You are conflating again.
The Bragg case is the 34 felonies. That is the one you should look at in depth so you don't fall into the sheeple category.
The E Jean Carroll is the civil case where he was responsible for damages.
Neither case has him "essentially convicted of rape" and are both complete horseshit.
This is what the judge said
Carroll's accusation against Trump was more severe than the accusations made by other women. Regarding the jury verdict, the judge asked the jury to find if the preponderance of the evidence suggested that Trump raped Carroll under New York's narrow legal definition of rape at that time, denoting forcible penetration with the penis, as alleged by the plaintiff;[d] the jury did not find Trump liable for rape and instead found him liable for a lesser degree of sexual abuse. In July 2023, Judge Kaplan said that the verdict found that Trump had raped Carroll according to the common definition of the word, i.e. not necessarily implying penile penetration.[e] In August 2023, Kaplan dismissed a countersuit and wrote that Carroll's accusation of rape is "substantially true".
I know the differences in the two cases, I have not looked into the Bragg stuff at all, I simply don't have time to dive deeply into this stuff unless there was a debate to be had and a bit of fun.
I am certain of his character based on his actions, pattern recognition and accumulated information. The man is a conman, narc who clearly abuses his power and has admitted as much.
I would imagine the judge has more knowledge on the case than either of us and unless you were biased, one would have to accept the outcome and veracity of the suit.
