Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "10-Yr-Old Abortion Seeker's Rapist ARRESTED. Emily Jashinsky Emphasizes Critique Of One-Source Story" video.

Bravo. Good job on this, guys. You did the right thing, and this correction was spot on. The questions you raised in the first report were valid. This is a child, and her welfare was at no point made paramount by anyone. This is what we can expect to see when we withdraw basic rights from anyone.
8
She did a very good job, for the most part, absolutely. And a lot of the points from their first segment stand: if everyone in the media and politics actually made the wellbeing of this CHILD paramount, as they all should have, this would never have happened in the first place. As matters stand, absent a confession and forensic evidence, a lot of ghouls would still be saying the story was a "hoax." This is unconscionable.
5
@nnenne4 AMEN and THANK YOU. This is becoming disgusting, literally.
4
EXACTLY. The question why the White House did not reach out first, before USING the story, stands. The welfare of the CHILD is paramount. Was it made paramount? No excuses, for anybody.
4
THIS segment is excellent.
2
@pmberkeley She couldn't immediately corroborate it, which should have been possible. No one put the poor child's interests paramount. I don't say this as apologetics for Emily. I've caught her in mistakes, am not a fan of hers, and agree with you, basically. Unfortunately this time, several of her basic points stand. That is what is truly shocking. I'm very angry. And I haven't forgotten Trump appointed Acosta (of Epstein fame) to be Labor Secretary. Roe v. Wade wasn't a principle of privacy but of self-defense.
2
@josephclements2145 That's not funny.
2
@josephclements2145 Anyone who thinks this is not Epstein's joint, still, is overly optimistic.
2
@OnimenoJason Except that when the story surfaced, the AG had no corroborating information AND an Ohio Congressman called the whole thing a hoax. In that atmosphere, would you have preferred to wait a week to see what happens, or to take your daughter to another state and have the procedure completed according to the timetable you had already set?
2
@pmberkeley THANK YOU
2
This was well done.
2
@SteveJonesOwnsDSP The report could not be corroborated. But more important, MUCH more important, the welfare of this CHILD should have been paramount, and no one made it paramount. Brie was right that the White House did not reach out first to the family, before USING the story. See, this why curtailing RIGHTS to personal autonomy is bad. You don't want politicians deciding. You don't want media weighing in.
2
@skiman863 How so? How was it that the Ohio AG had no immediate corroboration, and an Ohio congressman called the whole thing a hoax? EVERYONE should have known, from Biden on down, precisely WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CHILD.
1
@skiman863 So . . . The child's family only "felt" they needed to leave Ohio. Is that your central point? Who knows why they "felt" that way? Perhaps they are "snowflakes?" /s
1
@pmberkeley All in all, I have to say Emily did a very good job on this, and Briahna even more so. Which is a BIG story in itself. I'm so disgusted.
1
@Dr.Frankensteen If they were unaware of the case, they may have been unaware of the exception to the ban for her as well. Or the clinic where the procedure was scheduled may have had a temporary moratorium pending a legal opinion from their counsel. Say. How is it that so few people can THINK any more? Maybe stuff like literature and philosophy have a purpose after all? Just a stab in the dark, who knows.
1
@cabney7726 THANK YOU
1
This was done well. Most of their points stand.
1
@RossM3838 Not even where children are concerned. Biden's posturing was repulsive. BTW: Remember Acosta (of Epstein fame) was Secretary of Labor.
1
@jcmeadows1 Single-source is not verification. That was the point.
1