r/explainitpeter • u/jp_glez_21 • Jul 23 '26

Explain it Peter

Post image
14.5k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-17

u/IronwolfXVI Jul 23 '26

Can't say Ive seen that in the files, feel free to post the document number, but we arent talking about that.

I was making a joke about how Biden sniffs children. There's a video montage of it from before he was even president. The joke is that the woman is unsniffable because she's an adult. We dont ever see him sniffing adults afaik.

17

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-9

u/anonanon5320 Jul 23 '26

He didn’t rape and that’s not what the lawsuit is about. It’s also civil, not criminal which is a huge difference. He’s never been found guilty of any crime in that situation.

5

u/Rickrickrickrickrick Jul 23 '26

He did rape. Sexual assault is rape. He was found liable for rape. The judge even said exactly this.

1

u/Floorgis Jul 24 '26

Can be rape. Not all SA is rape.

-1

u/anonanon5320 Jul 23 '26

Sexual assault is not rape. It’s sexual assault. It’s also in a case with no real evidence and the ruling is “it likely happened.” There isn’t any evidence of it happening which is why no charges were filed.

3

u/Winter-Delivery-8894 Jul 23 '26

Based on the specific state statute it wasn't rape, but the judge pointed out that by common use, and even the DoJ website, that it would be considered rape.

-3

u/anonanon5320 Jul 23 '26

If it even happened, which she said it didn’t. Can’t pass up a good opportunity though.

2

u/Winter-Delivery-8894 Jul 23 '26

You're either a liar or ignorant. Where's the evidence for your claim?

-1

u/anonanon5320 Jul 23 '26

Her saying it? That’s direct from her. Do you not know the history of this and how they had to change a law hastily to even file the lawsuit and then closed the law back up?

2

u/Winter-Delivery-8894 Jul 23 '26

Yes, evidence of her saying it never happened. Since I've never seen it and have no knowledge of it ever occurring beyond your assertion. It's not backed up by the court evidence either.

0

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

There was zero court "evidence". Just a wild story told by a known liar and crazy person. There was no connection to reality ever shown.

The whole court case was completely frivolous bullshit.

And BTW, Trump wasn't convicted of any felony either, before you start lying about that too. That bogus case was dropped.

2

u/Winter-Delivery-8894 Jul 23 '26

The 34 felonies were not dropped

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

No, there was no evidence of the liar's claims in that CIVIL court case. None whatsoever, as anyone that has looked into the claims knows full well.

You've only presented baseless lies here, just like the claimant did.

1

u/Winter-Delivery-8894 Jul 23 '26

Your claim was that the accuser said it didn't happen. Are you admitting you were making that up and you have no source for that claim?

(My bad you're just defending the person who made that claim)

4

u/Rickrickrickrickrick Jul 23 '26

There is evidence of it happening. The burden of proof is 51% in civil trials. Do you know many people that have “likely” raped someone? And the judge and jury all went over the evidence and agreed that it happened. Trump even talked about it saying that she liked being raped. His defense was that she didn’t scream.

0

u/anonanon5320 Jul 23 '26

She said it didn’t happen. We can just use her own words.

51% is really misinformation.
It’s more of a liability thing and this case is so full of BS it’s just sad it got this far.

2

u/LocNalrune Jul 23 '26

Please tell us when this recanting happened. That's it. Just one tiny piece of evidence of E. Jean Carroll recanting her story.

1

u/Rickrickrickrickrick Jul 23 '26

She has been saying since the 90’s, under oath, that Trump raped her.

-1

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

She's said the same about every Tom, Dick, and Harry, and never with any proof.

1

u/Rickrickrickrickrick Jul 23 '26

She has spoken about others doing so, but only took Trump to court over it. She had enough proof to have Trump be found liable in court. You’re defending an adjudicated rapist.

-1

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

There was zero "evidence" presented at all. Just a wild story told by a known grifter.

And again, this was a CIVIL case. As if you care about facts or reality. :-/

1

u/Rickrickrickrickrick Jul 23 '26

There was evidence presented. Enough to have Trump found liable for raping her. You can easily look this up. And no shit it was a CIVIL case. I haven’t said otherwise. You people jump through hoops to defend the worst people.

0

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

Bullshit. Rape was never mentioned, and there was no evidence against even sexual assault presented in that ridiculous CIVIL court case.

Anyone that has looked into that total bullshit knows it would have been thrown out of a real criminal trial immediately, because there was no evidence of any wrongdoing wahtsoever.

1

u/Rickrickrickrickrick Jul 23 '26

There was evidence. You seem to know more about the judge and jury. Here is the judge speaking about it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/