Donald Trump's child rape case allegations are credible.

Camera Evidence - If this was a high end, sex slavery ring amongst the rich, elite and powerful (remember others accused in Epstein"s sex ring included royalty), it is highly unlikely any home videos would have been made. The sexual assaults were alleged to have taken place in 1994, so CCTV is unlikely to still be around. If either form of video did once exist, it would likely a) have been in the hands of the perpetrators and consequently destroyed upon Epstein"s investigation; b) thrown out when that type of media was converted to DVD, hard drives, etc. Lack of camera evidence is unfortunate but does not prove that no crime took place. Eye witnesses only - We have no idea what evidence may or may not exist. Whilst harder to prove, there are many crimes that get found out & punished after the fact. There may be written evidence or items of clothing stored in an attic, but thats also just speculative. Eye witness accounts should not be dismissed simply because we can't see into people's memories, or else we"d have to dismiss most of human history. I would also like to challenge your opinion that "the only reason somebody would bring this up is to smear Trump's reputation." Many children and teenagers keep quiet about abuse for years or decades, particularly when the abuser is in a position of power over them. Trump was a powerful business man, and supposedly threatened not just the girl but also her family. With the previous failed attempts by alleged victims since the 90s, it would discourage others from speaking up, but perhaps you"re partially right about political motivations. With a real possibility he could become president, perhaps the alleged victim felt her values couldn"t allow that happen and that gave her the strength to speak up now - hypothetically. I"ve copied my argument for warranting an investigation from the other debate - it covers your "final" argument: Less than 1% of rape allegations are falsely made. (Mic - 15/5/13) "Katie Johnson", has made two separate claims about Trump for the same circumstances, the 1st was thrown for administrative reasons after Trump"s lawyer implies the victim doesn"t exist. Upon the second attempt, a witness ("Tiffany Doe", allegedly connected to the already convicted friend of Trump, Epstein) is brought forward to back up the story. (Daily Mail - 29/4/16) This already shows that there is a level of determination by the apparently non-existent victim to pursue this complaint. I would suggest that a hoax wouldn"t bother make a second attempt if already discredited. Trump"s lawyer, Garten, suggests that because the address and telephone aren"t registered to the victim, it implies proof of dishonesty, but when we are also told that they have less than $300 to their name, there is a plausible argument that the victim might not be able to afford a permanent residence or phone contract of their own. An alternative scenario could be that following her time as a "sex slave" she was forced into a life on the streets, therefore giving a friend"s contact details or squatting at the foreclosed house at the time of filling the report. Ethically, should not all alleged crimes be investigated? If there is no evidence or witnesses to prove a connection between the two ladies and Trump, then the case would be dismissed anyway. Is it not a bigger risk to just ignore the allegation? Particularly when Trump has a trail of similar accusations from that time period: His ex wife, Ivana, accused him of "raping" her in 1989. She was later made to sign a gagging order in regards to their marriage, but was granted a divorce on the grounds of "cruel and inhuman treatment" against her by Trump. Even when she retracted her statement, this was not in full, changing the definition of the word rape, from a physical act to an emotional state. Twenty years on a court would probably conclude that the aggressive act, still constitute some form of sexual assault. (Independent - 27/1/16) Jill Harth Houraney accused Trump of sexually assaulting her over a business contract in 1993. It is particularly notable that she said Trump refers to making her his "sex slave" a term used in the Johnson accusations. (NY Daily - 6/5/97) Selina Scott, accused Trump of stalking and sending her abusive correspondence in 1995, after she said "unflattering" things about him in a documentary. (Telegraph - 27/1/16) Aside from these allegations, he also has supported other powerful men accused of similar sex crimes. In 1992, he managed to stop Tyson being imprisoned for rape against a teenager (mother jones - 7/12/15). Defended Herman Cain in 2011 (NY Daily - 2/11/11) and Roger Ailes in 2016 (Rewire - 2/8/16). Trump was also known to say, prior to Epstein"s conviction (of which he only served a fraction of his sentence, part time), that he and Epstein were great friends and shared an interest in young women. When the Cosby allegations were made, Trump"s reaction was particularly worrying as it was not about concern for the truth or justice - he instead made comments to the press that Cosby needed to use better PR because he was handling the situation wrong (eonline - 21/11/14). If we are to have any faith left in our justice systems, we at the very least need to allow the authorities to carry out formal investigations into allegations of any form of abuse or servitude. References: Mic - 15/5/13 - https://mic.com... Daily Mail - 29/4/16 - http://www.dailymail.co.uk... Independent - 27/1/16 - http://www.independent.co.uk... NY Daily - 6/5/97 - http://www.nydailynews.com... Telegraph - 27/1/16 - http://www.telegraph.co.uk... mother jones - 7/12/15 - http://www.motherjones.com... NY Daily - 2/11/11 - http://www.nydailynews.com... Rewire - 2/8/16 - https://rewire.news... eonline - 21/11/14 - http://www.eonline.com...