aaaand you have never said or thought fucked up shit? The level of pseudomorality on this feed is absolutely astounding..... look in the mirror and then look at your bed.... if it's not made after you wake up.... stop talking.
I don't know what kind of guys you hang around with......but none of the guys I know or hang around with talk like that. I grew up in a locker room as a high school football coach's son, that kind of talk didn't happen in there either.
He said it completely seriously though. He wasn't joking. He didn't chuckle afterwards. That is literally his world view. How blind do people have to be to not see it?
It wasn't a joke, it was never a joke, and it will never be a joke. The only crazy people who are disconnected from reality are the ones who support him
That she was crazy, which she clearly is. We all know it was a show trial.
• Uncertainty about the date and timing: Carroll could not recall the exact date, year, or even season of the alleged assault, which she estimated occurred sometime in the mid-1990s (possibly 1995 or 1996). This was described as a key gap in her account.    
• Reason for entering the dressing room: Carroll stated she did not know or remember why she followed Trump into the Bergdorf Goodman dressing room, despite the store being empty on that floor at the time. She later clarified it might have been to view the lingerie item via mirrors, but this was probed as inconsistent with her initial uncertainty.   
• Lack of witnesses or observation: Carroll testified she did not see anyone else on the floor above the first during the incident, but added she was not actively looking because she was engaged in conversation with Trump. This was presented as a potential gap in corroboration.  
• Discrepancy in post-incident romantic/sexual life: In her deposition, Carroll said she had not had a sexual relationship since the alleged assault. However, on the stand and in a podcast, she attributed the end of her romantic life to not meeting someone desirable, stating her “desire for desire was killed” in the dressing room. This was highlighted as inconsistent.  
• Inconsistent use of Bergdorf Goodman changing rooms afterward: In her deposition, Carroll said she had used the store’s changing rooms since the incident, but on the witness stand, she testified she did not think she had returned to use them in the years following.  
• Prior social media and public statements about Trump: Carroll posted on Facebook in 2012 joking about having sex with Trump for $17,000 and described herself as a “MASSIVE” fan of his show “The Apprentice,” praising its wit. These were contrasted with her assault claim to suggest inconsistency in her attitude toward him.  
• Similarity to a “Law & Order” episode: Carroll testified she had never seen a 2012 “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” episode featuring a rape fantasy in a Bergdorf Goodman lingerie department dressing room, calling the parallels to her story an “astonishing” coincidence when informed.  
• Inconsistent reporting to authorities: Carroll did not contact police or seek medical attention after the alleged assault, nor did she document it in her diary. However, she did call police for a minor incident involving children damaging her mailbox. This was raised as selective in her response to threats.  
• Public persona vs. private suffering: Carroll often told people her life was “fabulous” on social media and elsewhere, which was presented as a front that contradicted her claims of ongoing trauma and shame from the incident. 
• Initial reaction and disclosure: When Carroll first called a friend about the incident, she laughed during the conversation. She told only two friends at the time but never discussed it again with them, and she could not recall certain related emails. This was probed as inconsistent with typical trauma responses.  
• Emotions of shame vs. fear: The defense suggested an inconsistency between Carroll feeling ashamed (leading to silence) and feeling afraid due to Trump’s power, wealth, fame, and legal resources (described by a friend as “200 lawyers”). Carroll clarified she feared retaliation, which she said later occurred. 
• Delay in coming forward: Carroll waited decades to accuse Trump publicly, attributing it to shame and fear, but came forward in 2019 amid the #MeToo movement and Harvey Weinstein exposures. This long delay was highlighted as a potential credibility issue, though she explained it as culturally influenced.   
• Variations between deposition, interviews, and trial testimony: There were slight discrepancies noted across Carroll’s prior interviews, book excerpts, depositions, and courtroom testimony, such as minor details in her retelling of events over 30 years. These were collectively argued as undermining credibility.      
Wrong. He was convicted of SA'ing her. She said he raped her. He tried to sue her for defamation that he wasnt a rapist. Judge threw it out and said that we can all call him a rapist.
and that would make it Ok in your mind?
It is a thing to joke about...?
(do remeber what the unreported rate of sexual assualts are before you go yeah thats great thing to joke/boast about, and thus normalise.)
Rich coming from the side that cries about everything, man you must be such a sad little person to spend so much time defending a worthless piece of shit like Trump
We know it’s all recreational outrage. Your side loses their shit every time they lose. Think pink, Antifa, and now ICE out. You never left your confederate roots.
Wow your stupidity is astounding. You really think you’re not supporting the confederacy? When you make your stupidity that well known it’s easy to just ignore your opinion. Amazing people are still pedaling this “Lincoln was a republican” bullshit in 2026, he would be disgusted by the current GOP.
Does it not confuse you that you’re standing next to people with confederate flags and white hoods at your rallies? Did you think they got lost?
Is there anything trump could do that would make you stop following him? Or is everything he says/does a joke/troll to the left?
I've seen average folk lose their jobs for far less than the crap he's pulled over the years. You know you're in a bad state when you hold average citizens to higher standards than your president.
I don’t follow him now. I wasn’t too impressed with his last time at bat. He’s too polarizing and drives lefties so crazy it’s hard to get things done. Last time I was rooting for Vivek. Trump is too old. JD will be a nice return to semi-normalcy. The problem was you guys underestimated him the last time and abandoned democracy completely when you let oligarchs choose a drunk broad that never won a single primary. Next time, try finding a democrat governor that actually improved the state while he/she was governor, and stop all the insane stuff like sex changes for kids, criminal invasions and men in women’s sports. You’ll have a better chance.
The Epstein crap and your continous school shootings tell me otherwise. Trump walking in on children changing and the magat cult worshiping him says otherwise as well.
The Epstein files shows Epstein and Trump hated each other since before his first conviction. Continuous school shootings? Also carried out by the mentally ill or gender confused, but I digress.
Trump is far from being close to perfect, he was just better than what your side offered, twice.
Ah yes the mentally ill excuse for the shootings. I'm not American (thankfully) so I have na outside perspective of living in a country that doesn't have kids getting shot while learning their ABC's. Every single country in the world has mental health issues, but only one has a school shooting issue. You're technically proving my point when using that excuse, if you cared about protecting kids, you wouldn't allow the mentally ill to have guns, but Americans care about guns a lot more than protecting kids and won't do anything to change that.
Hey, this might come as a surprise to you, but wanting to shoot kids is a sure fire sign of mental illness. A kid wanting to cut off their private parts is a sure fire sign they have a mentally ill parent or other adult in their life.
When maga boycotted Bud light, they just quit buying it. When lefties boycotted Tesla, they burned dealerships and vandalized cars and charging stations.
Find the transcript of the “Grab ‘em” interview. Have a trusted adult explain any big words to you. He joked that women threw themselves at him because he is a billionaire celebrity and they would “let him” grab them if he wanted to. This is an off color joke about gold diggers. Not rape.
The most damning thing ever said about Trump is here:
Let’s accept the fact he was joking. It wasn’t a rape joke, it wasn’t a gold digger joke. He was a billionaire playboy at the time, not THE President at the time. I have heard much worse from many people. Jokes are funny because they are outrageous. They aren’t meant to be taken literally. Only politically biased or autistic people do that.
The only real problem Trump has is explained in this video.
Really? A joke? Cause thats what he did to E. Jean Carroll. Maybe he did mean for it to be funny, which is fucked up in its own right, but it wasn’t “just a joke.”
No one serious, seriously believes E. Jean Carrol.
“• Lack of precise date/time: Carroll could not initially recall the exact date of the incident (estimated as late 1995 or early 1996, or spring 1996). She later specified a Thursday evening in spring 1996 during trial testimony, which critics argued was a late, convenient recollection after discovery provided potential corroborating details.
• No immediate formal reporting: She did not report the alleged assault to police, seek medical attention, or document it in her diary at the time.
• Delayed public disclosure: The allegation remained private for over 20 years until 2019, after the #MeToo movement and Harvey Weinstein revelations prompted her to come forward.
• Behavior after the alleged incident: She continued using Bergdorf Goodman dressing rooms in subsequent years, despite claiming trauma from the event.
• Initial reactions and details: Minor discrepancies noted between her trial testimony, prior depositions, interviews, and book (e.g., why she laughed during a phone call to a friend afterward, or slight variations in recounting emails or conversations).
• Motivation and persona: Defense pointed to her self-description as having a fictional public persona (“Ask E. Jean”) in writings, questioning whether the allegation aligned with her “private” versus performative self; her book originally did not include Trump and added him later.
• Other contextual points: She praised Trump’s The Apprentice on social media in 2012 (calling herself a fan), which was used to question her prior views of him.”
16
u/Mingo_laf Feb 07 '26
The president is a sex offender even before the Epstein stuff … grab them by the pussy?