I did.*Huey » 10 Jul 2024, 5:10 pm » wrote: ↑ LMAO! You should have led with that. If that is all you got your party is in serious trouble.
Oh, a Jury did not find him liable for rape. The jurors specifically rejected that charge. Which is odd because the burden of proof is so much lower in a civil trial. It was the judge the reinterpreted the verdict, probably because "rape" was the expected outcome and like a good little goose stepper who obliged. Not to mention she is serial "rape" accuser.
The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped, finding Trump responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse. The judgment adds to Trump’s legal woes and offers vindication to Carroll, whose allegations had been mocked and dismissed by Trump for years.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-c ... f9ec83d7db
You are gonna have to stop this game of generalities and ambiguities and make a point.
We all know that frightens you. You are not going to get the wiggle room you seek. This is all about your argument. And do far you don't have one.