He certainly had a say in his life, but the Democratic-run schools certainly didn’t put him on a path to a better life. Democratic-backed public housing didn’t help. Democrats encouraging divorce, infidelity, etc. didn’t help keep his father around. He was the kind of person that the Democrats make, and the fact that they were able to do this to a child who entered this world perfectly innocent… to mold him into a tool of evil… that’s a tragedy.
To answer why, this is an attempt to confuse civil and criminal burdens. In a civil case the fact that a crimes was committed can be determined by a preponderance of the evidence (for the purposes of the civil case). They want to get away with doing that in a criminal case where they have to prove the predicate beyond a reasonable doubt.
There has to be proof of at least one predicate crime, the issue arises when there is proof of multiple possible predicates. The Judge’s idea is that they can all agree “a” predicate was provided beyond a reasonable doubt, but which? If they can’t agree on which, then it’s hard to say any one of them believes the predicate beyond a reasonable doubt.
This is hyper technically right but misses the boat. Every juror need only believe it beyond a reasonable doubt as to the particular predicate crime they think he was trying to hide… they could theoretically all be in agreement that he was trying to hide a crime and disagree on which crime.
But if they disagree on which crime, then no one juror can believe it beyond a reasonable doubt. They’re in a jury and fellow jurors disagree.
The best way to address this is to give this instruction and poll the jurors on the predicate crime. If they disagree then throw out the verdict.
They (with some exceptions) aren’t hiding. The kids go to schools. The parents have bank accounts. They rent apartments and buy houses and cars, by undergoing credit and background checks and by taking out loans.
There are still a lot using fake identities, living on cash, and trying to stay off the grid, but that’s more of a red flag than anything. It’s very hard to rotate burner phones and work / commit crime, without associating the device with your location/ identity.
When Clinton was President, Epstein trafficked children.
When Bush was President, Epstein trafficked children.
When Obama was President, Epstein trafficked children.
When Trump was President, Epstein died in a jail cell.
The awakening we need is that we don’t elect the president. States have no constitutional obligation to have anyone on any ballot. They can and do routinely ignore the results. The only real Presidential election is the one that occurs Jan 6, when the VP counts electoral votes. If you’re not an elector, you don’t have a vote.
There’s nothing wrong with the executive branch doing what the executive wants. The problem is with Presidents pretending their DOJ is independent in order to do things that the public doesn’t want and for which they’re unwilling to take responsibility for.
If they disagree as to each possible predicate, then there’s reasonable doubt as to all. That’s what disagreeing means.