REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
|
Message Subject
|
Trump was demanding justice for the Jeffrey Epstein victims in 2012
|
Poster Handle
|
Anonymous Coward |
Post Content
|
...
Did Judge Marra rule on that?
You did lie about Trump, so your credibility is at zero at this point.
I will say that the NPA Acosta made in this case is disgusting, and beyond belief. That slug should be fired already. Trump is too loyal at times, and this is one of them.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77686546 IT doesn't matter what Marra ruled in terms of the original 'non prosecution' agreement. The DOJ - TRUMP's DOJ - REFUSED to invalidate the plea deal. Comprehend that and what it means? OF course you do. You're a real shill. In February, a federal judge ruled the non-prosecution agreement to be unconstitutional. US District Judge Kenneth A. Marra said that the deal violated the 30-plus accusers’ right to speak with prosecutors about the terms of the arrangement.
But in late June, the Department of Justice declined to invalidate that deal. Prior to this decision, accusers had hoped Marra’s ruling would lead to the case being reopened.
The new indictment could provide something of an opportunity to relitigate the accusations Epstein has long faced, albeit in a different state.The social connections, in particular, have been crucial to helping Epstein avoid prosecution. The financier met many a powerful person as an investment banker at Bear Stearns, and later as the head of his own financial firm that exclusively caters to billionaires. He once described the famous people with whom he associates as a “collection,” and his well-connected lawyers, Kenneth Starr and Alan Dershowitz, were key to his light sentencing in the 2008 federal case. But some of these friends have also been implicated in his alleged abuse, write Coaston and North: These friends may not be able to help Epstein this time, however. They are shielded from prosecution thanks to immunity granted to “any potential co-conspirators” under the terms of his Miami deal, meaning they have little incentive to cooperate with prosecutors or to involve themselves in Epstein’s current charges on his behalf. While the deal was in doubt for a time due to a ruling by a federal judge that found it unconstitutional, the Justice Department has defended it. [ link to www.vox.com (secure)] ...at the end of the day, Epstein will get a larger sentence and all of those who participated with him won't be touched. It's that simple. Trump walks unscathed. Clinton walks unscathed. The British royal scum walk away. All of them. Walking away. Except the scapegoat they throw under the bus to be sacrificed for themselves and their own involvement, participation, and continued behaviors of predation. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77798856 Vox. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77022514 It's the facts. And you all will play your little kabuki stage show through the whole trial. Playing it out like you all always do - and when no one but Epstein goes down, you'll move on to something else to entertain the cattle. Epstein in their sacrifice to protect themselves from prosecution. Simeple. As That. Run along now. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77798856 The "facts".....
|
|
Please verify you're human:
|
|
Reason for reporting:
|