Under penalty of perjury, a witness told the FBI back in 2016 that they had “personally witnessed” President Donald Trump threaten to “disappear” a girl and have her entire family killed, according to a document released by the Justice Department on Friday.Released as part of the DOJ’s publication o...
Yeah, no need to defend one predator while going after another. String em both up, and let Monica pull the lever.
Are you suggesting that Clinton getting a blowjob from Lewinsky and then lying about it is the same in kind and degree to what is alleged in the released pages of the Epstein files?
Clinton was also a close friend of Epstein. Protecting him is likely why the Democrats didn’t use Trump’s friendship with Epstein effectively.
You need to stop making that mistake. Defending and protecting Clinton, who is a predator (as the Lewinsky affair among many shows) means protecting Epstein, and thus Trump.
The original comment was about Clinton’s blowjob only. I was very clear in my question, and constrained it to that only because at the time you had not explicitly extended it to all of Clinton’s involvement with Epstein.
Now that you’ve decided to do so, I’ll preface by saying I’m Canadian, and I don’t give a shit about Clinton, so if indeed his involvement is as bad as Trump, then punish him the same. Obviously they should be punished - as the law is intended to do - according to the severity of their crimes. I will say this: The Trump involvement in the last drop has been nightmarish, if even 5% is true, and I can’t help but consider that the Justice department is incentivized to release material that amplifies Clinton’s involvement and diminishes Trump’s, and if this is the best they can do then Trump is truly a monster.
Yeah, he, and everyone else connected with Epstein, are monsters and should hang.
These crimes are horrendous, but I’m guessing you haven’t really thought about the implications of the death penalty very deeply, and in particular in relation to crimes of CSA. For one thing, it’s a sure fire way to end up with a lot more dead kids.
Yeah, I have. My family includes criminal defense attorneys who are staunch opponents of the death penalty.
And I am in most cases - with the exception being cases like this, or war crimes, where the very powerful are inflicting massive harm with confidence they will get away with it. That is when it is useful, as something even the powerful must fear. China’s execution of bankers follows this.
Ok so you’re not talking about CSA in general;, in fact you’re not talking about any crime in particular, but rather the power possessed by those who perpetrate them?
How would this work? Is torture ok? How do you determine who is powerful enough? How do you prevent uncertainty and/or other powerful interests hijacking the justice system?
You know what’s easier and remains in line with fundamental values of liberal justice systems? Just no death penalty. Start by actually enforcing laws against the powerful, with penniless and impotent lifetimes spent in prison. Avoid creating martyrs and endless cycles of violence and retribution.
And in the case of CSA, again, avoid creating piles of dead kids. If all of these criminals thought they were facing the death penalty the crimes and corruption would just get worse, to absolutely no benefit to us other than satisfying emotional blood lust.