148 points

How would this be a surprise to anybody? He’s already been proven to have numerous ties to Epstein. His base simply doesn’t care.

permalink
report
reply
155 points
*

His base simply doesn’t care

Lets face it, we could have a video of trump raping those kids himself and they still would vote for him. Facts are irrelevant to cults, they are immunized against reality

permalink
report
parent
reply
127 points

“If Trump is raping kids live on camera, just imagine what the Demonrats are doing they’re too scared to film!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points
*

Anyone who watches the video is a pedophile and can’t be trusted!

Edit: Not even a joke. The GOP rolls out faultier logic on the daily.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points
*

“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, OK?” -Trump

We all thought he was talking about a gun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

☝🏻

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

It’s because they want to be him. Just like how they all don’t want to punish millionaires because they all think they’re going to wind up as one someday, they don’t want to punish their guys for breaking the law because they want to be able to break the law with impunity someday too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s all too easy to imagine the mental gymnastics.

“She was 17/16/whatever, not a real child anyway” “There is no sign in the video that she is not consenting, this is a private matter” “The democrats are sick for obsessing over this”

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

he’s their fantasy vaccine, and they’re not giving him up for real ones that actually sting a little

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

His numbers would actually go up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

His base will worship him more for it. He’s essentially a black hole (orange hole?) at this point, his people have passed the event horizon and can’t turn back.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

his ‘base’ is jealous af. all they get is ‘leftovers’ at the family reunion.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

It’s not a “surprise” not did anyone say it was. It justnt clear before WHICH person in the docs Trump was. Now it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
109 points

There is nothing he could have done, no crime heinous enough, no evidence damning enough, that will cause our country’s legal system to put him in a cell.

He’s white. He’s rich. He’s connected. He’s as corrupt as a CVS receipt is long. He’s above the law because the law exists to punish minorities for existing and no other reason.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

I mean, I’m not holding my breath on Trump being held to account for anything ever, but the whole reason we’re talking about this is because a rich, connected, corrupt white man went to jail and died there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Right, but he was (allegedly) killed by another rich, connected, corrupt person to stop him from taking anyone else down with him. Which adds another wrinkle to the whole thing. When you try to hold someone like that accountable, they kill you and get away with it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

And his followers will continue to follow him and say it’s all made up by the Dems.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They’re making it so that the only way a normal person can even get a chance at a life is to burn the system down and start over.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

A white, rich president of the u.s will never set foot in jail, people need to accept that. The best we can do is keep him away from politics, bog him in legal issues and wait for a big Mac to kill him

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

A white, rich president of the u.s will never set foot in jail, people need to accept that.

No. Accepting that is resigning ourselves to this current state being permanent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’m pretty sure that’s a lot of these posters’ (and their upvoters’) goal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

No we fucking do not need to accept that, unless you’re volunteering to deal with him for us.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Don’t accept it then, keep being pissed and demanding something that would never happen

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I tried teaching a Big Mac to fire a rifle but the lack of thumbs was an issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Grimace will do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Stop making sense on the internet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

There’s also the problems of supreme court bias and that the Dems would see locking him up as the greatest sin of all - being uncivil and disturbing the status quo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

and no other reason.

I think you’re summarizing a bit here. I’m gonna need to see something other than anecdotes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
74 points

John Doe 174 also repeatedly claimed that he was immune from consent requirements and numerous other unrelated matters…

permalink
report
reply
13 points

Lmao typical narcissist behaviors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
70 points

Am I the only one that feels horrified that there were at least 173 more Does disguised in those documents?

permalink
report
reply
57 points

Keep on mind that there were a wide variety of reasons people are on this list. There’s no evidence of wrongdoing for the vast majority of them. Some of the people on the list were even victims.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

That is a good point! It is still horrifying though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Of course the victims are different, but as for the people like Bill Clinton and Donald Trump, I am going to judge people by the company they keep. I doubt anyone in his circles were unaware that Epstein was a complete creep, though some of them might have been unaware just how much of a piece of shit he really was.

Not saying Clinton raped children, just saying that I’d be reluctant to shake his hand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

Last time I checked there was no statute of limitation for child sexual assault.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

Depends on the jurisdiction and how much the Catholic Church got to the laws. In most states it sadly does have a statute of limitations, with the clock starting either after it happens or after you turn 18.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

In most states it sadly does have a statute of limitations

Which makes sense for a crime where in most cases the only real evidence is likely to be the accusation itself. Short of having a live camera feed and a GPS tracker on you at all times and retaining all the data forever, it gets increasingly hard to build a defense against an accusation like that the farther in the past it was.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Actually it’s pretty common to have limits. It’s why NY passed a law to let anyone make a claim regardless of when it happened by a certain date. It was a catchup law, pretty much, and now the limit is back in place.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’m surprised that actually worked. Normally the statute of limitations in place when the crime occurs is the one that applies, and extending it later does not let you retroactively prosecute cases barred by the previous statute of limitations. Stogner v California went that way, for example.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The legislature made a one time exception here.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 429K

    Comments