Quote:I am drawing a conclusion based on what I know of the man, his words and his previous actions. I am not choosing to believe something about the man "just because." I am drawing a logical conclusion based on the facts I know and the mountain of circumstantial evidence which points to the likelihood of him doing at least some of these things. If a gun was put to your head and you were asked to honestly say if you felt Trump touched at least one of these women inappropriately you would say you didn't believe he did? Just because there is no concrete evidence you have had presented yet? You'd ignore past allegations, his own words, his own actions, everything you know about him and say.. if I had to objectively draw a conclusion knowing a lot of these accusations are she said/he said.. if I had to choose what I actually believe is true.. I would choose to believe he is wholly innocent of all charges.. really? Knowing it is not carved in stone.. your educated guess.. your hunch says.. not guilty?

None of that is evidence of guilt, which is what we have been talking about. This kind of logic is why that Brian Banks guy was falsely accused and convicted and why Ched Evans was falsely accused, destroyed by the media,lost his career as a promising athlete and was in a dark place for some time.


No he is innocent until proven guilty. Just because he is Donald Trump does not mean he should be prematurely judged as guilty without ANY concrete evidence suggesting he did anything wrong. Its really not a hard concept to understand.


Your problem here is confusing objective with subjective. Your way of reasoning is subjective and is based on personal feeling and opinion, my way of reasoning is objective and based on facts.

---