So she wants evidence destroyed damaging any civil recourse victims may have had against those involved. Talk about someone who should not have any form of construct immunity
Maybe I'm literally the devil's advocate here, but isn't there something to be said about legal procedure and what counts as evidence?
We do not know how the material was compiled or on what basis.
There is a lot at stage here. And we can't let questionable evidence taint the process.
it was enough for the Steele Dossier to start a witch hunt on the president of the mofugging united states. A few pedos can be brought down with something less.
So she wants evidence destroyed damaging any civil recourse victims may have had against those involved. Talk about someone who should not have any form of construct immunity
Maybe I'm literally the devil's advocate here, but isn't there something to be said about legal procedure and what counts as evidence? We do not know how the material was compiled or on what basis. There is a lot at stage here. And we can't let questionable evidence taint the process.
it was enough for the Steele Dossier to start a witch hunt on the president of the mofugging united states. A few pedos can be brought down with something less.
Innocent people could be brought down with something less too. So could the president.
What if someone on that list falsely accused the president? Should it be taken as truth?
Or should justice be done through a rigorous process?