I think you are referring to the first case, where the jury made the decision.
This was not that.
No major outlet SHOULD say he was found liable for ****, because he wasn't under NY state law, which says you need to stick your penis in her ****** to **** her. Trump jammed his fingers into her, which is not considered **** under New York law.
Under Federal law however, it IS ****. So if it had gone to federal court instead of NY state court, the same act would have been defined as outright ****.
I guess it is coming down to semantics, then. If it makes people feel good to excuse his actions and say he is not a ****** because he got tried in a court where they don't define his act as ****, then I guess pat yourself on the back. You're defending a man who grabbed her by the ***** and stuck his fingers in her without her consent.
Congrats.
If some scumbag did that to a family member of mine, I'd be happy to lay them to waste, and do the jail for for it. I would absolutely consider it **** based on the definition in federal law, and the definition that any decent human would ascribe to the act he committed.
And I will continue to call him a ****** based on the court decision that says he is one.
I will continue to call him a felon based on the 34 guilty decisions in his hush money case.
I will continue to call him a pathological liar based on the innumerable lies he has told, and his congoing penchant for lying..
I will continue to call him a failure for willfully dividing the country even further during COVID, instead of uniting it.
I will call him a failure for keeping so few campaign promises, and breaking so many during his presidency.
I will call him a failure for making the US a bad joke on the world stage.
I will call him a failure for already backpedaling on a promise that was damn near the basis of his campaign.
And so on.