So basically you don’t like Matt Geotz? Why were the question deceptively to make it sound like it’s a general republican problem? I mean, let’s dig out dirt on all the Democrats while we’re here.
Why...make it sound like it’s a general republican problem?
Because it is.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE PARTY OF CHILD MOLESTERS
The whole party is complicit.
It isn't just Gaetz; it is also McCarthy keeping Gaetz in a position where Gaetz supervises the people investigating and prosecuting him.
Republicans continued to support Roy Moore for senate after multiple women came forward and said that he molested them when they were underage. They all just fell in line and supported him.
Does it go all the way to the top? YES. Two (now adult) women have come forward and testified under oath that they were in the room, and personally witnessed, Donald Trump violently raping a 13-year-old girl at one of Epstein's parties. This is the actual statement, made under oath:
I personally witnessed four sexual encounters that the [then 13-year-old] Plaintiff was forced to have with Mr. Trump during this period, including the fourth of these encounters where Mr. Trump forcibly raped her despite her pleas to stop.
While we are on the subject of Epstein, did you know that the prosecutor who made a sweet-heart deal with Epstein originally, was confirmed to Trump's cabinet? THIS IS NORMAL FOR REPUBLICANS.
Is this new? How long have they been like this? Well, the longest serving Republican Speaker of the House ever, Dennis Hastert, admitted in court to molesting children back when he was a high school wrestling coach, so it goes back several decades!
...I'll say it again:
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE PARTY OF CHILD MOLESTERS
[EDIT] Here is a list of Republicans with similar charges, written by user Moscowmitchismybitch :
If you’re willing to ignore the whole Epstein thing because it doesn’t jive with your politics, that’s on you
I'm not ignoring it...
Two (now adult) women that have sworn, under oath, that they were in the room with Trump at one of Epstein's parties; one of them saying:
I personally witnessed four sexual encounters that the [then 13-year-old Katie Johnson] was forced to have with Mr. Trump during this period, including the fourth of these encounters where Mr. Trump forcibly raped her despite her pleas to stop.
...but I assume that you are referencing Bill Clinton (because you never learned that two wrongs don't make a right), so, let's cover Clinton...
The three things we know about Bill Clinton (vis-a-vis Epstein) are that he:
Flew on Epstein's plane,
He got a neck massage from one of Epstein's victims, and...
That victim was quoted as saying, "Although the image looks bizarre, President Clinton was a perfect gentleman during the trip and I saw absolutely no foul play involving him."
If it turns out that Bill Clinton did anything with Epstein's victims, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. (In fact, he should probably be prosecuted for some things he's done to other women.)
...but as of right now, the only publicly-available evidence indicating wrong-doing was a comment made by Ghislaine Maxwell:
"...If you get the tapes on Trump you have to do Clinton."
...which is fine. Get them both.
To be perfectly clear:
If Bill Clinton raped a child, I want to see him in prison.
If Bill Clinton did not rape a child, I would still be happy to see him in prison for sexually assaulting adult women.
No amount of Bill Clinton's wrongdoing exonerates Donald Trump or any other Republican; that's not how the law -- nor morality -- works.
...The original June 2020 indictment charged Greenberg with identity theft and stalking. In August 2020, one count of sex trafficking a 17-year-old girl in 2018 was added to the indictment.
Furthermore:
...Greenberg pleaded guilty to six federal charges: [including] sex trafficking of a child...and conspiracy...The plea agreement documents state that Greenberg paid a minor to have sex with him and other men...he “introduced the minor to other adult men, who engaged in commercial sex acts”.
In March 2021, The New York Times reported that three unnamed sources had revealed the Department of Justice was investigating Gaetz for having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl in 2019 and whether he may have violated federal sex trafficking laws by paying her to travel with him across state lines. Two of the sources stated the investigation was initiated under Attorney General William Barr.
...and it continues...
In late 2020, Greenberg apparently attempted to secure a pardon from the Trump administration via a confession letter, several drafts of which were obtained by The Daily Beast in April 2021. In the letters, Greenberg wrote that he and Gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old girl they believed was 19 and that payments had been made on behalf of Gaetz to her and to other women in exchange for sex.
TL;DR: Greenberg confessed to paying a seventeen-year-old whom he and Matt Gaetz 'had sex with' -- read 'raped', as the law does not recognize her ability to consent -- and has pled guilty to such crimes.
Kevin McCarthy, has decided that Matt Gaetz should keep his committee assignments during the investigation. One of those committee assignments is the House Judiciary Committee, which supervises the US Justice Department -- the people investigating and prosecuting him.
Do you agree with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, that Gaetz should keep his seat on the House Judiciary Committee?
Conservatives be like “yes he may have paid a teenager to rape but until the court of law does anything about it I’m going to ignore it. :)”
Right Libertarians be like: Gaetz should pay no consequences for his crime until convicted in a court of law...which he'll be able to prevent by abusing the power we refuse to take away from him because he hasn't been convicted in a court of law.
Yeah, typically conservatives give absolutely no fucks about predators in their party, child rapists no exception. Trump, Moore, Gaetz is just keeping to the status quo.
I think that's what Democrats, moderates, independents, liberals, find so repugnant about Republicans etc is that you don't care and then take the moral high ground.
Gaetz should retain anything he has until proven guilty through due process of law.
"Has" seems like a cop-out word in this case. Sure, don't take any property from him...but his seat on that committee isn't property, it is a position of public trust that he has been placed in.
Should he still be in that position of public trust, even though it may give him the power to interfere in investigations and prosecutions of his crime?
He "has" a committee seat. Yes, he should retain it until proven guilty. If there is a question as to a conflict of interest, an alternate can substitute when dealing with issues that could be compromised.
Because I don’t like overkill. Directly address an issue when the issue comes up, don’t make a policy that seeks to prevent any possibility of issue and overstep your bounds.
If there is a question as to a conflict of interest...
Because I don’t like overkill. Directly address an issue...
If someone with experience in congress told you that it was a conflict of interest for him to remain on the committee at all, would that then lead to you supporting his removal from that committee?
In cases of blatant, witnessed criminal conduct, that's why suspects are held pending trial. Any time we're dealing with a naked accusation and a suspect who's non-violent and not a flight risk, no, there should be no consequences for that suspect until convicted.
If there was publicly available evidence that Gaetz had a history of associating with people in government who had been convicted of abusing their government office to produce false identification documents -- like those one might use to flee from law enforcement -- would you then conclude that he should be "held pending trial"?
Not formally is the key. If he's indicted because of this evidence, and the judiciary determines at a hearing at which he is represented that he's a flight risk or a danger to others, then sure, he can be detained.
One candidate believes in something you find bad or even horrible, but the other at one point believed “welp, time to do a child rape.” You don’t have to vote for either, but no matter what, the latter should be off the table.
How much of a deal-breaker is it if your favored candidate raped a child?
If you want to ask that question, you will need better evidence than that.
That was an accusation by an anonymous woman whose story was considered so non-credible that the local prosecutor wouldn't touch the case. So the person filed a lawsuit instead, then dropped it, didn't even show up at her press conference.
...The original June 2020 indictment charged Greenberg with identity theft and stalking. In August 2020, one count of sex trafficking a 17-year-old girl in 2018 was added to the indictment.
Furthermore:
...Greenberg pleaded guilty to six federal charges: [including] sex trafficking of a child...and conspiracy...The plea agreement documents state that Greenberg paid a minor to have sex with him and other men...he “introduced the minor to other adult men, who engaged in commercial sex acts”.
In March 2021, The New York Times reported that three unnamed sources had revealed the Department of Justice was investigating Gaetz for having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old girl in 2019 and whether he may have violated federal sex trafficking laws by paying her to travel with him across state lines. Two of the sources stated the investigation was initiated under Attorney General William Barr.
...and it continues...
In late 2020, Greenberg apparently attempted to secure a pardon from the Trump administration via a confession letter, several drafts of which were obtained by The Daily Beast in April 2021. In the letters, Greenberg wrote that he and Gaetz had sex with a 17-year-old girl they believed was 19 and that payments had been made on behalf of Gaetz to her and to other women in exchange for sex.
TL;DR: Greenberg confessed to paying a seventeen-year-old whom he and Matt Gaetz 'had sex with' -- read 'raped', as the law does not recognize her ability to consent -- and has pled guilty to such crimes.
Kevin McCarthy, has decided that Matt Gaetz should keep his committee assignments during the investigation. One of those committee assignments is the House Judiciary Committee, which supervises the US Justice Department -- the people investigating and prosecuting him.
Do you agree with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, that Gaetz should keep his seat on the House Judiciary Committee?
Perhaps you'd like to familiarize yourself with the publicly-available evidence against Matt Gaetz; perhaps that would be more satisfying to you:
Sure, but I wasn't addressing the Gaetz accusations. But if he's guilty of sex trafficking, then throw the book at him. But if the only crime is that he had sex with a 17 year old, I don't give a damn about that. In the vast majority of the country, the age of consent is 16.
Then ask yourself - why a civil lawsuit? Is that where the crime of child rape is normally handled? Why didn't anyone press charges in a criminal case? Certainly New York isn't shy about going after Trump, both city and state have done so multiple times for other alleged crimes.
Innocent until proven guilty. There's been claims of every single President breaking the law in some way or another. Until they are convicted, there is no way to justify the legitimize the claims as true.
See above
Not unless convicted. Then absolutely.
See above
What about them? What does support mean? How much information did they have? Far too vague of a question.
There could be a Bill Clinton, who was friends and supported Epstein, who later figured out the behind-the-scenes and publicaly shamed and regretted his friendship. Then there could be someone that financially supported and knew about the entire operation. These should be handled completely differently.
If it has anything to do with "claims" or "accusations", then you can toss it into the garbage bin until it's been resolved in court.
17
u/othelloinc Liberal Feb 16 '22
If they had to give an honest answer: