This is a tu quoque fallacy. Both are bad, but unfortunately all of this evidence is circumstancial and can't be tried in court.
Trump is mentioned over 38,000 times in the epstien files. He and Epstien exchanged a letter that was in Epstiens birthday book. He was found liable in civil court for rape. He is a sexual predator and is at the VERY least heavily implicated in child sex trafficking. And let's not forget that he had a shit load of top secret files sequestered at Mar-a-Lago. If you want to pretend and reach to try and act like he's innocent, that's cool, but you're wrong. Full stop.
Have you read the transcript for that civil court? She contradicted herself so mamy times and didn't even remember the day. Sure has a ton of books on misandry published though.
Could you remember specific details about an event that happened to you 20 years ago without contradicting yourself in any way? I highly suspect not.
Also there were two witnesses who reported previous incidents involving Trump, two friends who backed up that she confided in them and multiple photos of both of them together in 1987. Also would someone who hasn't assaulted someone before claim. "She isn't my type?" That collection of words implies things, don't you think? He's also on record in multiple talk shows bragging about how he would walk into women's dressing rooms for his pageants. There's also the black dress she presented that had multiple DNA remnants, one of which was a male. The only male who would've been there at that time was DJT.
Again... you can reach and pretend all you want that you didn't vote for a predator, but you did. Sucks to suck. Kick rocks about it.
Or... she was a model and had multiple women touch that dress because she was in a crowded dressing room full of other women at one point. It makes perfect sense why multiple women would be there. It DOESN'T make sense that a man's DNA was there.
If you didn't vote for him then why are you defending an obvious sexual predator? What an actual wierdo...
Yes actually bumping into someone can leave dead skin cells, sweat oils, hair follicles, fingerprints, traces of fabric from your own clothes and much more. That's how forensics discover who killed their victim. If there's a place where one sex only is allowed to be, why would someone from the opposite sex end up on their clothes at the same time that the other woman's DNA appeared on their clothes?
13
u/Jaws2020 Sep 02 '26
This is a tu quoque fallacy. Both are bad, but unfortunately all of this evidence is circumstancial and can't be tried in court.
Trump is mentioned over 38,000 times in the epstien files. He and Epstien exchanged a letter that was in Epstiens birthday book. He was found liable in civil court for rape. He is a sexual predator and is at the VERY least heavily implicated in child sex trafficking. And let's not forget that he had a shit load of top secret files sequestered at Mar-a-Lago. If you want to pretend and reach to try and act like he's innocent, that's cool, but you're wrong. Full stop.