I wasn’t sure if she was guilty or not but after that speech I am.
I think a lot of nuance was lost by her not using her mother tongue. She was Epstein’s friend, after all
a lot of nuance
Its ‘nonce’. As in ‘a lot of nonces’
I think you mean nonsense
Nonce-sense perhaps
The world really did go full Brasseye
I didn’t even really consider her involvement until this week, now I am assuming she was in pretty deep
My “not involved in human trafficking” t-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my t-shirt
That entire family is so fucking gross.
Well, she was most likely trafficked herself. So it’s extra gross when she hides/defends others doing it.
makes me feel dirty just thinking about any of them, there is something deeply disgusting about these “people”
vibeBut I am wearing her underwear
not that i really care but in his defense he asked what sexual relations meant, they gave a definition and what he did with Lewinsky didn’t match that definition…
this is the first time i heard her talk and probably the last and I can’t be the only one. she must know about something that will come out and thankfully handled it like an absolute troglodyte so we all know now to pay close attention
something that will come out
Anti-SLAPP suit is gearing up very soon: https://feddit.dk/post/20969245/19914002
The thing about the Epstein files that a lot of people don’t realize is that the fact it’s a scandal means that there’s an opportunity to get justice at some point if in the future even if the system is broken. In a lot of places around the world, this shit is legalized and nobody cares. For example, in my home country of Iraq all of this is legal and a lot of powerful religious clerics do the same shit as these criminals, and nobody bats an eye. We live in a depraved world that’s governed by the wicked.
Come ON, we’re SUPPOSED to stop talking about it!!
you’re thinking of another club that should have come already
None of the other first lady’s HAD TO MAKE a speech about not being a sex trafficker…
Neither did she. Apparently she just felt the need to do it for reasons unknown to anyone.
Maybe she’s poking the bear; getting Epstein back in the news cycle. She probably detests Donald a lot and would love to see him put down.
That’s at least one thing we have in common.
Yes, but aren’t you glad she did? Because I’m not.
Woooooooooosh
First thing I thought was whose got the story and when is it going to drop
Is she even in the files? Besides the photos we’ve all seen?
I didn’t know there was a debate about her relationship with Epstein or how she ended up in the US. Now I do. All she’s done is draw attention to herself.
I used to think she was a clever gold digger but now all I see is a narcissistic moron. Same as her shit-scented husband.
My speech on me not being a sex trafficker has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my speech on how I’m not a sex trafficker
– Melania, probably
Ivana his 2nd wife who’s burried on the golf course is. She was a recruiter. Also Don Jr, Eric and Ivanka’s mom.
Makes sense Melania is the same
also why Melania hates the other children.
shes her handler for putin/russia.
Finally, a unique speech not copied from Michelle Obama.
Turns out, Michelle and her husband were never on Epstein’s island, so nothing to deny.
Do you think she plagiarized it or used chatgpt
Both!
If I had a nickel for every time a first lady did this I’d have one nickel. It’s not a lot but it’s odd that it’s that high.
her cosmetic surgeries arnt cheap.
I think Trump made her do it. Now we’re all talking about his wife instead of him.
And you know what? Let’s talk about both of them. They were both at the parties, and on the island.
choosing her, makes people more suspicious about trump, consider shes already being established connection to trump via epstein parties.
“theres nothing more suspicious than diddling kids, if you make a song about"not” diddling kids"- MAC. in this case it was a press conference.
Greatest television show in human history.
also another qoute “what odd thing to say” bart
I still don’t know what story she was denying. What were the images that she was saying were fake?
Muddy waters here
From what I’ve gathered
- There may be photos being released soon, and her legal team is trying to preempt it by denying it.
idk how law works, but I don’t know what preempting it is meant to do
- there is supposedly a (plausibly deepfaked) image floating around the boomer side of the internet:
I haven’t seen it nor tried to find it. Last time I checked Facebook, I learned several horrific slurs for ethnic groups I did not even know existed
- Maybe, she finally caught wind of her name being mentioned alongside Epstein
I’ve met people who just check the news and/or the internet once per year, if ever
- Some other Trump administration political strategy
I’m legit not intelligent enough to understand nor recall the explanation there
Probably a legal thing. Photos/Documents may be releasing soon
If not, yeah…
Just more bizarre
Like if I announced:
“I did not rinse my unwashed genitals in the spahetti after I cooked it”
In the middle of a family dinner.
also the fact that BONDI suddenly got fired soon before she was ready to be deposed, and had BLANCHE replace her, this just makes it more suspicious than just bondi, considering blanche has even closer ties with epstein.
No one knows what story she’s denying, or what images she’s claiming are fake. The most likely possibility is that someone is preparing to release a story on the links between her and Epstein. It’s standard practice in journalism to contact the subject of a piece, inform them of the contents of that piece, and offer them an opportunity to comment. A request for comment on an upcoming story seems a likely trigger for this reaction. The entire speech strikes me as a thinly veiled threat, essentially saying “If you publish your story I will sue you for defamation.”
Can’t sue for defamation if the commentary is either true or had reasonable belief to be so
That’s… not how it works. They absolutely can sue, but they’re not supposed to be able to win (or the case ought to be thrown, not completely sure). With all the current bullshit I’m not sure what would happen, though.
While you are pedantically correct, I was speaking with the understanding that frivolous lawsuits can be ignored. Like, you could sue a person you’ve never met for stealing your intellectual property that you don’t have with absolutely no evidence or for wearing a blue shirt but no one would reasonably count those as actual suits.
Defamation requires falsehoods based on precedent and case law so a suit that alleges defamation when the person spoke no lies is not a reasonable suit and doesn’t really count
Well, no, frivolous lawsuits absolutely cannot be ignored. That will result in a summary judgment against you. In fact, the orange shithead became infamous for illegally refusing to pay contractors, then overwhelming them with frivolous lawsuits which would force the victim to back down because they couldn’t afford the legal fees to defend themselves.
Whether the allegation is reasonable or not is irrelevant. If you don’t defend yourself, you lose. If you can’t afford decent representation, you lose. Objective truth doesn’t even count. The wording of the law, whatever precedent exists from previous cases (even if it’s obviously bullshit), and correctly following obtuse rules in how you present your argument are all that matters.
So, call it pedantic if you want, whatever; our legal system just does not work the way you’re implying. At all.
Edit: Even if a lawsuit should obviously be thrown out, the judge generally cannot just do that - your lawyer has to file a motion requesting dismissal. Ignoring it WILL bite you in the ass.
Since it seemed to have still passed under the radar, let me rephrase: they can be ignored when discussing statistics and viable law.
Ofc any actual lawsuit must be literally dealt with through the court system.
But when you’re talking about laws and suits, they do not need to be accounted for on the same level as legitimate cases
Lol
Changing the goalposts? Whatever
