Anonymous #1 4w

Agreed and I appreciate your comment. I’m really curious to hear some opinions from those who thinks political differences aren’t that deep in relationships!! I wonder if any of them will engage in my question

5

Anonymous #3 4w

It’s been affirmed by multiple judges actually

6

Anonymous OP 4w

Id love to see some proof for this

1

Anonymous #4 4w

“”On page 44, the judge wrote: ``The jury's finding of sexual abuse therefore necessarily implies that it found that Mr. Trump forcibly penetrated her vagina.'' The judge further writes: `` . . . in other words, that he raped her. . . . ''””

7

Anonymous #4 4w

There was a second case where he was held liable for sexual abuse by a different judge, would you like to see that as well?

5

Anonymous OP 4w

Absolutely! Thanks for the context so far

2

Anonymous #4 4w

Also do you know what digital penetration means (I don’t)

1

Anonymous #4 4w

Digits = fingers in this case

10

Anonymous #5 4w

Thanks!

1

Anonymous OP 4w

Thanks!

1

Anonymous #4 4w

There are so many court cases and lawsuits surrounding this rape it gets a little confusing lol

2

Anonymous #6 4w

There’s mountains of evidence, go listen to, “ and I walk up and grab her in her 🐱”

10

Anonymous #4 4w

We know facts are a red pilled persons wall. You can’t with those radicalized

1

Anonymous #6 4w

Hey so I was raped at 16 but wasn’t able to report it bc i had no “evidence”. Still happened tho

2

Anonymous OP 4w

Doubt it

-4

Anonymous pleasure.pirate 4w

MAGA women never fail to astonish me, they acknowledge that phrase but dismiss it as “it’s just locker room talk” yet most claim to be family oriented, God-fearing women, real christians would never defend that language

8

Anonymous OP 4w

Alright so just for the sake of accuracy (not to defend Trump, just to be clear about what we oughta be angry about), that first court case is about the SA allegation and defamation while the second one was a verdict on defamation. In the first court case, he was held liable based on a preponderance of evidence, so “more likely than not” as opposed to “without a shadow of a doubt” for SA. And there was no such verdict on SA in that second case, again that ones verdict was on defamation where

1

Anonymous #8 4w

He had to pay a much bigger amount than the first trial. That is to the best of my knowledge, happy to be corrected on the facts here. But yeah even with just the one court case you can make a pretty strong argument that he, in fact, a rapist. But he has never been criminally convicted of rape

1

Anonymous #8 4w

These are two separate court cases happening in two separate states. Im not 100% clear on the circumstances but I believe the second one I linked where he was found liable was Carroll suing trump for SA and defamation. whereas the second one was Trump suing Carroll for defamation, which he lost, thus the judge made that statement saying basically yes Trump raped her and she was telling the truth and not defaming him

1

Anonymous OP 4w

Judge Kaplan, the first screenshot I posted. That was the judge who made the statement following trumps failed defamation law suit against Carroll

1

Anonymous #6 4w

Your doubt doesn’t change reality

5

Anonymous OP 4w

Yeah they are two separate court cases, but they are the same Carrol v Trump litigation in federal court and they both happened in New York. The second case, specifically was about damages and secondary defamation charges; the screenshot you posted has a quote from post-trial discussion, not a verdict. So yes the judge is basically stating Trump raped her. But it is inaccurate to say he was criminally convicted of rape or that he was held liable for SA in two separate cases.

2

Anonymous #8 4w

I never said it was criminal.. but no there were two separate court cases one filed in 2019 about defamation and one filed in 2022 adding on sexual assault. But both surrounded the rape of Carroll and their outcomes corroborated her story. Trump attempted to countersue the first case and lost, that was the judge Kaplan one.

2

Anonymous OP 4w

Sexual abuse*

1

Anonymous OP 3w

I see the confusion now. The 2019 case was only defamation — the jury didn’t decide whether the assault happened, just that Trump’s statements about Carroll were defamatory. That case contextually involved the allegation, but the first time the sexual abuse itself was actually adjudicated was the 2022 civil trial. So it’s fair to say both cases surrounded the same allegation, but only one directly ruled on the SA. I thought we were only talking about the federal cases 2022-2024.

1

Anonymous #8 3w

Sorry, genuinely not trying to just split hairs. Being accurate about the cases and claims and verdicts makes it harder to dismiss in bad faith by your typical maga commenters

2