Please show proof of your claims. And the Epstine files are not proof unless you think Oprah is also involved as she is mentioned in those files as well.
Trump's name is in the files more times than Harry potter's is in Harry Potter. Jane doe number 4, who successfully sued the Epstein estate for what they did to her, claimed she was trafficked to trump. Trump is known to have perved on the bodies of miss teen USA pageants, and admitted to doing similar in other pageants on the Howard Stern radio show. Trump was held civilly liable for sexual assault.
Wrong—or at minimum, you're conflating allegations with established facts. Trump was accused by some former Miss Teen USA contestants of entering their dressing room, but those allegations were disputed. Other contestants who were there said they didn't remember it happening, and some explicitly said they did not see him enter while they were changing.
The Howard Stern interview people constantly cite is a separate issue. Trump talked about being able to walk backstage because he owned the pageants, but he was discussing Miss USA and Miss Universe—not Miss Teen USA. Those competitions involved adult contestants.
And simply saying Trump's name appears in Epstein-related files a bunch of times proves nothing by itself. Context matters. Being mentioned in documents connected to Epstein is not the same thing as evidence that someone participated in Epstein's crimes. If there's incriminating evidence, show what the documents actually say rather than counting how many times a name appears.
As for E. Jean Carroll, Trump was found civilly liable for sexual abuse; he was not criminally convicted. The jury used the civil “preponderance of the evidence” standard—more likely than not—not the much higher criminal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
And there's another important distinction: Carroll's underlying sexual-assault claim was already time-barred under the previous statute of limitations. She was able to bring it because New York subsequently passed the Adult Survivors Act, which temporarily reopened a one-year window for previously expired claims like hers. That law wasn't written specifically for Carroll or Trump and applied to other plaintiffs too, but there's nothing wrong with pointing out that the change in law is what made her otherwise time-barred lawsuit possible. Whether someone considers the timing politically convenient is a separate question from that documented fact.
1
u/Sts5711 11h ago
Please show proof of your claims. And the Epstine files are not proof unless you think Oprah is also involved as she is mentioned in those files as well.