your cult leader.

It's not a fact when you start on with the 'if' conjectures... and he wasn't found guilty of raping anyone.

If you had half a mind.

But that's the 'if' again.

If the accusations of 27 women and a 13 year old girl aren't enough to convince you nothing will.

And again. Dems love thought crimes and lawfare ... until they are caught up in them (Clinton) and now some dirty dealing Dems are under indictment for their thinking. Goose/Gander.

 

[buttercup]

It's talking.

In such cases, they are only thought crimes (which are NOT crimes).

And if thought crimes (which are not crimes) were in the realm of actual action and if those responsibilities tied to action were applied to thinking?

Come on, wake up.

No one is saying that mere words are a crime. But words that come out of a person's mouth DO show what is inside that person's heart.

You've probably heard of the old saying.... "Watch your thoughts, they become your words; watch your words, they become your actions; watch your actions, they become habits; watch your habits, they become character; watch your character, it becomes your destiny."