This keeps getting mentioned on these threads and the fact that it is from deposition testimony—serious lawyer stuff!—is invoked to lend it gravitas. But if you’re going to imply that a claim is credible because it came up in a certain formal legal context, you can’t ignore how the legal system treats that context.
Yes, some guy testified under oath in a deposition that Jeffrey Epstein told him that Bill Clinton likes young women. But in the legal system, that testimony is absolutely worthless and would be rightly excluded from any trial.
The technical reason is that it’s hearsay. Basically, it’s someone passing off a rumor as evidence of the rumor’s truth. And the American legal system assigns zero weight to hearsay testimony because it’s so unreliable and easy to fabricate. It’s possible this guy’s lying, of course, but fundamentally he’s just passing off a rumor he heard from someone else, about which has no personal knowledge that would allow him to confirm or deny its truth.
So maybe there’s some fire to this smoke and notorious poon hound Bill Clinton turns out to be an even bigger creep than we all assumed he was. Could be. But the deposition testimony that folks keep citing is completely worthless. It’s just a game of telephone, wrapped up with a fancy courtroom bow on it.