Title couldn’t say it all.
The evidence that Trump and Epstein brutally raped a 13-year-old girl easily meets the police standard.
Title couldn’t say it all.
The evidence that Trump and Epstein brutally raped a 13-year-old girl easily meets the police standard.
Comments
last commentyou personally saw the evidence?
Log in to vote
Anyone can read the evidence themselves, here’s a copy of the deposition: politico.com
Log in to vote
Look up the definition of the word "evidence" and then look up the definition of the word "allegation".
Log in to vote
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.
Log in to vote
^ 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.
Log in to vote
^ 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.
Log in to vote
^ What a foolish thing to say. Testimony is a form of evidence!
Log in to vote
^ Read the statements
every one begins plaintiff alleges !
Log in to vote
That's just how depositions read, always. It's still evidence.
Log in to vote
^ 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.
Log in to vote
Ask an attorney if a sworn deposition is evidence. (Hint: it is.)
Log in to vote
^ I did, his answer was it depends
Log in to vote
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
Log in to vote
^ 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.
Log in to vote
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.
Log in to vote
^ 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.
Log in to vote
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.
Log in to vote