We know Kings of England have committed murders. We know dictators have committed atrocities. We know Germany attempted to get Mexico to attack the US. Should we not talk about those things just because they haven’t been tried in court? No, that would be crazy. We should talk about those things because they did happen and there is evidence.

And there is evidence in this scenario too, is there not?

> And there is evidence in this scenario too, is there not?

Not all evidence is created equal and the situation here where there was a functioning fair court system is quite different from situations where there isn't one. There was definitely some irregularities in the investigation, and a possibility of entrapment.

Regardless, i don't take issue with talking about it, i just take issue with saying he deserves to be punished for it when the allegations were never proven in court. He should be punished for the things its proven he did, not the things he might have done.