Anonymous blue__wave 8w

What do you mean by “conflicting information?”

4

Anonymous OP 8w

I’m making fun of the #1 in the screenshot

18

Anonymous #3 8w

Are you the guy who got forced by their dad?

2

Anonymous blue__wave 8w

No i definitely was not forced just told i would be disowned, which in hindsight I should’ve just lied to them

2

Anonymous #3 8w

Yeah its ok that’s a crazy situation

1

Anonymous #4 8w

You should not speak about the E Jean Carroll case unless you know what “convicted” means vs. what “liable* means.

-2

Anonymous #4 8w

Acting this such a huge truth bomb is so funny.

8

Anonymous blue__wave 8w

Every time you say “he was convicted of rape” they can say “no he wasn’t” and it makes us look like idiots. OP and people like them are exactly the strawman of liberals that they make us out to be

-1

I do believe Trump is a rapist but he is not and probably never will be a CONVICTED rapist. He will be an adjudicated one and you need to be very careful with your wording because he will sue anyone for defamation if they say he was a convicted one, and whoever he sues will lose.

0

Anonymous #4 8w

Op said “he was found liable for sexual abuse in court” idk who we’re talking about. Saying he was convicted for rape isn’t even the wrong he was found liable for what is colloquially considered rape.

2

Anonymous blue__wave 8w

It’s not the “rape” part that’s wrong. “Convicted” means found guilty by a jury in a criminal trial using a higher standard of proof. OP tried to say he was “guilty” and civil courts don’t determine guilt, they determine liability. You can call him a rapist, you can say he is an adjudicated rapist, but you can’t call him a CONVICTED rapist.

3

Anonymous #4 8w

Trump is not going sue an average person for calling him a rapist bc he’s a public figure and that would be a much harder case to win. Regardless you can still call him a rapist bc colloquially what he was found liable for was rape. Even rhetorically I think it’s effective bc watching people defend someone over being liable instead of convicted of rape is telling.

0

Anonymous blue__wave 8w

It is but it makes us look bad and independents hold us to a higher standard than they do conservatives. It’s not fair but it’s the world we live in.

2

Anonymous #4 8w

Yeah I think this just a common parlance issue if we’re being pedantic or talking about this in a formal setting I would agree that’s important to distinguish, but on yik yak it doesn’t matter and op even clarified.

0

Anonymous #4 8w

I don’t think so as long as you clarify he was found “guilty” in a civil court I don’t think people care about the exact language.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 8w

Nah because then you get idiots saying “if he’s guilty why isn’t he in jail? Checkmate liberals”

2

Anonymous #4 8w

Then you just say bc he was found civilly liable and then what are they gonna do? Defend sa bc it was civil not a criminal case. They 100% would but most people would think that’s insane or they would sound insane at the very least. I feel like most of them know this that’s why the guy in the screenshot immediately backed out.

0

Anonymous #4 8w

I feel like you’re falling into the trap of unfair standards. MAGA can literally just make up a story about immigrants eating people’s pets and everyone forgets but when someone on the left uses common parlance then we allow them to play the word games of “well technically he wasn’t convicted” 🤓. Just say no fuck off in common parlance he is a rapist don’t let them police your language bc they’ll never police their own. Be honest about what you say but don’t fall into playing word games.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 8w

Remind me how that strategy worked in 2024. We were dealt a certain hand, and we have to play it to stay at the table. Otherwise we never get to play again.

2

Anonymous blue__wave 8w

And yes they would defend it but if they come at us with language policing they don’t have to defend it. When we attack we need to go for the throat and not miss.

3

Anonymous #4 8w

Bc voters don’t care enough about it obviously I dont think that means we should let it go completely. You can’t seriously say we lost 2024 bc dems didn’t specify it was civil case enough lol?

1

Anonymous #4 8w

That is going for the throat playing word games and splitting hairs about criminal and civil cases like there’s any meaningful moral difference isn’t going for the throat. Saying Trump is a rapist is so much more compelling then saying well technically he was found civilly liable for sa.

1

Anonymous #4 8w

Like don’t get me wrong like be honest it was a civil case but policing language that no cares about and is correct in common parlance is very meaningless.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

Nah, I 100% appreciate you #4. You don’t beat a hyperbolic asshole with hyperbolics of your own. He’ll drag you further into the mud a win because he’s used to the filth. We need to be precise with our language if we aim to actual fix things. Thank you for fighting the good fight.

2

Anonymous #4 7w

Diddler defender🤮🤮🤮🤮

1

Anonymous OP 7w

People like you made Kamala look bad and gave Trump the W last year. The reason we have a rapist in office is because of people like you

3

Anonymous blue__wave 7w

I DID NOT SAY THERE WAS ANYTHING WRONG WITH CALLING HIM A RAPIST. I don’t know where you guys are getting that. He was not CONVICTED.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

Who said he was convicted?

3

Anonymous #4 7w

The reason he’s in office is because he was elected by our dumbass citizens who believe everything the tv tells them

2

Anonymous #4 7w

🫩I never said you did, I said it was more compelling to call him a rapist over whatever this is. My point is policing language like this is pointless for the reasons I already outlined.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

Ok again you seriously believe Trump won bc we didn’t specify it was civil enough lol? Op did even explicitly say it was civil this isn’t serious.

1

Anonymous #7 7w

Liable for sexual assault and convicted for sexual assault requires the exact same evidence. The only difference is one is civil court and the other is criminal court. The language doesn’t matter bro was found guilty (or liable, doesn’t matter how you put it) of sexual assault

2

Anonymous #4 7w

Also no one said convicted you were the first person to bring it up? Also again in common parlance that is correct to he was guilty of sa.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

*rape

1

Anonymous OP 7w

It’s not about what kind of evidence, it’s about how much there is for one side. The language does matter and he CAN sue you if you say in comment sections like this that you know what the difference is but you don’t care. Your only defence would’ve been ignorance in this instance but you’ve proven you don’t have that.

1

Anonymous blue__wave 7w

CIVIL COURTS DO NOT DETERMINE GUILT

0

Anonymous #2 7w

OP CALLED HIM GUILTY. You can only be guilty if you are CONVICTED.

0

Anonymous blue__wave 7w

SO THEN CALL HIM A RAPIST INSTEAD OF SAYING HE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF BEING A RAPIST

0

Anonymous #4 7w

Crashing out over nothing, thank god I’m on the clock for this

3

Anonymous #4 7w

The average person doesn’t care about this distinction idk why we’re spazzing out in all caps about this instead of engaging with the actual argument I’m making. I understand you’re technically correct my point is in common parlance people don’t gaf.

3

Anonymous #4 7w

No fuck im saying you can say either you keep soying out about it but again in common parlance people don’t care.

3

Yes but OP in their comments is proving actual malice because I’ve explained to them the difference and they’re doubling down. They clearly want to harm Trump’s reputation as well and so are clearly stating a falsehood they know to be false. He is not guilty of rape, he was not convicted of rape, but he is an adjudicated rapist.

1

Anonymous OP 7w

I’m a straight white man, I lose nothing with Trump being in office. I voted against him but at the end of the day it is no skin off my back. It seems, however, that you are of one of the groups that is being negatively affected by the Trump admin that you are helping by acting like the strawman version of a liberal

1

Anonymous blue__wave 7w

The average independent holds the liberals and the conservatives to two different standards and if the conservatives can get us on a technicality, that’s a win for them.

1

OP doesn’t need to. “Actual malice” means you knew what you said was false but said it anyway. After I told OP that what they said was factually wrong, they doubled down.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

Bro trumps a rapist, double down these fucking nuts, all of them should be in jail but our courts are fucked

1

Anonymous OP 7w

He is a rapist AND he wasn’t convicted/found guilty. Both things are true. Calling him guilty or convicted is slander.

1

Anonymous #4 7w

Erm when I said guilty I was talking about the feeling of guilt and not legal terms 🤓🤓🤓‼️

1

Anonymous OP 7w

He probably doesn’t feel guilty about it

1

Anonymous #4 7w

Probably not but the wording pisses me off, you take things so damn literally

3