Donald Trump’s campaign spokesman defended Trump using “vermin” to describe his enemies, while historians compared his language to Hitler, Mousselini.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    You’re narrowly insisting on a verdict of criminal liability versus actual liability, which you aren’t going to find in a civil case.

    I am referring to actual responsibility. I have no reasonable doubt that Trump is a rapist. The jury found a Trump liable for rape, and the judge clarified that Trump is liable for rape.

    No matter how much you like this guy, Trump was found to be a rapist.

    • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      I do not like the guy. I’m explaining that beyond a reasonable doubt may be something you feel is appropriate, but it’s not because of the civil suit, because that’s not the standard of evidence in a civil suit.

      I’m comfortable saying he was a rapist way before the civil trial.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        You’re still just repeating and agreeing with everybody else in this thread who’s saying that this is a civil, not a criminal trial. I guess good job if that’s what you’re going for?

        That is correct. This is a civil case. Not a criminal case.

        The jurors, reasonably, do not doubt his liability of rape. The judge, reasonably, does not doubt that Trump is liable of rape.

        You’re just being precious about a term that is not exclusively used in jurisprudence.

        Trump was found liable of rape beyond a reasonable doubt.

        • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          No, you’re being intentionally obtuse and awkwardly stubborn and nobody knows why but you.

          Why use the exact same wording as a legal standard? You could have said “he’s a rapist, without a shadow of a doubt” and we’d have all known what you meant. Instead you decide you’re going to die on this weird ass ambiguous hill.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            I’m thriving on this hill. Some of you are married to certain interpretations of common phrases, and that is just your neurosis.

            Revel in it.

            Trump, beyond a reasonable doubt or its shadow, is a rapist.