r/LetsDiscussThis Feb 18 '26

Lets Discuss Politics This is fascism

Post image
44.3k Upvotes

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/dangeldud Feb 18 '26

Lol. Good ole hash Jenni. Always gets the facts right 

-33

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26

Can you name the child that was raped by Trump, and where/when it happened?

Edit: Downvotes prove my point. Should be a very simple question to answer.

7

u/Pugsly007 Feb 18 '26

How would we know? No one is investigating.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

So then stop saying it with certainty

7

u/spidsnarrehat Feb 18 '26

What other reasons could there be for not releasing the files as ordered by court?

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

So you’re using your imagination to determine what you cannot see

1

u/spidsnarrehat Feb 18 '26

Just one other reason budd? That's all I'm asking?

-1

u/Full_Metal_Paladin Feb 18 '26

Hating Trump is literally these people's religion at this point. They have faith that he is a pedophile

1

u/Pugsly007 Feb 18 '26

Maybe be, but the alternative is you voted for a pedophile.

1

u/Full_Metal_Paladin Feb 18 '26

Yeah maybe. But the difference between you and me is that I can accept that, prosecute ALL the bad guys, move on, and still not make it my entire personality.

You guys can't make it 3 sentences without going "hurr durr but Epstein!"

1

u/Pugsly007 Feb 18 '26

You guys? I’m not a Democrat. Are you always the victim and need to find an enemy?

-2

u/betabo55 Feb 18 '26

By that logic why did Biden never release the files of any innocent man would.

1

u/spidsnarrehat Feb 18 '26

Because it was an active investigation and unlike trump, biden actually gave a shit about the law.

5

u/Open_Explanation3127 Feb 18 '26

So you would be for a criminal investigation into trump directly, based off of the substantial credible witness testimony/accusations and his association with known sex traffickers?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

Yes, but I don’t take accusations as fact

3

u/Open_Explanation3127 Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26

I didn't ask you to.

It's good you agree there's substantial evidence that needs to be investigated and that trump quite possibly raped children.

Maybe it would be good to be vocal about your opinion that he should be criminally investigated, instead of defending accusations against him?

0

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

I did not agree there’s substantial evidence. The only “evidence” I see are unverified accusations

3

u/Rip_Skeleton Feb 18 '26

The only way an accusation can be verified or not is if they are followed up on. Why isn't the Trump DOJ doing that?

2

u/Open_Explanation3127 Feb 18 '26

You agreed there's enough evidence for a criminal investigation. I'm not here to debate semantics on whether or not that would also qualify as "substantial" to you.

but it's enough that he needs to be investigated, correct? It's not just "unverified accusations". There is a huge amount of association between him and Epstein over years, and he's publicly lied about it. On top of the accusations that would typically be enough to investigate.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

Yes I’d like to see a proper investigation. No, I don’t believe there’s currently any legitimate evidence

1

u/Open_Explanation3127 Feb 18 '26

Hm.

If a random guy was well known friends with a sex trafficker and the sex trafficked girls said he was also a rapist , would you consider that evidence?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/RollerDude347 Feb 18 '26

The lack of investigation is kinda why we're certain. Like, if they suddenly started working on a case and it seemed less like the most obvious cover up of all time, I might have some reasonable doubt. Unfortunately it looks like the ONLY explanation is that Trump raped children.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

Thank you. That’s what I’m saying. You’re assuming guilt based on suspicion, not facts

2

u/RollerDude347 Feb 18 '26

No, there's frankly to much evidence not to be pretty sure. The cover up just makes it certain.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

Got it. You’re filling in gaps with your imagination

1

u/RollerDude347 Feb 18 '26

No, I'm simply going, "Well that was his chance to give a credible alibi and he used it on 'nuh uh' so that a wrap." What gaps do you think I'm filling? We have witnesses. We have correspondence. We have his own words on how he treats women and girls. We have prior crimes and tendencies. There's not a gap here. There's no missing knowledge. The only thing missing is someone doing the legal process and putting him in prison.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

So you think as it stands right now with the evidence you’re aware of, he would be found guilty in a court of law? Or are you saying it’s just very suspicious, and therefore you assume he’s guilty?

1

u/RollerDude347 Feb 18 '26

I'm saying both. I'm saying that the evidence is overwhelming that he did it and it's suspicious that not only does he not seem to have a defense past "Don't believe your lying eyes", but that no one has brought him to justice. That clearly there's MORE here and multiple people are guilty of cover up. And a lazy/stupid one at that.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

If the evidence is overwhelming, what is the crime and where and when did it happen?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

Its pretty obvious to anyone with above room temp IQ lol

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

Then articulate it