As the article states, the inclusion of the nudes in the newsletter allows a very clear path for criminal charges in D.C. and Georgia under their respective revenge porn legislation. She should receive charges for both.
In any sane world, a member of congress would be immediately expelled for presenting literal nudes, without permission and in bad faith, of a sitting POTUS' family member, who is not, nor has ever been a member of the administration or government employee.
Congratulations to Vladimir Putin and the CCP, as your work to dismantle the U.S. through propaganda and mainstreaming batshit tinfoil-hat insanity through promoting these ridiculous, unserious elected officials like Greene, Paul, Jordan, Comer, Gaetz, Santos, et al, has been incredibly effective.
Oi nah get fucked mate, you guys took him in yonks ago.
But to be fair i believe he isnt considered 'Australian' or 'American' but more of a 'cunt to all humankind'.
We didn't go far enough. Only supplied non lethal aid the roos and the ostriches after the wild camel cull. The drop bears were trained but I fear we'll pay when they turn against us all.
In any sane world, a member of congress would be immediately expelled for presenting literal nudes, without permission and in bad faith, of a sitting POTUS' family member, who is not, nor has ever been a member of the administration or government employee. of anyone.
Having the prosecution recommend not pressing charges isn't exactly the same thing as the crime literally not happening. That's a bit of an assumption.
If I can make at least 3 assumptions, based on what you've said here, do you think OJ was a murderer?
Or, alternatively, his rich and powerful father used his connections to pressure anyone who could testify to rethink the consequences of their actions. Because rape is okay if you're rich and white.
There's been plenty of evidence that Hunter is creep with minors, just like his daddy creepy Joe. According to this sub, you have to prove innocence, so where is the proof that Hunter didn't?
Your link does not support your claim that it never happened. It does not even address the question of whether or not it happened, the quality of the evidence available, or the reasons why charges were not recommended. You are clearly reading into this article. Why? Bet you don't even know.
According to the article the supposed witnesses were garbage. Even the prosecution thought their testimony wouldn't hold up in court.
Somehow I have to prove a negative, to prove innocence, and yet somehow the parent commenter can make unfounded accusations without proof and be considered legit, worthy of updoinks? You people are in a delusional echo chamber. What a joke of a forum this is.
Wouldn't it be neat if she faced consequences for her actions, instead of the US working overtime to make sure potheads do as much time as they possibly can before they're finally forced to admit they lied about pot