Trump Campaign Doubles Down: It’s Totally Fine That He Called His Enemies ‘Vermin’

stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to politics @lemmy.world – 532 points –
Trump Campaign Doubles Down: It's Totally Fine That He Called His Enemies 'Vermin'
rollingstone.com

Donald Trump's campaign spokesman defended Trump using "vermin" to describe his enemies, while historians compared his language to Hitler, Mousselini.

128

You are viewing a single comment

No. He means that a civil trial uses different evidentiary standards. In a civil suit the standard is "preponderance of the evidence", while a criminal trial requires proof "beyond a reasonable doubt".

It's factually wrong to say it's beyond a reasonable doubt due to the civil suit.

You're narrowly insisting on a verdict of criminal liability versus actual liability, which you aren't going to find in a civil case.

I am referring to actual responsibility. I have no reasonable doubt that Trump is a rapist. The jury found a Trump liable for rape, and the judge clarified that Trump is liable for rape.

No matter how much you like this guy, Trump was found to be a rapist.

I do not like the guy. I'm explaining that beyond a reasonable doubt may be something you feel is appropriate, but it's not because of the civil suit, because that's not the standard of evidence in a civil suit.

I'm comfortable saying he was a rapist way before the civil trial.

You're still just repeating and agreeing with everybody else in this thread who's saying that this is a civil, not a criminal trial. I guess good job if that's what you're going for?

That is correct. This is a civil case. Not a criminal case.

The jurors, reasonably, do not doubt his liability of rape. The judge, reasonably, does not doubt that Trump is liable of rape.

You're just being precious about a term that is not exclusively used in jurisprudence.

Trump was found liable of rape beyond a reasonable doubt.

No, you're being intentionally obtuse and awkwardly stubborn and nobody knows why but you.

Why use the exact same wording as a legal standard? You could have said "he's a rapist, without a shadow of a doubt" and we'd have all known what you meant. Instead you decide you're going to die on this weird ass ambiguous hill.

I'm thriving on this hill. Some of you are married to certain interpretations of common phrases, and that is just your neurosis.

Revel in it.

Trump, beyond a reasonable doubt or its shadow, is a rapist.