Ghislaine Maxwell Trial

[Thistle]

Well she has come a long way in a short amount of time and the reason probably has more to do with Daddy than anything else. She has a parental advantage. If it was a race her start point would be one foot from the finish while the rest would be a mile out. How hard is it to get into Harvard Law School? Practically impossible for normal folks. 32 years old and heads a Dept? That kinda irks me because I bet there were 100 students who were more qualified than her.

You mean she didn't really get in because she was supervisor of equipment for the chess club?

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) accidentally revealed more than 2,000 flight records connected to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s private jets, over 700 of which were previously unknown, according to Insider.

As Ghislaine Maxwell Trial Opens - FAA Accidentally Reveals Over 700 Previous Unknown Jeffrey Epstein Flights | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

As the trial for Ghislaine Maxwell opens, the Federal Aviation Administration accidentally revealed data on over 700 previous unknown Jeffrey Epstein flights on private jets.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Hawvud University provided Epstein with free office space. Must have needed it for his travel agency.

 

[Furion]

That's the important thing… Apparently.

I mean they scrubbed the giant, stinky turd Billy Clinton from any consequences.

Surely vibise thinks he is innocent, and Bonnie's fact checking would allegedly prove it.

The faux Innocent must he protected so they can harm the actual innocents.

 

[Harry Leggs]

You mean she didn't really get in because she was supervisor of equipment for the chess club?

Did you know they never offered Maxwell a plea deal? Maxwell knows the guest list including Clinton and the Prince and all that are connected.

 

[Thistle]

I mean they scrubbed the giant, stinky turd Billy Clinton from any consequences.

Surely vibise thinks he is innocent, and Bonnie's fact checking would allegedly prove it.

The faux Innocent must he protected so they can harm the actual innocents.

The left's reliance on fake fact checking is proof positive that they have completely lost their tentative tethered to reality. For more on that you might find this interesting:

 

[Thistle]

Did you know they never offered Maxwell a plea deal? Maxwell knows the guest list including Clinton and the Prince and all that are connected.

Oh I'm sure they did. Assuming she hasn't excepted it, that's a good sign. We can only hope that she shatters every piece of China in the china shop.

 

[Harry Leggs]

Oh I'm sure they did. Assuming she hasn't excepted it, that's a good sign. We can only hope that she shatters every piece of China in the china shop.

Still no plea deal for Ghislaine Maxwell, who heads to trial next week

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday said they’re still not offering Ghislaine Maxwell a plea deal, paving the way for her long-anticipated sex-trafficking trial to begin next week.

nypost.com

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday said they’re still not offering Ghislaine Maxwell a plea deal, paving the way for her long-anticipated sex-trafficking trial to begin next week.

 

[Thistle]

Still no plea deal for Ghislaine Maxwell, who heads to trial next week

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday said they’re still not offering Ghislaine Maxwell a plea deal, paving the way for her long-anticipated sex-trafficking trial to begin next week.

nypost.com

Federal prosecutors on Tuesday said they’re still not offering Ghislaine Maxwell a plea deal, paving the way for her long-anticipated sex-trafficking trial to begin next week.

Isn't the woke left going to rush to her defense and turn her into the next Gloria Steinem? For the record I'm all for throwing her a lifeline so that she can turn states evidence on all the people who really need to be reported.

 

[Harry Leggs]

Isn't the woke left going to rush to her defense and turn her into the next Gloria Steinem? For the record I'm all for throwing her a lifeline so that she can turn states evidence on all the people who really need to be reported.

Besides prosecution, they are attempting to prevent her from outing all the privileged culprits when their job should be extracting all the information possible and making it available. It is political.

 

[Thistle]

Besides prosecution, they are attempting to prevent her from outing all the privileged culprits when their job should be extracting all the information possible and making it available. It is political.

That is a fact!

 

[DeSanto]

No, there aren't.

Wym? Of course there are! I watched a trial where this guy was defending himself in court and he cross examined his own minor son, who watched his father murder his mother, and the the video just blurred out the minor son. You could at least hear what the boy was saying, though.

It didn’t effect the outcome of the trial at all.

Remember: the accused has the right to confront his/her accuser. Try making the trial public while hiding the identity of the accusers; the mistrial would be instantaneous.
And if the trial is public, those victims who were already hesitant to speak in front of the public will never testify.

 

[DeSanto]

The left's reliance on fake fact checking is proof positive that they have completely lost their tentative tethered to reality. For more on that you might find this interesting:

I really like that channel.

Just saying

 

[DeSanto]

While were talking about important lawsuits being downplayed in the media...

Let’s us not forget about Assange. Who, I believe, has pertinent information relevant to the Maxwell case which is probably what has kept him alive this long.

The UK High Court is expected to rule on the Assange appeal within the next couple days. You would think this would be headline news. But no.

 

[Thistle]

I really like that channel.

Just saying

The YouTube algorithm apparently knows that that's the sort of thing that I would be interested in.

 

[Thistle]

While were talking about important lawsuits being downplayed in the media...

Let’s us not forget about Assange. Who, I believe, has pertinent information relevant to the Maxwell case which is probably what has kept him alive this long.

The UK High Court is expected to rule on the Assange appeal within the next couple days. You would think this would be headline news. But no.

I wouldn't know a thing about it if you didn't just tell me right now.

 

[DeSanto]

I wouldn't know a thing about it if you didn't just tell me right now.

Also Today... SCOTUS will hear oral arguments in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, concerning Mississippi’s ban on all abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. It is not an overstatement to say that the Dobb’s case is quite possibly the most important abortion challenge heard by the supreme court since the Roe v. Wadelegalized abortion in 1973.

So, what makes this case so different?
Rather than the court judging a state law which impedes women from obtaining abortions (such as the recent Texas fetal heartbeat bill) the Dobbs case directly challenges the underlying logic of the initial Roe v. Wade decision. In Both Roe as well as the 1992 supreme court case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the supreme court had previously ruled that states could not make laws that places “undo burden” upon a women obtaining abortions before the point of “fetal viability," determined to be at approximately 24 weeks of gestation. The Mississippi law outright banned abortions after 15 weeks--well before the point of viability--placing the state law in direct conflict with both the Roe and Caseyrulings. Consequently, this case has presented the supreme court with the opportunity to re-evaluate the flawed logic of those previous rulings.

That the supreme court chose to hear the arguments of Dobbs is history-making evidence that it is willing to re-evaluate its previous decisions, an act that will have long standing consequences on court decisions beyond abortion. Both sides of the abortion debate recognize Dobbs presents an “all or nothing” proposition to the court. If the court upholds the Mississippi law it would essentially overturn both Roeand Casey --a stunning admission of the limitations of the court’s authority to create rights and laws beyond the legislative branch. Alternatively, if the court strikes down the law it would re-affirm the authority of the supreme court to define abortion as a legitimate right protected under law. Should the former happen, at least 20 states are poised to immediately make abortion illegal. Should the latter happen, it will make it almost insurmountably difficult to formally overturn Roe in future challenges. For better or worse, the court’s decision in Dobbs will determine the course of how the pro-life movement will approach abortion in the justice system.

All that is left for us to do now is pray.

 

[Thistle]

Also Today... SCOTUS will hear oral arguments in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, concerning Mississippi’s ban on all abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. It is not an overstatement to say that the Dobb’s case is quite possibly the most important abortion challenge heard by the supreme court since the Roe v. Wadelegalized abortion in 1973.

So, what makes this case so different?
Rather than the court judging a state law which impedes women from obtaining abortions (such as the recent Texas fetal heartbeat bill) the Dobbs case directly challenges the underlying logic of the initial Roe v. Wade decision. In Both Roe as well as the 1992 supreme court case Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the supreme court had previously ruled that states could not make laws that places “undo burden” upon a women obtaining abortions before the point of “fetal viability," determined to be at approximately 24 weeks of gestation. The Mississippi law outright banned abortions after 15 weeks--well before the point of viability--placing the state law in direct conflict with both the Roe and Caseyrulings. Consequently, this case has presented the supreme court with the opportunity to re-evaluate the flawed logic of those previous rulings.

That the supreme court chose to hear the arguments of Dobbs is history-making evidence that it is willing to re-evaluate its previous decisions, an act that will have long standing consequences on court decisions beyond abortion. Both sides of the abortion debate recognize Dobbs presents an “all or nothing” proposition to the court. If the court upholds the Mississippi law it would essentially overturn both Roeand Casey --a stunning admission of the limitations of the court’s authority to create rights and laws beyond the legislative branch. Alternatively, if the court strikes down the law it would re-affirm the authority of the supreme court to define abortion as a legitimate right protected under law. Should the former happen, at least 20 states are poised to immediately make abortion illegal. Should the latter happen, it will make it almost insurmountably difficult to formally overturn Roe in future challenges. For better or worse, the court’s decision in Dobbs will determine the course of how the pro-life movement will approach abortion in the justice system.

All that is left for us to do now is pray.

Yes I was aware of this case I didn't know exactly where we were in the process will be interesting to get some reports on those oral arguments. If they overturn Roe it'll be interesting to see what supreme court nomination hearings in the sun it sounds like. Since 74 it's been a lot of discussion about stare decisis.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Maxwell smarts.
In some convoluted way the deep state will try to wrestle some political angle on this matter.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Yes, and that's the way this trial should be conducted. Imagine what would happen if muck-raking partisans got their hands on the identities of the molestation victims.

The left winger prosecutor has to protect the left winger male perverts.

 

[wiseones2cents]

What???? The super rich indulge in immorality? Say it ain't so!!

They are the pillars of our society and poster boys for capitalist wealth!!