No victims or associates testified in the proceedings that led to indictments in the cases, which have been the subject of conspiracy theories pushed by President Trump’s supporters. VP
Archive - https://archive.is/rQSDX
This doesn’t matter, it’s a distraction.
A Grand Jury is there to decide if there’s even enough evidence to bother with a trial in the first place. The only time Grand Juries don’t indict is when even the prosecutor knows it’s pointless but they’ve got to look like they made an attempt.
What is shown to the Grand Jury has little to no bearing on an actual trial, it’s just a first step that ensures time isn’t being blatantly wasted by frivolous charges.
“Although no victims testified in the grand jury proceedings, many later testified at Ms. Maxwell’s 2021 trial in Manhattan, offering accounts consistent with those offered by the agent and the detective, the filing said. It also noted that many victims have made their accounts public in civil litigation.”
So does that mean the NY Times is a Trump supporter since they’re also pushing this conspiracy? It’s quite absurd how often they find themselves on the wrong side of history while still maintaining a “prestigious” reputation.
Reporting the facts = peddling conspiracy theories.
The department’s filing was submitted to two federal judges who are considering recent requests by Attorney General Pam Bondi and her deputy, Todd Blanche, to unseal grand jury transcripts in the Epstein and Maxwell cases.
Its misinformation at best. So what if SA victims didn’t testify directly in the grand jury proceedings? This would be like reporting “No murder victims testified in Ted Bundy grand jury proceedings - only investigators”
A grand jury’s only purpose is to see if there’s enough evidence to proceed with charges and an actual trial. Their headline and byline are worded as if they were charged based on manufactured claims made by government employees. As if some egregious violation occurred here rather than standard procedure.
They’re lending credence to these conspiracy theories by reporting on them as if theyre real news and not just bullshit made up by a certain guilty party that happens to currently be president of the United States.
There have been conspiracy theories concocted, and this article addresses what the filings say about it. It also gives the context that the investigators’ testimony matched up with what witnesses would later say at trial.
Not every piece of news needs to come as part of an opinion piece on how you should feel about it.
Yeah buried down below the headline in small font. We all know most people only read headlines and then walk away. Why even put that garbage in the headline if the body of the article refutes it?
