He raped this woman, digitally penetrated her against her will. She never filed charges. Later on, she wrote a memoir about her life (which is a remarkable life, she has had a lot of success) and wrote about the incident.
Trump could have ignored it, no one was suing him and he faced no charges due to the statute of limitations. It happened decades ago.
But he couldn’t, could he? Instead he called her ugly, that she was “not his type”, that she lied about it to get attention. And a whole host of other nasty things. An then, of course, his followers took that as a call to arms and blanketed this woman with death threats, swatting and intimidation. Despite this, he kept turning up the heat on her, as he is want to do.
So she sued him for defamation, to clear her name and prove she did not lie about it. He was found liable for rape and defamation by a court of law and a jury of his peers. And then he did it all over again the very next day.
I remember when they showed him a picture of Carroll and he mistook it for a picture of Marla Maples, whom he was married to at the time he raped Carroll. Not his type? I guess that argument went out the window, didn’t it?
He ejaculated on her dress. She still has it. She never cleaned it but Trump won’t provide a DNA sample. If he is innocent, why would he resist providing one?
That stained dress of Lewinsky was taken as fact and condemned Clinton. But Trump is given the all clear because he refuses to provide DNA to exonerate himself. If he really wanted to clear his name all he had to do is provide DNA and prove this woman lied. The whole case would have fallen apart and she would have been branded a fraud. Yet, he didn’t. Why? Is DNA easy to fabricate? No, it is highly complex, given strict lab standards which he could provide and pay for there would be almost no way it would falsely incriminate him.
This isn’t a John Wayne movie. It’s real life. The state didn’t prove it’s case, because it can’t be proven.
The cries of “rApE!” are pure feefees. The accusation doesn’t meet the statute, even if it is true. The judge should be impeached for his comments.
Carroll told a story she could never prove. How could she? And the story she told doesn’t add up, on her actions.
This happened in 1995 (or 1996, she can’t remember), not 2020. The context and therefore behaviors were completely different in 1995. She was not a powerless little female even then.
Yet it only comes out in a “memoir” after he wins an election?
I don’t think it will surprise anyone on here that you’re putting in the effort to defend this guy from rape.
And again, no one is surprised that you personally don’t know about how resilient DNA evidence is, but your blanket dismissal of that fact doesn’t magically make it true.
Now, tell us all again about how you aren’t MAGA, don’t much care for the guy, etc.
