You don't know shit just like i do...were you there?
State of the Union - watch Amy Coney Barret recoil in disgust at the sight of Trump
- Thread starter james t kirk
- Start date
I was not.
I am only commenting on you and Skoob's arguments.
If your position is "I wasn't there and I don't believe any of the evidence presented in court" that's fine.
But then you can't make any argument based on what the jury said, since you are expressly saying that you don't believe that.
You are also free to say that you did pay attention to the evidence in court and don't find it convincing.
But then again, you can't argue at all about what the jury decided in that case and try to split hairs on legal definitions.
That's your proof that justifies making statements that you claimed are fact? Wow
......and right after the cameras cut away after the photo op, she slaps his hand away just like in the video.
Yeah that's what I thought....misinformation being spread by you to support your biased narrative.
No one takes people who do that seriously because it essentially erodes their integrity.
The evidence presented didn't convince the Jury of rape...
It is misinformation if it didn't happen.
But I posted the video where it shows that it does happen.
The trial was a civil trial and not a criminal trial for rape.
The statute of limitations for that had expired.
In New York, for it to be legal rape, penetration by penis is required.
Which is why they found him guilty of a lesser charge of sexual abuse and not rape. Legal loophole.
But a penis does not have to be involved for it to be rape.
Usage of digits, a foreign object etc are also rape per definitions of rape by many organizations such as the APA (and common sense).
Knuckle Ball posted the entire article for you to read.
Also from your verdict form it is clear that Trump forcibly touched Caroll and injured her. That is rape.
Last edited:
Sorry Skoob, I didn't get a chance to reply to you asking me for proof and actually threatening that I should choose my proof carefully, or what? What a joke!
But since you asked, a number of respected members have already posted the Judge's comments from that case, so I will just say thank you to them. And to you Skoob, just carry on, I always get a chuckle reading your diatribe.
Ritchie, getting a little hot under the collar there buddy. Breathe, take a deeeeeeep breathe, think of Trumputin grabbing you by the crotch and breathe.
So you are sticking to the "I didn't pay attention to the case, follow it, or understand it, I'm just a poor sheepdog doing what I'm told"?
(Or the even more insulting "I'm nitpicking the legal definitions because I'm just that awful a person" like squeezer suggested.)
Well, if that's what you prefer, ok.
Your proof is snippets of video? Contradicted by even more vids & pics showing the contrary?
haha that's funny...and desperate.
THAT is the definition of confirmation bias.
Thank you for the demonstration.
Judge's comments are not verdicts of guilt.Sorry Skoob, I didn't get a chance to reply to you asking me for proof and actually threatening that I should choose my proof carefully, or what? What a joke!
But since you asked, a number of respected members have already posted the Judge's comments from that case, so I will just say thank you to them. And to you Skoob, just carry on, I always get a chuckle reading your diatribe.
Jury report did not find rape.
Civil court does not find someone guilty.
Hence the "choose your proof carefully" guidance I offered and you ignored.
LOL ...... I ignored nothing and hence I didn't have to choose proof carefully since it was already shown to you, which, by the way, you have ignored.
Your diatribe is basically a bunch of
.sure, rich--zero rape convictions
-which wife? he have kids with everyone of them
