Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
For Blackvegetable. Here is your trump thread
10 Jul 2024 6:12 pm
*Huey » 10 Jul 2024, 5:40 pm » wrote: ↑ Continued use of strike thru to ignore objective fact is the sign of a coward, Boston Coward.
TO prove what? What is it you are trying to prove?
You also made a comment about trump being a rapist. A jury did not find Trump liable for rape in a civil trial. Acknowledge that is objective fact. If you did not want that discussed, Boston Coward, you should not have brought it up.
Here are the facts you are ignoring again:
Here are the facts you are pulling a runner about:
This is fact. 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. (This next part is part fact and opinion) 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.
I strike through the pre-meltdown drivel, Braintree Coward.Continued use of strike thru to ignore objective fact is the sign of a coward, Boston Coward.
Judge clarifies: Yes, Trump was found to have raped E. Jean CarrollA 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.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... udge-rape/
Never, ever, presume to "explain", Very Stupid Little Person.
that photo features two women who have submitted statements to the court, under penalty of perjury, that Grifty raped them.
Objective facts.
That Grifty is too far gone to recognize two of his three wives.TO prove what? What is it you are trying to prove?
do you understand?