So you think Epstein, worth hundreds of millions for decades, and convicted of felonies, has only one file? No that is not possible.So there might be only one file, right?
As I said, I do not know how many files there were before you stole some, or how many there are now, but if there are not a huge number, you stole a huge number.
The grand jury would have been laser focussed on getting an indictment against Epstein, with no desire to go past that, or to muddy the waters with other people.Everything you are saying could potentially be valid if you were demanding the release of the Epstein grand jury testimony instead of demanding the public release of a hoax.
If it is a hoax, we should both want it released so the hoaxers can be tracked down. It should be easy to do.
trump was clearly a major part of Epstein's life, and business, so he will be in Epstein's files. We already know he was in the files that were released. If he is not in the rest of the files, we know that the files have been edited.Trump was not.
You are even wrong here. Beyond a reasonable doubt is 99%, 99.9%, or 99.99% sure. It would not be beyond a shadow of a doubt, which would be 100%. The 10 witnesses can all be wrong. The person could have an identical twin brother no one knew about. An infinite number of reasons that can get someone convicted beyond a reasonable doubt --- Including a mistake by the jury of what is reasonable doubt --- that could all lead to a wrong conviction without any dishonesty.Only through dishonesty can something that did not occur nonetheless be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
trump has worked hard to get reasonable doubt. There is an obvious question of what sort of innocent person tries to create reasonable doubt with how he handled children. Most innocent people would try to create certainty they did nothing wrong.
Reasonable doubt is not innocent.