Bill Clinton is guilty. Nothing will happen. The rich control the poor.
possibleinnuendo on
I don’t think she ever provided the emails, at least that is what maxwell’s lawyer said.
Also, I couldn’t find anything confirming the nipple girls age at the time.
boscotiger on
Grasping at straws.
GrumbleBadger on
I too am guilty of enjoying pert nipples
RichardStaschy on
Proof of hearsay?
daknuts_ on
Here’s an analytical response not addressing the ‘seriousness of the accusation’. Legally this is known as hearsay without corroboration from the first party in the story. Even with first party corroboration it can be contested without a first person witness *to the act(s*).
Because anybody can say anything, true or not, and the US system puts burden of proof on the accuser because the accused is innocent until *proven* guilty.
NormalAtmosphere8274 on
You have a low standard for the word proof
NefariousEscapade on
Yeah…. Need a lot more than a random text wall with photoshopped confidential added.
AffectionateHyena833 on
It must be that MAGAts all wish they were powerful enough to get away with pedophilia. Because otherwise I can’t understand why they’re so adamant to protect this piece of shit. Trump is their moral figure, and if he’s a piece of shit it’s an indictment against how much of a piece of shit they are as well.
See also: staunch defense of that piece of shit Kirk.
Keep downvoting MAGA cucks. Go goon to your preteen daughters.
thegame24uk on
🥱
nv-erica on
I’m sorry – but really – if there was anything damning – we would all have seen it during the Biden admin.
Intuitshunned on
This is the exact definition of hearsay in court. Unless there is corroboration from the original source.
13 Comments
[deleted]
Bill Clinton is guilty. Nothing will happen. The rich control the poor.
I don’t think she ever provided the emails, at least that is what maxwell’s lawyer said.
Also, I couldn’t find anything confirming the nipple girls age at the time.
Grasping at straws.
I too am guilty of enjoying pert nipples
Proof of hearsay?
Here’s an analytical response not addressing the ‘seriousness of the accusation’. Legally this is known as hearsay without corroboration from the first party in the story. Even with first party corroboration it can be contested without a first person witness *to the act(s*).
Because anybody can say anything, true or not, and the US system puts burden of proof on the accuser because the accused is innocent until *proven* guilty.
You have a low standard for the word proof
Yeah…. Need a lot more than a random text wall with photoshopped confidential added.
It must be that MAGAts all wish they were powerful enough to get away with pedophilia. Because otherwise I can’t understand why they’re so adamant to protect this piece of shit. Trump is their moral figure, and if he’s a piece of shit it’s an indictment against how much of a piece of shit they are as well.
See also: staunch defense of that piece of shit Kirk.
Keep downvoting MAGA cucks. Go goon to your preteen daughters.
🥱
I’m sorry – but really – if there was anything damning – we would all have seen it during the Biden admin.
This is the exact definition of hearsay in court. Unless there is corroboration from the original source.