What? Kidnapping doesn’t only happen to kids, adults can be kidnapped as well. Also if you are dead set on calling it something else it would just be abducted, like she’s a whole person not just a wife.
You really think he EVER got on a boat, with a pregnant woman in labor, or a newly delivered mom, and then went and disposed of the baby?
He was there to fuck underage girls, not play with the consequences. I’m not saying Epstein couldn’t have ordered such done, but think about this, why would Trump have been there? Taking time off the golf course so he could watch a baby get dumped? Just not very plausible given what we know of him.
Let’s pretend for a minute that Maduro’s abduction was actually justified by anything that was given as a reason (spoiler: it’s not). How would that affect his wife still? Being married to a criminal and benefiting from their crimes without participation isn’t illegal.
Its long been illegal to benefit from your spouses crimes.
Calling a dictator’s spouse uninvolved ignores how authoritarian power works. When crimes are public and systemic, knowingly benefiting from the ruler’s wealth and privilege while offering loyalty or silence helps sustain the system, and the law already recognizes this by treating knowing benefit and facilitation as culpable even without direct action.
Ps> re: maduro’s capture. in history only three things have hiatorically stopped a dictator:1 self destruction, 2 people rising up or 3 another country.
why did they “kidnap” his wife too?
Why put “kidnap” in quotes, it’s not as if it’s a wild claim?
It certainly wasn’t lawful in Venezuela, where I believe the kidnapping occurred.
because it actually is a “wifenab” or wifenap but the word doesn’t exist.
it was not a political choice but a linguistic (non)sensibility
What? Kidnapping doesn’t only happen to kids, adults can be kidnapped as well. Also if you are dead set on calling it something else it would just be abducted, like she’s a whole person not just a wife.
yes, “abducted” is surely a better word choice but my comment was a reply to the title. so i used the same word and put it in quotation marks.
Now… why did they abduct a “whole other person” who is Nicolás Maduro’s wife?
Kidnapped had been the appropriate word choice since the mid-1800’s at least.
not sure why we are arguing about word choice? if you understand the intent, just move on… why be critical?
Who happens to be 13?
And pregnant?
And they murdered her baby?
Seriously, this could get real worse real quick.
?
In relation to Trump raping that 13 yo and killing their baby
i feel like i will regret my question but, can you post some links so i can understand what you’re writing about?
(https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet 8/EFTA00025010.pdf)
Trump raped a 13 year old possibly impregnating her and her uncle drowned the baby in lake Michigan while Trump was present.
Someone called the FBI a few years ago and claimed that Trump raped her and killed her kid. Take it as seriously as you would any spurious accusation
No one seriously thinks Trump murdered a baby and dumped it in Lake Michigan or was there when it happened. He’s not got the attention span for that.
Not any more, no.
You really think he EVER got on a boat, with a pregnant woman in labor, or a newly delivered mom, and then went and disposed of the baby?
He was there to fuck underage girls, not play with the consequences. I’m not saying Epstein couldn’t have ordered such done, but think about this, why would Trump have been there? Taking time off the golf course so he could watch a baby get dumped? Just not very plausible given what we know of him.
No, it was a thirteen year old girl. Are you even paying attention?
You know how he said that he could kill someone in the middle of the 5th avenue and get away with it? He was projecting.
Because she’s just as guilty if not more for living off blood money. Or did you give her a pass?
Let’s pretend for a minute that Maduro’s abduction was actually justified by anything that was given as a reason (spoiler: it’s not). How would that affect his wife still? Being married to a criminal and benefiting from their crimes without participation isn’t illegal.
Its long been illegal to benefit from your spouses crimes.
Calling a dictator’s spouse uninvolved ignores how authoritarian power works. When crimes are public and systemic, knowingly benefiting from the ruler’s wealth and privilege while offering loyalty or silence helps sustain the system, and the law already recognizes this by treating knowing benefit and facilitation as culpable even without direct action.
Ps> re: maduro’s capture. in history only three things have hiatorically stopped a dictator:1 self destruction, 2 people rising up or 3 another country.