See here's how politics work: Make an accusation. Slander your opponent. Bring forward witnesses. Drop or lose your case when no evidence is found.
Having the prosecution recommend not pressing charges isn't exactly the same thing as the crime literally not happening. That's a bit of an assumption.
If I can make at least 3 assumptions, based on what you've said here, do you think OJ was a murderer?
Yes. Much better that we assume guilt until proven innocent.
Or, alternatively, his rich and powerful father used his connections to pressure anyone who could testify to rethink the consequences of their actions. Because rape is okay if you're rich and white.
Wait. When did we start talking about Hunter Biden?
Wait was he charged with bringing a minor across state lines to have sex with them, or was it tax evasion?
There's been plenty of evidence that Hunter is creep with minors, just like his daddy creepy Joe. According to this sub, you have to prove innocence, so where is the proof that Hunter didn't?
Your link does not support your claim that it never happened. It does not even address the question of whether or not it happened, the quality of the evidence available, or the reasons why charges were not recommended. You are clearly reading into this article. Why? Bet you don't even know.
According to the article the supposed witnesses were garbage. Even the prosecution thought their testimony wouldn't hold up in court.
Somehow I have to prove a negative, to prove innocence, and yet somehow the parent commenter can make unfounded accusations without proof and be considered legit, worthy of updoinks? You people are in a delusional echo chamber. What a joke of a forum this is.
How is Gaetz not in prison for raping and sex trafficking children.
Probably because it never happened.
Here's a link from what you might consider a reliable source: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/23/matt-gaetz-sex-trafficking-probe-prosecutors-recommend-against-charges.html
See here's how politics work: Make an accusation. Slander your opponent. Bring forward witnesses. Drop or lose your case when no evidence is found.
Having the prosecution recommend not pressing charges isn't exactly the same thing as the crime literally not happening. That's a bit of an assumption.
If I can make at least 3 assumptions, based on what you've said here, do you think OJ was a murderer?
Yes. Much better that we assume guilt until proven innocent.
Or, alternatively, his rich and powerful father used his connections to pressure anyone who could testify to rethink the consequences of their actions. Because rape is okay if you're rich and white.
Wait. When did we start talking about Hunter Biden?
Wait was he charged with bringing a minor across state lines to have sex with them, or was it tax evasion?
There's been plenty of evidence that Hunter is creep with minors, just like his daddy creepy Joe. According to this sub, you have to prove innocence, so where is the proof that Hunter didn't?
Politics in the mirror much?
Your link does not support your claim that it never happened. It does not even address the question of whether or not it happened, the quality of the evidence available, or the reasons why charges were not recommended. You are clearly reading into this article. Why? Bet you don't even know.
According to the article the supposed witnesses were garbage. Even the prosecution thought their testimony wouldn't hold up in court.
Somehow I have to prove a negative, to prove innocence, and yet somehow the parent commenter can make unfounded accusations without proof and be considered legit, worthy of updoinks? You people are in a delusional echo chamber. What a joke of a forum this is.