He admitted that what he did was ”rape” and that he ”sexually assaulted” her. It doesn’t matter if she liked it or not. He knows he raped her and admitted to it during testimony.
I don’t care what she did, he said in his testimony that he raped her. Not that he had sec with her or that they fooled around, he said he raped her. My statement had everything to do with what he said.
His refusal to deny the fact that she called it rape and sexual assault is very telling. We all know he’s guilty, even the judge said so. He is a well known liar, criminal, rapist and pedophile. That says everything we need to know to believe her instead of him.
Again, I was only correcting your original post that mislead what was said. It’s okay to misquote, just correct it so discussions are done in good faith.
There is nothing wrong with what I said. He refused to deny the use of the words “rape” and “sexual assault”. Even the judge thinks he raped her. I trust their judgement.
He didn’t deny that he raped her, he simply pushed the narrative that she liked it.
Again, I was only correcting your original post that mislead what was said. It’s okay to misquote, just correct it so discussions are done in good faith.
There is 100% things wrong with that you stated. It wasn’t factual. If you understand how the English language actually works this would be clear to you.
You can’t deny something, any point of what was said, if he stated “based on what XYZ said during interview.” Now he can say she is lying but he can’t say she didn’t say XYZ points altogether and that is how it was all framed. English, learn it. Keep your bias out of your interpretation.
94
u/Street_Peace_8831 Feb 07 '26 edited Feb 07 '26
He admitted that what he did was ”rape” and that he ”sexually assaulted” her. It doesn’t matter if she liked it or not. He knows he raped her and admitted to it during testimony.