I am afraid all of them dance around the central issue, which is the good Congressman knows how due process works in America. There are facts that are adduced first. There is an opportunity to be heard on both sides. There is due process. There is consideration. Then there is judgment. The gentleman has flipped the whole thing on its head. He has said we are going to judge her guilty before anybody has an opportunity even to hear what the charges are, much less answer the charges, much less do any kind of analysis. I am sorry to hear that the text exchange that seems to be at the heart of people's consternation here took place during the distinguished gentleman's questioning, but that is not a Federal offense nor is it an ethical violation in the House of Representatives. You don't get to have the undivided attention of all of your colleagues. The gentleman says that he thinks that our position is that any association with Jeffrey Epstein is a dispositive moment of judgment for people. That is not the position we have advanced. We have taken the position with the survivors that we want to end the coverup of what happened and then let the chips fall where they may. If there are people who were actually engaged in crime, as Ghislaine Maxwell was, as Epstein was, then they should be charged with every element of due process.
Jamie Raskin: “I am afraid all of them dance around the central issue, which is the good Congressman knows how due process works in…”
Editor's note · Context
Addressing due process and the treatment of allegations related to Jeffrey Epstein during a debate.
Share
More from Jamie Raskin
While President Trump fumbles his disastrous and illegal war of choice in Iran, prosecutes his perceived political enemies and sends masked federal agents into our communities, Team Maryland is fighting to defend our freedom and to make…
Specifically, we have information that a Florida man living temporarily in Washington, D.C., may have illegally bulldozed and destroyed the East Wing of the White House, causing hundreds of millions of dollars of damage there.
“In every other part of the federal government, taking lavish gifts from interested parties is called corruption—but at the Supreme Court, it’s bizarrely been treated as a job perk.





