I get why you’re asking for that, but I can’t give you one particular instance. I’ll try to explain it.
If it’s in trump’s favor, they’ll say a confident fake or real. If it’s not in his favor, they’ll say that it’s mostly true or false. I have read them and checked them from reading about the topics for years, and then I’ll read their version. You can not trust me on this, but see for yourself.
Edit: This is a really good example. Read the wording and the slant. What is the verdict?
Terms like “found guilty” and “convicted” are reserved for criminal cases. This case, which centered on defamation, was a civil proceeding to decide the outcome of a lawsuit against Trump filed by Carroll. These cases do not determine guilt, but do determine “liability” for certain actions. Civil cases do not impose jail time or other criminal penalties, and as such require a different standard of proof:
Because Trump was not convicted of a crime, it is not accurate to say that he is “a convicted sexual abuser.” Instead, it is accurate to say that a jury unanimously decided that it was more likely than not true that Trump sexually abused and forcibly touched Carroll, and as such, her defamation claim was valid.
Snopes is unreliable, FYI. They have a hard on for trump.
[citation seriously fucking needed]
I get why you’re asking for that, but I can’t give you one particular instance. I’ll try to explain it.
If it’s in trump’s favor, they’ll say a confident fake or real. If it’s not in his favor, they’ll say that it’s mostly true or false. I have read them and checked them from reading about the topics for years, and then I’ll read their version. You can not trust me on this, but see for yourself.
Edit: This is a really good example. Read the wording and the slant. What is the verdict?
https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/05/09/trump-liable-sexual-abuse/