• xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    143
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The investigations uncovered Epstein’s close ties to former President Bill Clinton and Britain’s Prince Andrew, as well as his once friendly relationship with former President Donald Trump

    Dear AP, why the fuck are you downplaying Trump’s ties to Epstein? Trump hung out with child diddlers to diddle children. He was hilariously cagey when asked if he’d release Epstein materials as president.

    There may not be enough evidence to get him in court, but he should be held in the same group as Clinton and Andrew.

    • Gloomy@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      There is this, where a anonymous person has reported beeing raped by Trump as a Teen girl (please read this at your own discretion). She never went to court because she was intimidated.

      • rayyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        5 months ago

        She never went to court because she was intimidated.

        Threatened. Death threats. Very thinly veiled death threats.

    • morphballganon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      What’d Clinton do?

      The only thing I read about Clinton and Epstein said that Clinton turned down a girl offered to him.

      • Killing_Spark@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        What did Clinton do? You mean aside from keeping his mouth shut about being offered an underage girl?

          • Killing_Spark@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            41
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Bro the guy was literally “the leader of the free world” and said nothing about his friend selling children to child diddlers and you are going to come at me with a “but akchually WHICH LAW DID HE BREAK?!?!?!?”. Go piss.

            • morphballganon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              I was responding to a person who said Trump belongs in the same category as Clinton. So you believe Trump’s transgressions are no worse than keeping his mouth shut about illegal activity? It seems you are defending them by ridiculing me.

              • Killing_Spark@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 months ago

                You didn’t though. You replied to me saying this:

                What did Clinton do? You mean aside from keeping his mouth shut about being offered an underage girl?

          • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Laws should follow and codify ethics, not dictate them. If a transgression (such as not reporting CSA to the relevant authorities) is not already banned by law, that doesn’t mean it’s fine. It means the law needs to be amended.

            • Killing_Spark@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              In this specific case I agree, not reporting CSA should be illegal (and probably is?) I’m not so sure that we should codify the current ethical understanding into law though.

              We need to leave room for development. Forcing new ideas to first go through the battle of legalization isn’t helpful in this regard. Laws are there to regulate what normal social regulation can’t do properly.

              I think people who cheat on their partners are morally speaking bad people. But writing into law you can’t have multiple partners at once is quite obviously a bad decision, because there are happy polyamourus relationships. The government doesn’t need to get involved here, being treated like the ass that you are for cheating is punishment enough, and leaves the room for developing new ways of living together.

              • lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                I guess we need to distinguish between legislation, regulation and case law established through judicial precedent. Legislation is definitely too cumbersome to react to shifting moral standards. Regulation and judicial precedent are more flexible in cases where legal consequences are warranted.

                As so often, there is nuance to the topic. General statements are hard to make both concisely and precisely. I opted for brevity, but you are absolutely right.

                Either way, we agree that complacency about CSA is fucked up.

          • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Motherfucker, diddling children could be legal tomorrow and i would still not fuck a child. The law doesn’t decide what’s right or wrong.

      • ealoe@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        If you hang out at a bar with Nazis in it, it’s a Nazi bar and you’re a Nazi too. Same with pedophile island. Some things are so evil if you know about it and do nothing you are just as complicit as the people directly doing it.