08-26-2023, 05:28 PM
(08-26-2023, 04:39 PM)Dill Wrote: "Found" to have raped. Not "convicted."
Judge Clarifies: Yes Trump was found to have raped E. Jean Carrol
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/
Also, "lower burden of proof than a criminal case" =/= "extremely low burden of proof."
If the latter were the case, people could just live off defamation suits.
SSP kinda already hit on this...also, the judge here is providing a personal opinion and it's not a statement of fact.
(08-26-2023, 04:39 PM)Dill Wrote: I'm not in Jack Smith's head, nor am I a lawyer, but I'm thinking the statute to which you refer would be rather difficult to apply, since Trump never voiced an intention to "destroy" or "overthrow" the U.S. gov., though one consequence was a violent assault on the Capitol and Congress. While that looks like "violent overthrow," it's not clear that the US could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Capitol breach was intended. The plan was, though, to retain control of the exec. branch illegally.
But then it sounds like you're just providing speculation and opinion and not actual fact like it came across.
