• assaultpotato@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Not at all likely, and until then, is still 100% factually accurate.

    That still leaves “rapist” as indisputably factually accurate.

    • realcaseyrollins
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not indisputably, as that was a civil case and therefore does not require evidence of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If there was stronger evidence, he likely would have been tried criminally instead.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’m starting to think these dems don’t take rape seriously, given how they failed to try to criminally convict someone they know is a rapist.

        • realcaseyrollins
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Who are you referring to here?

          I’m a conservative but I’ll admit that Democrats seem to care more about rape than Republicans. Most rape apologist rhetoric actually comes from the right not the left.

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            I’m referring to the fact that they know for sure Donald Trump is a rapist, but they’re not using whatever evidence convinced them of this fact to bring a criminal conviction.

            Sounds like they’re not taking the obvious next step, given they know he raped someone.

            This is, in case you’re going to commit to the playing dumb, not my actual point. My actual point is that while people want to believe it, they don’t have the actual reason to believe it, which is known as evidence.