you personally saw the evidence?

Anyone can read the evidence themselves, here’s a copy of the deposition: politico.com

Look up the definition of the word "evidence" and then look up the definition of the word "allegation".

Testimony from a deposition is evidence, it's more than an allegation. This girl had to testify under oath and under penalty of perjury to say she was raped by Trump.

I think reasonable people can weigh that evidence differently.

To say it's not evidence though is to demonstrate a lack of understanding of our legal system. In most rape cases, this would be sufficient evidence to indict Trump, and were she able to corroborate it (difficult in the case of rape), there would be sufficient evidence to convict him.

^ Edit: And I got something wrong about this deposition. Her evidence is corroborated here, there's a material witness in here who was also a victim of Epstein's.

It's too bad that she withdrew the suit after Trump was elected, but I understand why. Trump is absolutely vicious at attacking those who challenge his power.

In light of the Trump administration's recent cover-up of the Epstein files, people should have a second look at this deposition. You know, read it and decide for yourself if it sounds credible. Though this allegation is old, it is newly credible, for me.

^ it’s not evidence, the deposition clearly states that every single statement is alleged, there is no finding of fact, that’s up to a jury, or a judge in a nonjury trial.
All the statement in a grand jury statement is looking for is reasonable suspicion, or saying that a trial is warranted, not a conviction.

^ What a foolish thing to say. Testimony is a form of evidence!

^ Read the statements
every one begins plaintiff alleges !

That's just how depositions read, always. It's still evidence.

^ As far as I know testimony in a grand jury is not subject to rebuttal, it’s basically the District Attorney’s tool use for its own purposes, I’m not an attorney but my understanding of evidence is that there are rules that govern the use of statements at trial that do not apply in a grand jury proceedings, therefore I wouldn’t consider that testimony to be evidence.

Ask an attorney if a sworn deposition is evidence. (Hint: it is.)

^ I did, his answer was it depends

The deposition MAY be allowed if declarant no longer available to testify. However that is unusual as such testimony is not subject to cross and DA allowed leading questions. Garland’s DoJ had all Epstein evidence for years. If there was legit dirt on Trump it would have been leaked in September or October last year

^ I agree, but the Lib Cope Squad here has already predetermined that Trump is a pedophile, and you cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into.

If there was no dirt on Trump why isn't his administration releasing the Epstien "client list" that his own Attorney General said she had on her desk?

I think Garland was a fucking pushover of a AG. DOJ had like 3-4 very strong cases against Trump for several different felonies, but Garland, playing everything by the book, allowed Trump to run out the clock on all of them except the Manhattan campaign fraud felony, and even that one essential got thrown out once Trump was elected. And, for sure, he wouldn't have leaked shit.

Fucking tragedy.

^ Trump is a lot of things, most not good, I don’t think he’s a pedophile, there’s nothing in his background that suggests that is an issue with him.

The link provided was to a civil complaint filed with the court. It wasn't a link to sworn testimony at a deposition. That is why I tried to make a distinction between evidence and allegation. I believe I can file a civil suit against anyone for anything. Now, I'm no attorney. If I'm off-base here, I'll be glad to admit I was wrong.

And the Republican swallower crowd knows that Trump is obviously a child rapist and keeps pretending like it's some crazy conspiracy regardless of what amount of evidence is presented.

One short of a Lib Cope Squad quorum!

===> "Trump is a lot of things, most not good, I don’t think he’s a pedophile, there’s nothing in his background that suggests that is an issue with him."
.
Agreed. This was first filed in California in April 2016 by an anonymous person using the pseudonym "Katie Johnson" who was purportedly representing herself, though it most certainly read like a lawyer drew it up. The purported plaintiff even gave the court a fake contact address. The supposed witness referenced in the filing was also, of course, anonymous. When it was tossed for legal insufficiency, it was refiled twice in NY, conveniently in the runup to the general election. But nobody was ever served, nor did the purported accuser even show up for a scheduled press conference. Indeed the case was suddenly dropped both times.
.
So no, this is not "evidence" lol. This was an unproven accusation filed by a so-called accuser who likely did not really exist. No evidence was ultimately submitted.

There's zero credible evidence Trump raped a 13 year old. Stop it.

@Dolfan why no thoughts/contributions on subjects like this?

This was an unproven accusation filed by a so-called accuser who likely did not really exist. No evidence was ultimately submitted.
There's zero credible evidence Trump raped a 13 year old. Stop it.

@lex and @rickdugan... Have you read the filing? I'll link it again politico.com

There's not "zero credible evidence". The plaintiffs accusations here are corroborated by another victim as well as sworn testimony from one of Epstein's employees. And personally, I find the evidence to be compelling.

You can stamp your feet and say "zero credible evidence" all you want - that doesn't make it true. There is evidence here, and it's not just the account of the accuser but material witnesseses as well.

I'd assert that if you haven't read the filing, you don't know what you're talking about.

@RonJackass: It's just a preliminary accusation document with fake names. The purported former employee, "Tiffany Doe", purportedly agreed to give sworn testimony when necessary. For all we know, the whole story could be a work of fiction - not a word of it has been supported by any actual evidence.
.
So now we use some common sense and a little research to further judge it. She filed it three times and conveniently abandoned it each time before having to reveal herself or provide any actual evidence. She gave a fake address the first time around and claimed not to be represented when clearly a lawyer drafted it. In each filing after the first, the story changed.
.
But even more telling, if this was more than just an election stunt, why hasn't "she" pursued it since? She has until age 55 in the state of NY. She could have refiled any time over those last 9 years, yet not a peep. I think we all know the reason.
.
All of this point to this as a BS work of fiction planted in an attempt to hurt Trump's election prospects.

if this was more than just an election stunt, why hasn't "she" pursued it since?

• Because she's terrified of what Trump does to his accusers and other victims.
• Because she saw Epstein get his sweetheart fake prison deal, and the DA who gave it to him get awarded a position in Trump's first cabinet.
• Because of Epstein's "suicide".
• Because she's seen Trump go unpunished for numerous felonies.

I mean, it doesn't really take a lot of brain power to imagine why a young women would prefer not to be in Trump's crosshairs. Are you sure you're operating on all 4 cylinder's @Rickdugan? This is hardly a tough question.

Anyway, it's still clear you didn't read the filing - there are a number of false factual claims in your argument.

You can lead a horse to water... but you can't take them out of the FoxNews distortion zone I guess.

Also... breaking news. WSJ is reporting that Trump was informed he was in the Epstien files by Bondi, prior to the decision not to release them.

wsj.com

That alone doesn't prove he's a child rapist. But man is all this shit starting to stack up to "beyond a reasonable doubt" in my mind at least.

^ You know what they say about opinions...

tiktok.com

This is why orange man is bad.

That tiktok is the testimony from a woman who said she was raped 4 times at the age of 13 by Trump at Epstein's place. Epstein raped her twice. Trump punched her in the face and threatened her. He told her he was rich and powerful and if she told anyone what happened he would kill her and her entire family and make her disappear like he had done to another girl. Do people realize the level of scum that you are supporting with this man?

^ And yet for four years, the Justice Department, completely controlled by radical left-wing Trump haters, did absolutely nothing to prosecute Trump on child rape charges. You lefties are as sane and rational as Hamas.

radical left-wing Trump haters

If by "radical left-wing Trump haters" you mean the milquetoast and obsequious Merrick Garland who let Trump run out the clock on virtually every felony case.... yes you have a point.

Alright Ronjackass, now you just sound like an unhinged wingnut. You're ignoring the totality of events and obvious signs that this is a hoax because you desperately want to believe this. Maybe put on your man pants and look at the complete picture with a dispassionate critical eye. When you do, it should be clear that this is a work of fiction which suddenly appeared just as he was winning the Republican nomination and then just as suddenly disappeared (3 separate times) before anyone was forced to prove anything. Seriously dude.
.
And to be clear, I would be saying this no matter who the target was. I detest lawfare. Someone misused CA and NY victim protection laws to anonymously publish salacious child rape accusations, which of course included no specifics about dates or locations, and then just as anonymously backed out each time before the accused could defend himself in any way.
.
The ends do not justify the means, no matter how much you dislike a politician. This was just the tip of an enormous iceberg of efforts by countless parties to use unconventional and downright abusive legal maneuvers to attack Trump. I say this is someone who can't stand the guy myself, even if I like a lot of his policies.

Alright Ronjackass, now you just sound like an unhinged wingnut.

Alright @RickTheKiddieDiddler, call me names if you want but at least I'm not defending a fucking rapist and pedophile.

The ends do not justify the means, no matter how much you dislike a politician.

No they do not and this is a lesson you should take to heart the next time you're tempted to slander and disparage a 13 year old rape victim because you like Trump's policies.

^ The Lib Cope Squad here shows just how feminized the left has become, a bunch of overemotional little bitches who think something is true because they really, really, really want it to be.

===> "No they do not and this is a lesson you should take to heart the next time you're tempted to slander and disparage a 13 year old rape victim because you like Trump's policies."
.
What fucking victim you ridiculous knucklehead? We don't know if any of this is real. There has been no sworn testimony or evidence provided. It's just a preliminary filing submitted by an anonymous person. Why can't you seem to process this?
.
This is what I meant by abuse of the victim protection laws. Normally a person who files a lawsuit is identified in the initial filing, allowing the accused an opportunity to investigate the allegations, mount a defense or even countersue for defamation. But these victim protection rules force the defendant to wait until hearings begin in order to defend himself.
.
Whoever filed this gamed the system (and it could have been a dude in his 50s - we have now way of knowing), 3 separate times. In each instance they got a smear story on public record and then pulled the filing before having to support the allegations, all timed with the election of course.

===> "a bunch of overemotional little bitches who think something is true because they really, really, really want it to be."
.
It just boggles the mind, especially coming from other grown ass men. I get not liking Trump. I even get being inclined to believe something like this given how much of a narcissistic asshole he is.
.
But what I don't get is a grown man looking at the whole pattern of events surrounding this and not being able to see it for what it clearly is. The ability of someone to make public accusations like this, with virtually zero accountability, is truly scary. They picked the right two states for sure as you can bet that neither CA nor NY had any appetite whatsoever to pursue potentially fraudulent court filings when doing so could benefit Trump.

Its crazy that some of you believe obama isnt american and other tin foil hat conspiracies but won't believe Trump is a pedophile despite veing a regular on the lolita express and his history of sexual predation

^ If someone ever brings real evidence that Trump laid a finger on an underage girl with sexual intentions, I'll be the first in line to lynch his ass. But this horseshit story ain't it.

But what I don't get is a grown man looking at the whole pattern of events surrounding this and not being able to see it for what it clearly is.

@rickdugan do you not understand that you're doing exactly this? Here are just a few examples from this thread in which you have made factually inaccurate or completely baseless claims.

❌ What fucking victim you ridiculous knucklehead? We don't know if any of this is real.... It's just a preliminary filing submitted by an anonymous person.

Victims of CSA are virtually never identified in court filings. There's good reason for this, do you want to live in a nation where a child victim's personal anguish is a matter of public record the rest of their lives?

What you are alleging - that it was made up - is a serious and bold claim for which you have provided no evidence. If the victim's attorneys, Thomas Meagher and Lisa Bloom, did indeed fabricate the story that would be grounds to disbar them and slap them with felony perjury charges as well as making them vulnerable to a libel suit. Trump, notoriously litigious and vindictive, would have pursued these avenues already... unless they knew the claims to be true.

To claim the accuser doesn't exist is hogwash. The accuser "Katie Johnson" even did an interview with The Daily Mail in which they posted her fucking photos and acknowledged they knew her real identity. She's a real fucking person! dailymail.co.uk

❌ But nobody was ever served, nor did the purported accuser even show up for a scheduled press conference.

As stated in the complaint... "[the victim] was fully warned on more than one occasion by both Defendants, Donald J. Trump and Jeffery Epstein, that were she ever to reveal any of the sexual and physical abuses that she had suffered as a sex slave for Defendant Trump and Defendant Epstein, that Plaintiff Johnson and her family would be in mortal danger. [The victim] was warned that this would mean certain death for herself and family."

These accusations came out after Alexander Acosta's botched prosecution of Epstein. She had good reason to be afraid and to cancel that press conference, as they had already let one of her rapists off the hook.

❌ If someone ever brings real evidence that Trump laid a finger on an underage girl with sexual intentions

Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, the evidence is there. We have two accusers in this case and a material witness who worked for Epstein and was present when the victims were raped, all offering sworn testimony.

Plus there's a fucking gigantic mountain of circumstantial evidence connecting Trump to Epstein, as well as evidence that demonstrates that yes, Trump is in fact a rapist.

1. More than 16 women have accused Trump of sexual assault. pbs.org
2. In the case of E Jean Carol, one such accuser, the court found that Trump had indeed raped her. washingtonpost.com
3. "I don't even ask, I just grab 'em by the pussy", he said.
4. Epstein and Trump had a yearslong relationship. Trump flew on Epstiens private jet at least seven times, he visited Epstien's Island and hosted him at Mar a Lago. Several of Epstein's victims have claimed to have been assaulted by Trump in addition to the accusers in the Johnson filing. nytimes.com
5. Epstein's prosecutor, Alexander Acosta was offered a cushy spot in Trump's cabinet after letting Epstein off the hook.

MOST IMPORTANT: these latest developments with the Epstein files lend enormous credibility to the Katie Johnson case. Trump's attorney general told Trump he was in those files. nytimes.com And then, after campaigning on release them, he suddenly changed course after learning he was implicated.

If none of these additional details existed, it might make sense to be cautious of the Johnson lawsuit. Faced with this mountain of evidence, there's only one explanation for being incredulous: you're in a cult that believes it's leader can do no wrong.

@Ronjackass: Are you still calling this work of fiction "evidence" and continuing to quote from it like it's real? Seriously? And then of course you go on with endless wild speculation, as mentally weak folks like you often do. 😉
.
Good to know that the Daily Mail was provided with a face to put to the anonymous name and a supposed former employee to talk to on the phone, also still anonymous. But it doesn't change any of the underlying facts, including the lack of any concrete evidence, including sworn testimony, specific times and locations, etc.
.
So once again we use some common sense and a little research to further judge it. She filed it three times and conveniently abandoned it each time before having to reveal herself or provide any actual evidence. She gave a fake address the first time around and claimed not to be represented when clearly a lawyer drafted it. In each filing after the first, the story changed.
.
But even more telling, if this was more than just an election stunt, why hasn't "she" pursued it since? She has many millions ($$$$$$$$) of reasons to if this is true. She has until age 55 in the state of NY. She could have refiled any time over those last 9 years, yet not a peep. I think we all know the reason.
.
And don't say it was out of fear Ronjackass. Fear definitely didn't stop Stormy Daniels or a slew of others. Trump was vulnerable after losing the re-election, which is why everyone felt free to go after him, but not her. For that matter, if this was so real, why in the world didn't NYS and NYC prosecutors try to grab it and run with it? They went after him for everything else they could dream up and these events purportedly took place in NYC, yet not a peep on this from them.
.
I think we all know why nobody pursued this after the 2016 election - because it was a hoax. Nobody bought this in 2016 because it stank like a setup and it still does. Nothing has changed that.

===> "Faced with this mountain of evidence, there's only one explanation for being incredulous: you're in a cult that believes it's leader can do no wrong."
.
What "mountain of evidence?" What is most likely a fabricated accusation filing from 2016 (see discussion above), some old pictures of Trump with Epstein at some social events and a handful of assault accusations from others that were considered dubious at best and, of course, utterly unprovable?
.
You might not be aware of this RonJackass, but accusations are not the same as "evidence." Where are all the civil lawsuits? How did some of these people not get rich when Trump was booted from the White House and easy to pursue in court? And, as I mentioned above, why did not a single state or city prosecutor try to run with any of this?
.
The reason that none of this went anywhere is because there was no "evidence." Just smoke and mirrors.
.
And don't behave like a hyper-emotional twat and accuse someone else of doing the same. I am the last guy who feels any blind loyalty to Trump. But I won't buy into some happy horseshit narrative when all that exists is noise and speculation, but no substance. That's what emotionally weak gullible people do.

continuing to quote from it like it's real? Seriously?

Yes, absolutely. I find it completely credible, the things she claims Trump says and does in there seem completely in character for someone who has already been adjudicated as rapist and brags about grabbing women by the pussy without even asking.

But even more telling, if this was more than just an election stunt, why hasn't "she" pursued it since? She has many millions ($$$$$$$$) of reasons to if this is true.

Trump lost that defamation case to E. Jean Caroll, like years ago, and still hasn't paid her. He probably never will. He's notorious for not paying his bills. Many. Such. Cases. In cases where he has had to pay up, such as the Trump University fraud case, the state had to seize his assets. And other than the memecoin scams he's running, Trump doesn't have that many assets. He doesn't even own the buildings that bear his name!

No good attorney would advise the victim here that she's likely to get a pay day.

And don't say it was out of fear Ronjackass. Fear definitely didn't stop Stormy Daniels or a slew of others.

No, it didn't stop Stormy, but she was a face-out pornstar, not a 13 year old. And, look at what happens to people who speak out against Trump. His former personal attorney, his campaign manager, and the CFO of the Trump org all served time in fucking jail. He's outed intelligence agents, fired career civil servants, gutted inspectors general. He'll be ruthless with his public commentary and may incite angry mobs or individuals to commit stochastic terror. People who speak out against Trump do not fare well.

For that matter, if this was so real, why in the world didn't NYS and NYC prosecutors try to grab it and run with it?

Because they didn't have the evidence DOJ has now. Because the victim didn't want to press charges out of legitimate fear for her life. But also because... Trump was president at the time and you can't prosecute a president for a crime! Take your pick.

I am the last guy who feels any blind loyalty to Trump.

Interesting that you would say this, given the voluminous evidence here on TUSCL to the contrary. I mean, you have a daily "OMG LOOK AT TRUMP'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS" thread. Bro, take a look at your own comments!

don't behave like a hyper-emotional twat

Buddy, respect gets respect. And you lost a great deal of mine the minute you started with the name calling and ad homena. And this laborious hyperventilating you've done about the account being "fiction", which remains completely baseless and asserted without evidence. Pot, meet the kettle.

^ Now you're just engaging in pure speculation.
.
Jean Carroll, as weak as her case was, will likely get her payday. The money is already sitting in escrow waiting for the appeals to run out, which will happen soon enough.
.
You're absolutely insane to think that, if there was an actual provable child sexual assault case to be made against Trump, that countless high profile attorneys wouldn't have lined up to take it during those years where he was on the ropes. Or that NYC and NYS prosecutors wouldn't have pounced on it in a second. Your explanations are flimsy speculation that don't hold up. Heck plenty of these attorneys would have done it for the press alone.
.
So once again we use some common sense and a little research to further judge it. She filed it three times and conveniently abandoned it each time before having to reveal herself or provide any actual evidence. She gave a fake address the first time around and claimed not to be represented when clearly a lawyer drafted it. In each filing after the first, the story changed.
.
You can't credibly explain why Katie Johnson played these bait and switch games in two different states in 2016 and then never refiled when he was out of office, despite having many millions ($$$$$$$$) of reasons to do so. Nor can you explain why NYS and NYC prosecutors didn't pounce on this when they were looking for anything they could find to hit Trump with. Or why not a single one of these other "accusers" ever filed a civil suit. All you can do is to keep throwing around wild ass speculation, much of which makes no sense.
.
But don't worry, nobody else can reasonably explain all of these games and notable lack of real action either, which is why this work of fiction was never taken seriously by anyone with a lick of sense.

You can't credibly explain why Katie Johnson played these bait and switch games in two different states in 2016 and then never refiled when he was out of office, despite having many millions ($$$$$$$$) of reasons to do so. Nor can you explain why NYS and NYC prosecutors didn't pounce on this when they were looking for anything they could find to hit Trump with.

I just did explain it. In a nutshell, the accuser chose not to pursue civil or criminal charges because she quite reasonably fears for her life.

You also keep dodging all my points on the recent news, which is really one of the most compelling points, to me.

Trump promised on the campaign trail to release the Epstein files. Then, he reversed course after being told by his AG that he was in them.

The whole thing is completely usual. I've never heard of an AG briefing a president on an ongoing investigation. In pre-fascist America convention was to keep a wall of separation between DOJ and the White House, to ensure there was not even an appearance of meddling.

The fact that Trump was not only briefed, but told he was implicated?! And then had it shut down??! Unheard of in our great nation, these are sad times indeed.

But be it 2 years, 5 years or 10, the full truth will come out here eventually and boy you're going to look and feel awfully ignorant for your ardent defense of this disgusting pig of a pedophile.

@Icey “ Its crazy that some of you believe obama isnt american and other tin foil hat conspiracies but won't believe Trump is a pedophile despite veing a regular on the lolita express and his history of sexual predation”

@georgmicrodong

This is a biased and dishonest line of logic… just because youre in proximity to a criminal, friends with a criminal, work with a criminal or even family with a criminal, doesnt mean you have any affiliation with their crimes.

Being an accomplice to a crime is something that has to be investigated and proven. You cant just say epstein was a pedo, therefore anyone who visited an island, visited his mansion, or partied with him or attended the same social events was a pedo.

But what easily debunks this logic is people who use it, do so selectively with particular groups of people they dislike.

Ive literally seen the exact same people, on one hand argue all cops and politicians are corrupt, but also argue that cartel members and protesters arent, and should instead be judged on the individual actions of each person. Why dont cops, teachers, politicians, friends of diddy, friends of epstein etc get to be judged by their own individual actions?

But students, fast food workers, gangsters, protesters, cartel members, and other groups can all be judged individually.

RonJax, Dusty et al

Please do me a favor. Watch the ESPN documentary “Fantastic Lies” (several times) about the Duke lacrosse team case and see if it doesn’t give you some pause (at a least a little bit) on the political motivations of accusers, prosecutors, the media and the public in sexual asssult cases

===> "I just did explain it. In a nutshell, the accuser chose not to pursue civil or criminal charges because she quite reasonably fears for her life."
.
Horseshit. Nobody else was afraid for their lives when he was bounced out of the WH in seeming disgrace and too many people to count went full steam ahead in a massive lawfare campaign. Yet she never re-appeared to try to collect that $100 million that she was purportedly seeking, nor did a single NY criminal prosecutor choose to pick it up.
.
Indeed back then everyone thought Trump was done. The party was already trying to move on. It was only the never-ending lawfare that kept him in the press and eventually resurrected his political career.
.
I'm not "dodging" your other points - they're just more irrelevant noise. There is only one inevitable conclusion as to why: (1) She never followed through, despite filing 3 separate times during his presidential campaign and then just vanishing; and (2) Why NY prosecutors never pursued it or even talked about it, despite having clear jurisdiction; and (3) Why his political enemies did not move heaven and earth to leverage it further (and you had best believe that opposition campaigns spent a lot of money investigating this). It is because there was nothing there. It's the only answer makes sense when looking at the whole picture.

"This is a biased and dishonest line of logic… just because youre in proximity to a criminal, friends with a criminal, work with a criminal or even family with a criminal, doesnt mean you have any affiliation with their crimes."

When your job is to investigate criminals and you refuse to investigate some criminals because they're your co-workers, then you do have "an affiliation with their crimes."

^@georgmicrodong the mistake you make is that you have to PROVE they were AWARE of and refused to investigate those criminals.

You cant just say “a cop did a crime, therefore other cops automatically knew about the crime and refused to investigate”

You can apply the same logic everywhere. Assume a school shooter had accomplices simply because they studied together in the same classroom.

Even the cops in the george floyd situation were arrested by other cops. Thats all a cop is required to do. Its the judge and court who decides on the penalty for the crimes.

Theres never been a situation where cops “refused to investigate other cops”. The real issue people like you have is youre hoping and praying for cops to be terrorists like micah xavier johnson where they go around shooting at random cops.

You are literally saying that school shooters should have all their classmates investigated and charged, and should automatically be considered accomplices who were aware of the shooters plans, just because they studied together.
Even though students arent cops, theyre still morally and even legally obligated to report a school shooter situation to the authorities. So your excuse of “but its the cops job to investigate crimes!” Doesnt even hold up. Any citizen with knowledge of an incoming violent crime is required to report it

@rickdugan

Repeating yourself is not an argument.

But I get it. You can't explain why the Trump administration has decided to bury the files after Trump was informed he was in them. You just want to call it "irrelevant noise" because there is no good explanation. Other than the obvious one:

Trump is a fucking kiddie diddler

"Repeating yourself is not an argument."

Self awareness isn't Captain No Pussy's strong point.

===> "Repeating yourself is not an argument."
.
It is when the person reading it is too fucking dense to get it the first five times. 😉
.
Here, let me repeat it again. Take all the time you need:
.
There is only one inevitable conclusion as to why: (1) She never followed through, despite filing 3 separate times during his presidential campaign and then just vanishing; (2) NY prosecutors never pursued it or even talked about it, despite having clear jurisdiction and going after him for everything else they could dream up; and (3) Why his political enemies did not move heaven and earth to leverage it further (and you had best believe that opposition campaigns spent a lot of money investigating this). It is because there was nothing there. It's the only answer makes sense when looking at the whole picture.

If what you're saying made any sense @rickdugan then DOJ would've released those Epstein files. Instead, they met with Trump, told him he was in them, then buried them. 🤷‍♂️

YOU ELECTED A PEDO

^ You mean the same files that the Biden DOJ had in its possession for 4 solid years? Boy it was mighty neighborly of them to hide that smoking gun for Trump's benefit for all those years. 😉
.
And to be clear, why I keep debating this in the face of obvious trolling is not because I give a shit about Trump. Rather it is because of the unprecedented and totally inexcusable lawfare that was waged against Trump. Even a narcissistic asshole is supposed to be treated fairly by the courts, but both prosecutors and certain state judicial officials were all too willing to play along with this nonsense.
.
This is just one example among many. In a fair world, after someone pulled this bait and switch stunt 3 separate times running up to the general election, someone in the state prosecutor's office would have investigated whether the filing ever had any merit whatsoever or if it was utterly fraudulent. But of course we're talking about CA and NY here. Or, more likely, they did investigate it (hoping it was true), didn't like what they found and buried it.
.
I am saddened and concerned about the blatant abuse of our judicial system and IMO everyone else should be too. What can happen to me, can happen to thee, when the shoe is on the other foot.

inexcusable lawfare

Lawfare is when Dear Leader is held accountable for his actions, and when Dear Leader does it, it's just politics, right?

He tried to overturn our election. He staged an insurrection. He committed campaign finance fraud (and was found guilty of it - deservedly.)

And he should be held accountable raping children. He won't be but he should be.

Finally @rickdugan, I have to tell you I appreciate this conversation and I'm happy to keep it going. Not because I'm learning anything (nor am I under any illusions that you are either) but I am enjoying the fact that we're keeping @CJKent_Band's poorly formed but accurate headline at the top of /discussions. High five!

===> "Lawfare is when Dear Leader is held accountable for his actions, and when Dear Leader does it, it's just politics, right?"
.
Filing a hoax child rape lawsuit, 3 separate times, in a way that Trump was never allowed to defend against, had nothing to do with "accountability." Nor for that matter did the manufacturing of capital cases out of parking ticket violations by NYS and NYC prosecutors and judges. These were all about causing as much harm as possible. It was both shameful and frankly a bit scary to see our legal system so blatantly abused for political purposes.
.
Again, remember, what can happen to me, can happen to thee, when the shoe is on the other foot.

^ Not interested in weighing in about whether or not Trump is a pedophile, I've already stated that I don't think he's a pedophile, but as far as law fare is concerned Trump is a master practitioner of law fare, so using it against him successfully is some major Ju-Jitsu, at least IMHO.

^ 25, there's just no comparison between using civil and bankruptcy statutes to advance one's causes and blatantly and outrageously abusing victim protection laws and criminal statutes to attack a political opponent. This is not Russia or China. Shit like that is just not supposed to happen here.

^ please buddy, dont be stupid, Trump initiates all kinds of activity by law enforcement by making up stories about things that never happened, he is unquestionably a seriall prevaricator who has no qualms about using falsehoods to advance his own agenda, including inciting all sorts of crimes against political opponents, and anyone or anything he decides is not in his best interests.

^ Feel free to be specific then 25. I'm genuinely interested in what you think Trump has done which is as egregious as what happened in NY. Now I'm not talking about noise, but actual use of official state/federal power to target a political opponent in court.

Meanwhile this is what the Dems' woody for Epstein has gotten them.
Approval rating -30 and lagging the GOP on almost all issues of importance.
Way to go, LCS!

wsj.com

Inciting a riot to stop the peaceful transfer of power
that’s a gentle description of of what happened at the capital a few years back for starters.
This subject isn’t up for debate, I’m not interested in back and forth bullshit, but I’m sure you will spin my reluctance to engage as somehow you’re right and I’m wrong, but honestly I don’t give a fuck either way.
Your man is a lame duck, and I’ve been around a long time, soon enough we’ll have a change of administration, unlike the liberal group I’m sure this country will survive and even prosper.
I live on Winston Churchill’s assertion that Americans always do the right thing after they try everything else.

Filing a hoax child rape lawsuit, 3 separate times, in a way that Trump was never allowed to defend against, had nothing to do with "accountability."

@rickdugan This is not lawfare even by any reasonable definition. No charges were filed, how could it be lawfare? Can independent citizens commit "lawfare" or is your implication that the democratic leadership was somehow involved? (And if that's the implication: proof?)

This comment just re-enforces the point I'm making: it's only lawfare when it targets Dear Leader.

Not to mention the fact that Trump's decision to bury the Epstein files demonstrate those accusations are very likely to be true. He wasn't sending Epstein birthday cards because he liked his squash game.

Nor for that matter did the manufacturing of capital cases out of parking ticket violations by NYS and NYC prosecutors and judges.

What are you even talking about here?? What do fucking Parking Tickets have to do with anything? And what are you talking about with New York State?

The Manhattan case - in which Trump was found guilty of a felony - was about the hush money Trump paid Stormy Daniels, which he attempted to illegally hide to avoid campaign finance disclosures through legal payments to Michael Cohen. He was on tape colluding with Cohen to pay her off. The case was a slam dunk.

You're also missing:

• The Georgia racketeering case en.wikipedia.org in which Trump illegally tried to have the vote tally in GA altered so he would win the election. He was on tape here too, telling the GA SoS and Gov to "find 8,000 votes". Unfortunately, he was never tried because he ran out the clock with numerous delay tactics.

• Finally, the federal election obstruction charges was about Trump's attempts to install fake electors, pressure Mike Pence to an unlawful decertification, and the subsequent January 6 insurrection. He ran out the clock on these charges too. en.wikipedia.org

Ron, Trump was not convicted for paying hush money. Indeed that is not inherently a crime - NDAs are quite common. He was convicted of mischaracterizing the payments in the books of his own private company.
.
In both the NY civil and criminal cases, Trump was being charged with what amounted to minor paperwork violations. Normally the penalties for these offenses would have been modest fines. But in both cases, prosecutors engaged in unprecedented and highly suspect legal interpretations and maneuvers to turn these into major crimes, aided heavily by outlandishly accommodating judges.
.
So instead of settling on fine amounts for these minor paperwork offenses with no victims to speak of, he came away with 34 felony convictions and a judge in the civil case who was so gung ho that he was considering putting the entire Trump organization into receivership., until an appeals court warned him off.
.
So like I said, lawfare. Now maybe I shouldn't be so angry given that these nasty little ankle-biters are likely the reason that he got re-elected. People saw these circuses for what they were. But it truly scares me to see it happen in the first place. The appeals will likely drag out for years and I doubt that either of these verdicts will survive when it's all said and done, but that is not much solace.
.
And that lawfare extends to this bait and switch bogus child rape charge being filed 3 times. At the very least court officials and prosecutors let it keep happening without questioning it. Much more likely is that prosecutors in both states looked into it, saw what it really was and buried the results. Maybe a more passive-aggressive form of lawfare, but lawfare nonetheless.

He was convicted of mischaracterizing the payments in the books of his own private company.

This "mischaracterization" was done with the attempt of avoiding federal campaign finance laws and defrauding the American electorate. Let's not pretend like this was a book keeping error or even a tax dodge. And remember that Trump was on tape discussing it.

Normally the penalties for these offenses would have been modest fines.

There's no normal here. Trump isn't a private citizen. He was running for public office - the highest in the land.

And furthermore, though he was convicted in this case he was sentenced to: LITERALLY NOTHING. So it's hard to see the argument that he was treated unfairly.

There's few good analogies to anything he did. Probably the closest was John Edwards, who tried to hide campaign contributions given to cover up his extra marital affair.

Obama's DOJ prosecuted him for it. Was that LAWFARE?!!! Were you outraged at the time?

I noticed you didn't address the other cases that I mentioned: Georgia racketeering and the federal election obstruction cases. You have to have your head up your ass to think those were lawfare, because Trump is literally on tape pressuring GA executives to overturn the election.

The J6 rally and subsequent insurrection happened live on TV for everyone to witness. Trump should have been held accountable for it and it's a tragedy Garland permitted him to go unpunished.

But do explain: How on earth were these prosecutions amount to lawfare?

Should we permit people from unlawfully overturning our elections with no consequences?

I'm sure you agree we shouldn't. So why do you think Trump should not have been prosecuted? 🤔 Here's a hint: en.wikipedia.org

Did I miss where Trump was charged with a campaign finance violation? By anyone, federal or state?
.
Normally they have to prove that there was an underlying crime before they can bootstrap a purported coverup to it to charge it as a felony. But this was not the case here. Indeed the judge very helpfully coached the jury by telling them that they could infer facts not in evidence in determining whether an underlying crime even existed. In fact, at first Bragg provided theories of multiple different crimes and the jury was told by the very helpful judge that they could choose which one they liked. Only later in the process did the prosecution settle on the alleged, yet to this date unproven, federal campaign finance violation.
.
This was a travesty. Due process was thrown completely out the window. This is not how our courts are supposed to work. It's small solace that his election ruined their plans to throw him in jail or that this case will almost certainly not survive appeals. It should never have happened at all and it kept him tied up for months during an election while costing him millions to defend.

OK @rickdugan. I find your argument uncompelling, vague and lacking supporting evidence. As I stated Trump was on tape discussing breaking the law, it doesn't get much more cut and dried than that.

But let's say for the sake of argument I accept your premise than the Manhattan case was an unreasonable prosecution.

You still haven't answered the very important questions I asked you about the GA racketeering charges, and federal election obstruction charge. How the fuck were those lawfare?

*Should we just allow people to try to overturn our elections?

I offered no opinion about the GA case or the federal election case. I don't know enough about either of them to have an informed opinion and neither does anyone else. Neither of them went to trial. All we had to that point were unproven accusations. The defense has no opportunity to cross examine witnesses or produce any of its own witnesses or evidence.
.
But I have to be honest that I was a bit skeptical about any other case against Trump after seeing those circus acts play out in NY. It very much looked like a coordinated attack. Maybe the federal and GA cases were stronger, but we'll never know. What I do know, after following those NY cases carefully, is that the judges in both of them carried the ball over the goal line as much as the prosecutors. It was an awful sight to behold.

It boggles the mind that you have no opinion, given how much information is publicly available on both cases. The J6 insurrection was live streamed by thousands, hundreds were successfully prosecuted for that insurrection, just not the man who was ultimately responsible.

But I understand why! It can be downright impossible to admit dear leader did something wrong. 😔

^ I have no opinion because we've only heard one side. Listening to information from both sides of an argument is how grownups evaluate situations.

Grownups don’t elect fascist pedophiles who have tried to overturn our elections.

^ Sore little bitch. 3.5 years to go.

===> "Grownups don’t elect fascist pedophiles who have tried to overturn our elections."
.
Grownups know that he hasn't been proven to be any of the above. Hyper-emotional twats who lack maturity and critical thinking skills are the ones who pass judgment based upon unproven accusations and emotional angst. 😉

Hyper-emotional twats who lack maturity and critical thinking skills are the ones who pass judgment

Man that is some grade A prime-cut projection. 😚👌

Look at this thread man. Here's what you're saying:

• When Trump commits a felony and is duly convicted by a jury of his peers, it's LAWFARE
• When he tries to overturn our elections and foists and insurrection on our nation, we don't have enough information to judge.
• When he is accused of rape, by dozens accusers over multiple incidents spanning decades it's LAWFARE
• When he covers up the nation's largest pedophilia scandal in which he himself is implicated, it's unremarkable.

I could go on. I just wish you could see the intellectual knots you've twisted yourself into to defend this fascist pedophile. You look like a fucking idiot.

(1) A jury verdict gift wrapped by a judge that will likely not stand on appeal; (2) allegations of an attempt to "overturn an election" that have not even been litigated never mind proven; (3) rape accusations where not a single purported victim or state prosecutor has ever been able or willing to litigate, either civilly or criminally; and (4) A purported coverup of something that the Biden DOJ had in its sole possession for four years.
.
Right, I'm the idiot. No doubt your invitation to join Mensa will be arriving at any time. 😉

^ A lot of commentators, even on the left like Joe Klein, lament the feminization of the Democratic party. Even their "men" like we see here are screeching harpies. @RonJax2 has a particular bizarre obsession with sucking Trump’s dick.

No doubt your invitation to join Mensa will be arriving at any time.

You know what projection is right? Look it up if you don't know, Mr. Mensa.

There's a reason you started resorting to insults and name calling in this thread - your position is untenable as Trump's actions are completely indefensible. And furthermore, whether you acknowledge it or not you're ashamed.

You're ashamed you voted for someone who fomented an insurrection on our storied nation.

You're ashamed you voted for a pedophile. You're ashamed you've enabled a child predator to cover up a gross pedophilia scandal.

You're ashamed of the human rights catastrophe unfolding in our country as we deport our workers with un-uniformed masked brownshirts terrorizing our communities.

You're ashamed that our economy is being destroyed and the value of the dollars in our pockets is being destroyed.

In spite of this shame, you're never going to admit you were wrong, because your ego is too delicate and fragile. What will happen instead is you will die a lonely man, wondering why some many people in your life have abandoned you.

And Puddy I am never taking you off block, nor am I reading your comments, no matter how much you harass me with username pings. My sincere hope is to never hear from you ever again.

@Founder - PLEASE FIX THIS ASAP.

@RonJax2 - You don't want to hear from me again? Keep my name out your mouth, you premenstrual little bitch.

You know everything I've said about you is correct, that you are a broken little man with suboptimal coping skills and probably a drinking/drug problem to get over the election you couldn't steal and your inability to get laid without P4P.

Rickdugan isn't worth replying to. All he does on here is lie. Hes like a hype man for Trump.

Puddytat has a problem fighting his self hate.

And.... Trolls will abuse any feature on here. Thats why 2 way block is needed

Rickdugan isn't worth replying to.

@icey. Probably not. There was a moment in this conversation where he admitted he didn't know much about the GA racketeering and federal obstruction cases where I thought he was starting to understand that he'd been Trumped.

But now, I don't know. Now it feels like we could have video and first hand testimony corroborating the child rape allegations and Rick would still call it LAWFARE or baseless.

It is really hard to leave a cult. There are to this day, Branch Davidians who gave David Koresh their wives and children and still think Koresh is a god. There are survivors of the Jonestown massacre who still revere Jim Jones.

Well Puddy, in all fairness to RonJackass and the other light in the knickers types who equate accusations and other noise with guilt, Trump certainly didn't help himself on Jan 6. His rabble rousing is indisputably what led to those inexcusable events.
.
But whether this rises to the level of trying to usurp an election is another matter entirely. I haven't see any evidence that he told anyone to storm the capital. Indeed he issued a video release later that day telling his supporters to go home. Nor have I seen anything to suggest that his attempts to slow down election certifications were anything more than an effort to give himself more time to mount challenges and investigations.
.
Personally I believe that he truly believed that there was election fraud, which is why he was behaving this way. It was bad for sure, but whether what he did rises to the level of an attempted insurrection or coup is entirely another matter. Nobody with a lick of sense, including I'm sure Trump, would believe that a few thousand mostly unarmed protesters were actually going to take over the United States government. I mean seriously now. 😆
.
What we need to know is whether he did anything more nefarious and typical of true attempted coups. Like try to shut down Congress and the Supreme Court. Or try to enlist his generals in supporting him in a government takeover. Or try to enlist support from other U.S. political leaders. Thus far I've heard nothing to suggest that any of this happened, but all of that would come out in court for sure.
.
But it was enough for the light in the knickers types to scream and holler in melodramatic fashion about "insurrection" and "coups." Then of course, in their minds, any and all actions against him are justified, including the travesties that were the two NY cases.

His rabble rousing is indisputably what led to those inexcusable events... But whether this rises to the level of trying to usurp an election is another matter entirely.

Did you just unironically write both of these sentences back to back? "He's responsible but I'm not sure he's reponsible." OK?

Here's some quotes from his speech on the mall on January 6th:

There’s no joke about it: I’ve been in two elections. I won them both and the second one, I won much bigger than the first. OK. Almost 75 million people voted for our campaign, the most of any incumbent president by far in the history of our country, 12 million more people than four years ago.

We will not let them silence your voices. We’re not going to let it happen, I’m not going to let it happen.

And I’d love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. The military, the secret service.... but I’d love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us.

I hope Mike is going to do the right thing. I hope so. I hope so. Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is, this is from the number one, or certainly one of the top, Constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it.

We want to go back and we want to get this right because we’re going to have somebody in there that should not be in there and our country will be destroyed and we’re not going to stand for that.

And you have to get your people to fight.

We don’t have free and fair elections.

[The media] has become the enemy of the people.

Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you, we’re going to walk down, we’re going to walk down.

Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.

Full transcript here: apnews.com

There's two possibilities here. Either you acknowledge that Trump is an autocrat who tried to overturn our elections, or you're admitting being part of a cult of personality.

@rickdugan – I’m a very reluctant and cautious Trumper. I voted third party in 2016, convinced Trump was a joke candidate much like he was portrayed on South Park (I haven’t watched the last season but I’m sure their lampoon of him is hilarious), and again in 2020 because living in a solid blue state I could afford a protest vote. After Jan 6, I was convinced we had to move on from him, and called him a liability to conservatism that we couldn’t afford. I was a DeSantis guy, but unfortunately he’s all steak no sizzle and that won’t win a presidential election.

But Trump’s greatest appeal to me was “they’re after you, I’m just in the way,” and last year I saw just how fucking true that was. After ridiculously partisan judges and DA’s convicted him, I donated $1,000 to his campaign; after the assassination attempt, I donated up to the individual max. Not that I particularly like the guy; no way in hell I’d want Trump dating my daughter, I still loathe his temperament, but it all told me how far the left would go to destroy any opposition to their anti-American agenda.

America might be beyond repair, on the level of the UK, if Harris were in office right now…overrun with illegals taxing our shared resources, even terrorists that crossed the Biden Open Border…gender surgeries openly performed on children…10% annual inflation to funnel more money to Democratic NGOs and connected corporations (like anything “green.”)…anti-American ideologies prioritized, like in the UK where local victims of Pakistani rape gangs are getting told “they deserved it.”… openly coddling and embracing the horrible Iranian regime.

It's not that I’m a fan of everything Trump does. I fucking hate the gamesmanship on tariffs whipsawing the stock market and corporate plans, and I absolutely fucking loathe dumb shit far-left anti-scientific environmental lawyer and can’t comprehend why conservatives seem to have taken to him. Yes, Jan 6 was disgraceful and unpresidential, but goddamn the left is trying to milk it like a prized heifer into more than it is. Overthrow democracy? The literal fucking military answers to him. You mean he had that and instead sent in jackholes in Viking helmets to steal podiums? It makes no sense.

Little screaming incel bitch @RonJax2 is pulling the left’s favorite card, weaponized victimhood. Fascist America, are you fucking kidding me? I’ve seen him and others on message boards acting like they’re literally in danger because they said not-nice things about him. He’s one of those little libs who talk about “my truth” that Trump is guilty of everything since the St. Valentine’s Day massacre and can’t be convinced otherwise, and anyone who doesn’t automatically agree is “sucking Trump’s dick” (he has quite the fixation, probably tickles his itty bitty teeny tiny little pee pee to the thought of Trump busting a fat load in his mouth).

On that note, it’s pretty hilarious that the left always talks about “the Trump cult” when they scream “racist” at any accusation of Obama, no matter how mild, and literally have called him “sort of God” and “lightworker” which are more worshipful than anything I’ve heard said about Trump. It’s only a cult when it’s the other guy!

I’ll turn on Trump harder than anyone if I see hard evidence that Trump intended to actually overturn an election, raped a child, or any other of the left’s fever dreams. The lib cope squad acts like any accusation that they believe passionately enough, or throw enough F-bombs or threats behind, are automatically true. Which only makes them look even more like the spoiled children they are.

Until them, I’m amusing myself watching you beat @RonJax2, @Icey, and the rest of the lib cope squad’s bitch asses. More eloquently than I.

I've read everything he said, many times over. But rabble rousing and trying to usurp an election are two very different things.
.
Did he tell the crowd to storm the Capitol? Did he try to coerce anyone in Congress or the VP at gunpoint to accede to his wishes? Did he try to dismiss Congress, the Supreme Court or both? Did he try to move troops into position to put down resistance? Did he try to enlist support from other U.S. political leaders? These are the things that typically happen in real coups, but thus far I've heard nothing to suggest that any of this happened. If you know differently, I'm all ears.
.
Instead he just sat out there rousing the rabble, no doubt in the hopes of drawing attention and putting pressure on Congress to hold up the certification. The problem of course is when you spin people up enough, sometimes they go over the top.
.
I sincerely doubt that Trump wanted that crowd to storm the Capitol. Nobody with a lick of sense, including I'm sure Trump, would believe that a few thousand mostly unarmed protesters were actually going to take over the United States government. I mean seriously now. 😆

Trump is up there sounding literally like fucking Hitler and you're like "it's just rabble rousing." OK.

I’m not going to compare Donald Trump to Hitler,
but fuck all this is a President of the United States of America, and he’s rabble rousing, this is a disgrace and anyone who doesn’t agree with me is totally out of their minds.

I’m not going to compare Donald Trump to Hitler,

@twentyfive, no doubt you've heard of Godwin's Law, an internet meme law that suggests the first to make a comparison to Hitler or Nazis loses the argument. Anway, Godwin himself has said the comparisson is apt. politico.com

Falsely claiming elections were stolen, the lügenpresse, immigrants our "vermin" who are "poisoning our blood." This is all like basic Hitler shit.

And now we have concentration camps within our borders and masked brownshirts terrorizing our communities.

Tell me 25, what would it take for you to compare Trump to Hitler?

===> "I’ll turn on Trump harder than anyone if I see hard evidence that Trump intended to actually overturn an election, raped a child, or any other of the left’s fever dreams. "
.
@Puddy: Exactly. I feel exactly the same way. Like you, I'm hardly a die-hard Trump supporter and there is much I don't like about him. But I need a lot more than accusations and other noise before I'm going to assume that a crime occurred.
.
Trump was still President when Jan 6 occurred. He was still in charge of the military and many thousands of federal law enforcement officers. Yet instead of using these resources and making other real moves to grab control by force, instead he just sat out there whining angrily at a few thousand mostly unarmed protesters.
.
And yes things definitely spun out of control. But nobody with a lick of sense would believe that a few thousand mostly unarmed protesters were actually going to take over the United States government. I mean seriously now. 😆

@rickdugan - Yeah, it sounds like we're very much in the same boat on Trump (and broader politics).

I don't believe all the Obama Manchurian Candidate or Kenyan-born nonsense either (and it doesn't matter to me, he's in the rear view mirror).

I think there were greater improprieties than usual in the 2020 election, and would have said that even if Trump won. The libs say it was the most secure election ever because they need it to be, but that doesn't even pass the smell test, not when a million new protocols were put into place for COVID. There were mysterious piles of ballots appearing, fractured chains of custody, times when only one set of poll watchers in swing states could see what was actually happening. But for one, I'm not sold that it was enough to flip the election, not at a time when people were discontented and Trump was repeatedly shooting himself in the foot, and for another, even a bad missed pass interference call doesn't mandate replaying of the Super Bowl.

I favor robust election security measures, including voter ID (and unlike the Dems, I trust black people to get a government ID) and restrictions on mail-in voting specifically so we shit like this doesn't happen.

BTW if @RonJax2 doesn't want to be tagged, he should put a space in his name. I originally tried to sign up as Puddytat but that was taken, so I put in the space, and I think that messes up attempts to tag me. I don't know if the system reads @Puddy Tat the same way.

@RonJax2
Im a Jewish man, the closest we’ve come to Hitler in modern times is probably PolPot, in Cambodia, or possibly what happened in Rwanda, you can take hyperbole as far as you like, and we’ve had our share of nativists and demagogues in our history as a country, but we have always returned to the center. This country is unique in the history of the world, we’re pretty tough, and we are an amalgam of many different cultures, religions, and traditions, we have figured it out and eventually we’ll figure this out as well.

"what would it take for you to compare Trump to Hitler?"

Severe schizophrenia or mental retardation.

One thing to point out regarding Jan 6, guys like icey or GMD claim most, even all politicians are corrupt and pedos and cover up the pedo crimes of other politicians.

So according to that logic Jan 6ers should be american heroes in their book. They were directly targeting federal buildings instead of businesses like other protests/riots.