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
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.
lol the new joke is they waged a war on Iran to make people forget about Epstein but the war was such a catastrophe that they put Epstein back on the table to make people forget about the war
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.
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."
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.
She absolutely did not have sexual relations with these people... uhm mr Epstein, and ms Maxwell, or any of their ephebe escorts, nor passed them along to friends and acquaintances.
64 Comments
SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world · 128 pts · 128d
I wasn't sure if she was guilty or not but after that speech I am.
Bunitonito@lemmy.world · 36 pts · 128d
I think a lot of nuance was lost by her not using her mother tongue. She was Epstein's friend, after all
jobbies@lemmy.zip · 17 pts · 128d
Its 'nonce'. As in 'a lot of nonces'
GargleBlaster@feddit.org · 3 pts · 128d
I think you mean nonsense
jobbies@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 128d
Nonce-sense perhaps
yermaw@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 128d
The world really did go full Brasseye
turtlesareneat@piefed.ca · 22 pts · 128d
I didn't even really consider her involvement until this week, now I am assuming she was in pretty deep
QuantumSparkles@sh.itjust.works · 17 pts · 128d
My "not involved in human trafficking" t-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my t-shirt
pelespirit@sh.itjust.works · 77 pts · 128d
That entire family is so fucking gross.
generallynonsensical@lemmy.world · 47 pts · 128d
zerobot@lemmy.wtf · 22 pts · 128d
makes me feel dirty just thinking about any of them, there is something deeply disgusting about these "people"
TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world · 75 pts · 128d
SirSamuel@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 128d
But I am wearing her underwear
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 128d
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..
zerobot@lemmy.wtf · 39 pts · 128d
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
8oow3291d@feddit.dk · 10 pts · 128d
Anti-SLAPP suit is gearing up very soon: https://feddit.dk/post/20969245/19914002
smuuthbrane@sh.itjust.works · 32 pts · 128d
Come ON, we're SUPPOSED to stop talking about it!!
iThinkDifferentThanU@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 128d
switcheroo@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 128d
None of the other first lady's HAD TO MAKE a speech about not being a sex trafficker...
bstix@feddit.dk · 18 pts · 128d
Neither did she. Apparently she just felt the need to do it for reasons unknown to anyone.
CannonFodder@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 128d
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.
SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social · 2 pts · 127d
That's at least one thing we have in common.
SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social · 3 pts · 128d
Yes, but aren't you glad she did? Because I'm not.
callouscomic@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 128d
Woooooooooosh
Gorilladrums@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 128d
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.
MrNesser@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 128d
First thing I thought was whose got the story and when is it going to drop
Avicenna@programming.dev · 18 pts · 127d
lol the new joke is they waged a war on Iran to make people forget about Epstein but the war was such a catastrophe that they put Epstein back on the table to make people forget about the war
jobbies@lemmy.zip · 17 pts · 128d
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.
mumblerfish@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 128d
-- Melania, probably
redsand@infosec.pub · 6 pts · 128d
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
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 128d
also why Melania hates the other children.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 0 pts · 128d
shes her handler for putin/russia.
sudo@programming.dev · 14 pts · 128d
sex trafficked 🤓
Saprophyte@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 128d
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.
daannii@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 128d
Do you think she plagiarized it or used chatgpt
ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one · 9 pts · 128d
Both!
WhyIHateTheInternet@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 128d
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.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 128d
her cosmetic surgeries arnt cheap.
kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 128d
"She's a movie star" yeah, we know. Lesbian stuff, right? How do you think Jeffrey found her for his boy Donny?
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 128d
well TRUMP did sleep with "movie star" and paid her.
CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net · 8 pts · 128d
I still don't know what story she was denying. What were the images that she was saying were fake?
tourist@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 128d
Muddy waters here
From what I've gathered
idk how law works, but I don't know what preempting it is meant to do
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
I've met people who just check the news and/or the internet once per year, if ever
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:
In the middle of a family dinner.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 127d
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.
CountVon@sh.itjust.works · 11 pts · 128d
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."
DokPsy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 128d
Can't sue for defamation if the commentary is either true or had reasonable belief to be so
forrgott@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 128d
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.
DokPsy@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 127d
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
forrgott@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 127d
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.
DokPsy@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 126d
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
forrgott@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 126d
Lol
Changing the goalposts? Whatever
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 7 pts · 128d
"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.
MTZ@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 127d
Greatest television show in human history.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 127d
also another qoute "what odd thing to say" bart
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 5 pts · 128d
She absolutely did not have sexual relations with these people... uhm mr Epstein, and ms Maxwell, or any of their ephebe escorts, nor passed them along to friends and acquaintances.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 127d
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.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 127d
choosing her, makes people more suspicious about trump, consider shes already being established connection to trump via epstein parties.
lechekaflan@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 128d
She's blyat. 😅
couldhavebeenyou@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 128d
Maybe the child is Epstein's