>>510774285
Ah, so they're the REAL pedos, and that's why they decided to fabricate a story with no evidence at all! They're definitely the pedos.

>>510774298
I'm sure they do, but I don't think they'd run a story with such specific allegations as an excuse for a fishing expedition, because even with discovery they'd still lose if it were BS. If there were no evidence then it'd be pretty easy for Trump's lawyers to meet the 'actual malice' standard for stories about a public figure. The only legally safe way for the WSJ to publish is if they have the goods to back up their claim.

>>510774260
>I wouldn't give one single tinkers damn if he said yeah I did it. And fuck you. I would cheer for him.
Finally a pedophile who cares about us!