ADVERTISEMENT

Question for mods

It turns on the meaning of the word "convict." Trump was found as a matter of fact in a court to have committed sexual assault. He was not convicted of it. This is because a criminal conviction happens in an entirely different procedural posture, and requires a higher standard to be met.

In short: yes, Trump probably did what he was accused of doing, according to a jury, but no, he's not a convicted sex offender.
Well the judge said it was rape. Others seem to call it something else…both meaning the same thing.

Whatever the case, Trumpsters are just fine with sexual assault/ rape. Whatever you want to call it when someone sticks their dick into you when you don’t want it in there.
 
He wasn't charged with rape. Stupid. He wasn't convicted of rape. Stupid.

good grief it has nothing to do with a bench or jury trial. rape is part of the ny penal code. he wasn't charged with it. he had a civil suit brought against him. he wasn't found to have raped anyone. he wasn't even charged with it
Oddly enough Dr. Hoops didn't say he was charged or convicted of rape.
 
You and DrHoops - quite the pair. Both think they're lawyers and neither has a clue.

Just TDS 24X7X365
You're being just as disingenuous as them. The fact is the jury found he probably did what she accused him of doing, which was, by definition, rape.

He wasn't convicted of rape, no, but a jury found that he more likely than not committed actions that were, effectively, rape.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrHoops
good grief it has nothing to do with a bench or jury trial. rape is part of the ny penal code. he wasn't charged with it. he had a civil suit brought against him. he wasn't found to have raped anyone. he wasn't even charged with it
DrHoops and Bloom on the same team. Shocker, huh?
 
“Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump was found to have raped E. Jean Carroll”
@Bloom.

oddly enough it's impossible for the judge to have found that she was raped inasmuch as he wasn't indicted under the ny penal code and never charged with rape. different rules of evidence and procedure and standards and burdens etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
good grief it has nothing to do with a bench or jury trial. rape is part of the ny penal code. he wasn't charged with it. he had a civil suit brought against him. he wasn't found to have raped anyone. he wasn't even charged with it
WTF are we wading into this bullshit tonight? Are we drunk? Are you high on edibles? This is stupid.
 
You're being just as disingenuous as them. The fact is the jury found he probably did what she accused him of doing, which was, by definition, rape.

He wasn't convicted of rape, no, but a jury found that he more likely than not committed actions that were, effectively, rape.
Which is what was articulated in the Wa Post article I linked
 
You're being just as disingenuous as them. The fact is the jury found he probably did what she accused him of doing, which was, by definition, rape.

He wasn't convicted of rape, no, but a jury found that he more likely than not committed actions that were, effectively, rape.
Not being disingenuous at all. I thought accuracy was important to you?
 
Remember, OJ was only found guilty in a civil trial. Does that somehow make OJ less guilty?
mmhmm-okay.gif
 
There’s no one afraid of you. I’ve been in one fight in my life and got knocked out. I’ve seen your picture. I wouldn’t be afraid of a second fight you. 😂 And no one else would be afraid.
Show the picture...share the laughter..
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT