As well they should be: again, the question is: "WHAT liberal media?"
By "liberal media", do the delusional RWNJs mean: ABC/NBC/CBS/PBS/NPR/Wapo/NYT/CNN/MSNBC? If so, the idea that these corporations are "liberal" is a joke.
And there were no charges anyway. It was a civil case ɓrought by a woman that claims something happened like 30 years ago. New York even changed a law just so the lawsuit could be brought.
The high-profile 2023 case began when E. Jean Carroll sued Donald Trump for sexual assault and defamation.
Directly from the case file summary.. You're making up semantic differences for what I can only assume are bogus bad faith reasons, so you can argue with people. I think you're on the wrong site.
Sexual abuse, that's what it was and the only reason he was even in court over it was because New York actually changed a law so they could bring the lawsuit in the first place. They found someone willing to accuse him of doing something like 30 years ago, lol. Since the other lawfare cases weren't hurting his campaign enough (or at all actually) they decided to give this a shot, but obviously most of the country wasn't buying it and elected him for President
As well they should be: again, the question is: "WHAT liberal media?"
By "liberal media", do the delusional RWNJs mean: ABC/NBC/CBS/PBS/NPR/Wapo/NYT/CNN/MSNBC? If so, the idea that these corporations are "liberal" is a joke.
Don't tell lies about the President and maybe you won't get sued...simple as that
As if sexual assault charges are any better than rape...
And there were no charges anyway. It was a civil case ɓrought by a woman that claims something happened like 30 years ago. New York even changed a law just so the lawsuit could be brought.
Lol, it wasn't sexual assault either. Nice try though
Then what did the jury find him guilty of then? Heavy petting?
Congrats, you made me wonder what the specifics were enough to look it up.
Here's the case info for anyone else that's similarly curious: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html
Directly from the case file summary.. You're making up semantic differences for what I can only assume are bogus bad faith reasons, so you can argue with people. I think you're on the wrong site.
Comment history points to bullshit. Just block and continue on.
Sexual abuse, that's what it was and the only reason he was even in court over it was because New York actually changed a law so they could bring the lawsuit in the first place. They found someone willing to accuse him of doing something like 30 years ago, lol. Since the other lawfare cases weren't hurting his campaign enough (or at all actually) they decided to give this a shot, but obviously most of the country wasn't buying it and elected him for President
Wow, you are a grade A moron... or a troll either way. Go away, this comment was made like a month ago
Sure bud, whatever makes you feel better
Sexual abuse survivors regularly keep the abuse to themselves. Read a goddammit book once in a while. Ask me how I know that.