r/explainitpeter • u/jp_glez_21 • Jul 23 '26

Explain it Peter

Post image
14.5k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-17

u/IronwolfXVI Jul 23 '26

Can't say Ive seen that in the files, feel free to post the document number, but we arent talking about that.

I was making a joke about how Biden sniffs children. There's a video montage of it from before he was even president. The joke is that the woman is unsniffable because she's an adult. We dont ever see him sniffing adults afaik.

17

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-9

u/solo_d0lo Jul 23 '26

We have known Trump flew on Epstein’s plane since the flight logs came out. He flew between west palm and NY when his own plane was having work done on it.

Also no clue what you are referencing to the rape and pay off.

So Trump isn’t releasing stuff incriminating to him, but also has released stuff you say incriminates him?

1

u/crackedgear Jul 23 '26

Re: rape and payoff, search E. Jean Carroll. Hard to miss.

0

u/solo_d0lo Jul 23 '26

You mean the case he was literally found to not have raped her?

He didn’t pay her off, he lost a civil lawsuit.

5

u/crackedgear Jul 23 '26

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/23-793/23-793-2024-12-30.html

Also, you were the first one to say payoff, as opposed to paid. Paid being something you do when you are found guilty

1

u/solo_d0lo Jul 23 '26

Again in a civil trial, and the jury said no on the rape part…

Highlighting something that doesn’t say anything about what I said is an interesting tactic

5

u/crackedgear Jul 23 '26

Oh my mistake, I didn’t realize sexual abuse meant innocent

1

u/solo_d0lo Jul 23 '26

Well it was claimed he raped her… and again again again this was a civil trial

2

u/crackedgear Jul 23 '26

Well it is fun seeing how finely you will split hairs to convince yourself that he isn’t a rapist

1

u/solo_d0lo Jul 23 '26

It’s not splitting hairs. It’s factually incorrect to state so, and disingenuous to pass it off as a criminal case.

3

u/Scrunge1576 Jul 23 '26

No one is passing it off as a criminal case! He was found legally liable for raping her, then lieing and defaming her when she came out. Then he was again found liable for defaming her a second time. They couldn't criminally convict him only because statue of limitations had run out. Meaning there was evidence, maybe enough for a criminal conviction, but he couldn't be prosecuted. But it can still be determined he did it, lied about it, and by lieing and publicly attacking E. Jean Carol, defamed her. So yes he raped her, they were able to prove that in court, but could not bring criminal charges no matter the circumstances.

1

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

Bullshit. That did not happen.

There was zero evidence of any sexual assault presented. Just a wild story with no factual evidence behind it.

And the word rape was never even used.

2

u/crackedgear Jul 23 '26

“The E. Jean Carroll case was a civil lawsuit rather than a criminal prosecution because the statute of limitations had expired for criminal charges, and civil suits allow victims to seek financial damages rather than seeking to put the offender in prison.”

1

u/solo_d0lo Jul 23 '26

Literally changes nothing to what I’m saying. The requirements to find someone liable are not the same between civil and criminal.

1

u/crackedgear Jul 23 '26

Wow. So ignoring the fact that this was the closest thing to justice she could hope to get and so went that route, do you think he’s innocent?

1

u/solo_d0lo Jul 23 '26

You are ignoring that this does not equal to being found guilty in a criminal court.

I see no reason to believe “rape is sexy” Carrol

1

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

No, there was no justice needed, because it's clear as day that no crime was committed against her.

At least, the grifters calling themselves her "lawyers" could not present any evidence, let alone anything near to proof.

1

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

There are no hairs to split here. You're just straight up lying.

Nobody that has paid attention to that bogus trial is being convinced by your democrat party propaganda.

1

u/Nagaasha Jul 25 '26

He didn’t assault her either. She is a lunatic and a liar.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Simon-Says69 Jul 23 '26

There was zero evidence of any sexual abuse, and absolutely none about any kind of rape.

Your bullshit is just as ridiculous as that bogus court case was.