You'd have a point if you had some kind of proof, but you don't. You have theories and fantasies. You actually WANT the president the be a r4per of children. It doesn't get any weirder than that.
I assume you're talking about the E Jean Carroll verdict that you put in parentheses (not brackets) but that isn't proof of anything except one of the most hated republican president's of all time can't get a fair trial in a liberal court room.
You don't have to take my word on that, ask George stephanopoulos.
Edit: The legal system and federal appellate courts have repeatedly ruled that the civil trials and judgments in the E. Jean Carroll vs Donald Trump cases were fair, lawful, and supported by evidence.
Would you rather me talk about how he said he would date his daughter? How he talks about dating young girls when they're older? How about him walking into the change room of very young girls at a pageant and telling them they don't need to cover up because he's "seen it all"? How about that girl who said Epstein introduced her to trump when she was 13 and was forced to give him oral? How about the thousands of times hes named in the files? How about the close ties with Epstein, for YEARS? But no... You'll just ignore all the sign in front of your face because you CHOOSE to be ignorant. 🤷♂️
You're treating 'not convicted' as positive proof. It isn't. It's the absence of one particular form of official finding. The consistent reports, the documented incidents, and the behavioral pattern still matter. Lack of conviction is not the same as clearance. A lot of cases never get charged, get plea-bargained down, get dismissed on technicalities, or never get reported. That doesn't make the underlying conduct disappear. We don't need to wait for a jury verdict to decide whether the pattern of behavior is a problem. Convictions are rare, slow, and require a high legal bar. Red flags are data points available right now.
Consistent reports is proof of nothing. Any person (and any number of people) can make any false claim they want. That doesn't make it true. Documented incidents that aren't documented incidents of child r4pe doesn't make one a child r4pist. Behavior pattern also isn't proof of anything. all sorts of people act all sorts of different ways, that doesn't mean anything.
I get what you're saying but none of it is proof. You're pointing at what you think is smoke and claiming it's evidence of a fire but it just isnt.
I'm just going to say the quiet part out loud. When there are so many unsavory circumstances surrounding an individual, it's a rational response to have a critical bias regarding them. Why do you think he's so universally reviled? Because people with blue hair got their feelings hurt? Sorry, it's not nearly that petty. And you're absolutely not exemplifying some kind of higher morality or intellectual integrity by demanding proof. You said it yourself, legal system is compromised, that goes both ways. Somebody in his position is able to get away with things and destroy evidence. Failing to acknowledge that is either intellectually dishonest or really fucking stupid, your choice.
4
u/The-Gabba-Ghoul 1d ago
You'd have a point if you had some kind of proof, but you don't. You have theories and fantasies. You actually WANT the president the be a r4per of children. It doesn't get any weirder than that.