I suppose people are waiting to see if a prominent person is accused. Or maybe for accusations that are outrageous.

The stupidest thing about conspiracy theories is that they often assume that if “the public only knew” then something would change. “The public” doesn’t give a fuck.

My opinion is that people just wanted to lock up Trump (or Clinton), and all the raped little girls are beside the point.

  • null@piefed.nullspace.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    21 days ago

    What pages of publically released Epstein files prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an individual rapes kids?

    • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 days ago

      This administration DOJ is run by president’s criminal lawyer, who wants to stay away from the files (interestingly doesn’t even go after Democrats).

      So no, as long this is done don’t get a proper trial.

      But with actions of this administration, you can’t deny that at very least trump and Republicans do everything in their power to protect pedophiles, it does to the point that trump is ok with breaking the law that nearly every Congress person voted for, ruining his own legacy by being labeled one instead releasing the files and at very least cleaning up his own name.

      So yeah, that to me is a proof beyond a reasonable doubt that we are being run by pedophiles and pedophile protectors.

      • null@piefed.nullspace.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        21 days ago

        We’re talking about things available to the public that confirm individuals as having raped kids.

        • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          21 days ago

          It’s very rare during a trial to have a direct evidence of a crime (so called smoking gun), it usually is multiple corroborating evidence that then is used by prosecutor to paint how the crime was committed.

          The defense then has to show why that’s not plausible.

          So can you provide some defense then, because to me it is beyond a reasonable doubt.

          DOJ killed the investigation, saying there’s no one left to investigate and that Epstein committed all those crimes alone.

          So why not release the files (especially since law requires it) to clear everyone wrongfuly listed there?

          • null@piefed.nullspace.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            21 days ago

            multiple corroborating evidence that then is used by prosecutor to paint how the crime was committed

            You haven’t linked any publically available documents yet… We’re still here, at step one.

            Also why are you talking about releasing the rest of the files? That has nothing to do with the claim here.

            • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              21 days ago

              The fragments of the files are public and are hosted on DOJ website and implicate a lot of people, a lot from the circles of the president.

              You talked about reasonable doubt, please provide me what’s the “reasonable doubt” when:

              • DOJ says there’s nobody else to investigate or prosecute (according to them Epstein was the only one that committed those crimes)
              • that means everyone else listed there did nothing wrong and releasing those files would clear them up
              • a law passed that all files (including FBI investigators notes) supposed to become public

              So why would trump prefer to break law not releasing those files that would clear everyone (including himself) of those accusations?

              There’s no one blocking him and as mentioned there’s a law actually mandating him to do it, so what’s your reasonable doubt that he and his friends aren’t guilty?

              Not many criminals have the option of controlling their prosecutors.

              • null@piefed.nullspace.lol
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                21 days ago

                The fragments of the files are public and are hosted on DOJ website and implicate a lot of people, a lot from the circles of the president.

                But you won’t cite any so we’re still stuck at step 1.

                • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  21 days ago

                  You want me to cite 6 million files?

                  You talked about reasonable doubt.

                  So what is your reasonable doubt why he can’t publish all files to clear himself of any accusation?

                  • null@piefed.nullspace.lol
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    21 days ago

                    I want you to cite any.

                    I think you might have gotten lost: You’re defending the claim that there is information in the currently publicly available files to justify executing individuals. You need to showcase examples to defend that claim.