Epstein Files | Ghislaine Maxwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 3K
  • Views: 92K
  • Politics 
lawtig02 said:
Possibility #1: Epstein and Maxwell were trying to confirm nobody would spill their secrets, were happy that Trump had not, and were noting they were 75% through locking up the perpetrators.

Possibility #2: Epstein was emailing in flagrante delicto and could see the finish line.

I'm thinking it was #1, but could have been both.
Click to expand...
I read it differently. "The dog that hasn't barked," the offender that hasn't spoken out, is suspicious. Even though Maxwell/Epstein knew Trump "spent hours" with a victim, he's never once been mentioned as an offender - by the police chief, etc. Epstein is 75% of the way to concluding Trump ratted on him.
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
I read it differently. "The dog that hasn't barked," the offender that hasn't spoken out, is suspicious. Even though Maxwell/Epstein knew Trump "spent hours" with a victim, he's never once been mentioned as an offender - by the police chief, etc. Epstein is 75% of the way to concluding Trump ratted on him.
Click to expand...
Certainly could be. I took Spanish, not Pedo.
 
C-Money said:
For real, why would you not want the files to be released and those involved be prosecuted unless you are one of the people involved?
Click to expand...
I can guarantee you I'm not in the Epstein files.

I do not want them released, at least en masse, because I believe that investigative files should be kept private for the following reasons:

- If investigative files are likely to become public, people will not cooperate with investigations (even as much as they do now)
- Investigations compile and chase down a lot of unverified claims, and rightly so, which means that a lot of unverified claims will appear in investigative files
- Investigative files often don't take any hard/provable stance on the truth of the claims complied within them, which means that a lot of possibly/likely innocent folks will be included in the release of said files

I also think that in this case, the media is in no way, shape, or form competent to understand the Epstein files and will inevitably make a huge fucking mess of whatever they receive (either intentionally or unintentionally).

On the whole, I don't think that releasing the Epstein files will do much of anything except create a lot of innuendo and drama for a lot of probably largely-innocent folks while doing almost nothing to bring forward charges for those who are actually guilty of terrible actions. And, given that belief, I don't think that releasing the Epstein files is in the public good.
 
evrheel said:
www.rawstory.com

'Slander': White House 'rapid response' team struggles as Epstein emails entangle Trump

The White House's so-called rapid response team struggled to defend President Donald Trump after the release of emails from sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.On Wednesday, House Democrats shared emails provided by Epstein's estate that said Trump "knew about the girls" who were being trafficked...
www.rawstory.com www.rawstory.com
Click to expand...
So Leavitt's normal lies are not enough?
She can just say they are fake and yell "FACTS".
 
TangledUpInBlue06 said:
I read it differently. "The dog that hasn't barked," the offender that hasn't spoken out, is suspicious. Even though Maxwell/Epstein knew Trump "spent hours" with a victim, he's never once been mentioned as an offender - by the police chief, etc. Epstein is 75% of the way to concluding Trump ratted on him.
Click to expand...
That is how I read it.
 
OGtruthhurts said:
boy would they have to make some tough decisions if that happened lol bc those so-called christians hate a gay or trans more than anything even more than a gay and trans supporting blue sheep
Click to expand...
They have no standards. Remember they used to claim to be the party of family values, they just dropped that when trump was elected. They didn't try to explain or reconcile, just supported a man that didn't remotely fit their proclaimed position without question.
 
IMG_0952.jpeg


I think he is calling Lauren Boebert, Nancy Mace, MTG and Thomas Massie stupid. I mean, he may have a point.

But they seem to be isolating Boebert as the easiest target to hotbox.
 
Calheel said:
Who do you consider to be the “Biden Administration” (TM)?

Is it any Democrat?

Is New York State AG Letitia James part of the “Biden Administration”?

Is Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg part of the “Biden Administration”?

Is Fulton County DA Fanni Willis part of the “Biden Administration”?

Is special prosecutor Jack Smith part of the “Biden Administration”? (And if so, was Robert Mueller part of the “Trump Administration” in 2017?)

Or when you say “Biden Administration” do you really mean anyone who was going after Trump?
Click to expand...
Artic Ice is showing conclusively that the Biden Administration actively coordinated with DA Bragg and state and county attorneys - even having a hand in drafting the indictments. And you're aware I'm sure that the fourth highest official in the DOJ resigned to take a position in Bragg's DA's office (totally normal and a mere coincidence). Stay tuned for more.
 
Ramrouser said:
Artic Ice is showing conclusively that the Biden Administration actively coordinated with DA Bragg and state and county attorneys - even having a hand in drafting the indictments. And you're aware I'm sure that the fourth highest official in the DOJ resigned to take a position in Bragg's DA's office (totally normal and a mere coincidence). Stay tuned for more.
Click to expand...
1762975444640.gif
 
nycfan said:


Hahaha yeah this was obvious. Lutnick went from 24/7 media hits to gagged.
Click to expand...

🎁 —> The President’s Most Annoying Buddy

“… “In the six to eight steps it takes to get from his house to my house, my wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again,” Lutnick said. His claim that Epstein’s creepiness was obvious called into question efforts by the White House to assert that Trump couldn’t have known that Epstein, his former friend, was a sexual predator who abused young girls. Lutnick also suggested that Epstein probably had recordings of many of his associates who’d gotten massages at his home, calling the late convict the “greatest blackmailer ever.”

The interview made the president and his top aides “go nuclear,” another Trump confidant told us, because it brought renewed attention to an issue that the White House has been trying to bury amid bipartisan calls for greater transparency. Even some of Trump’s most devoted backers have demanded that the Justice Department turn over what it knows about the identities of Epstein’s high-profile clients.

… Nearly everyone we spoke with conceded that Lutnick still holds sway with the president, the most valuable asset in this administration.…”
 
Gmonet said:
I'm sure that there are democrats involved. Almost certainly it played a part in not publicizing the full report earlier.

However, given:
1 - the birthday card (and other cards showing Mar-A-Lago)
2 - Trump's recorded statements about his friend (liking young girls)
3 - Maxwell's e-mail about Trump spending hours with one of the girls
4 - likely photos of Trump with naked Epstein girls
5 - Maxwell's unprecedentedly lax treatment as a convicted sex offender
6 - Trump's numerous/creepy statements about 'grabbing pussy'/his daughter/going backstage at teen beauty pageants
7 - Trump appointing the US Attorney who gave Epstein a sweetheart plea deal to his cabinet
8 - more that I'm not remembering offhand

What chances would a reasonable person give that he had sex with a underage prostitute? 50%? 70%? Even downplaying all the wildly coincidental evidence showing his lechery/desire to cover up clear connections to Epstein, it seems 25% would be the low end.

You should probably just go ahead and admit you're comfortable throwing your unquestioned support behind a possible/probable pedophile and be done with it.
Click to expand...
If #4 is true or if there is concrete evidence of Trump's sexual involvement with a minor, then I will disavow Trump and call for his resignation. Most of MAGA would as well. But....it's not going to happen.
 
SnoopRob said:
I can guarantee you I'm not in the Epstein files.

I do not want them released, at least en masse, because I believe that investigative files should be kept private for the following reasons:

- If investigative files are likely to become public, people will not cooperate with investigations (even as much as they do now)
- Investigations compile and chase down a lot of unverified claims, and rightly so, which means that a lot of unverified claims will appear in investigative files
- Investigative files often don't take any hard/provable stance on the truth of the claims complied within them, which means that a lot of possibly/likely innocent folks will be included in the release of said files

I also think that in this case, the media is in no way, shape, or form competent to understand the Epstein files and will inevitably make a huge fucking mess of whatever they receive (either intentionally or unintentionally).

On the whole, I don't think that releasing the Epstein files will do much of anything except create a lot of innuendo and drama for a lot of probably largely-innocent folks while doing almost nothing to bring forward charges for those who are actually guilty of terrible actions. And, given that belief, I don't think that releasing the Epstein files is in the public good.
Click to expand...
These strike me as legit concerns
(Like releasing a file of informed speculation about Russian influence in our elections?)
The very notion that “name X appears in the Epstein files” seems sort of silly. That does not suggest guilt.
Of course they won’t ask my opinion on what is correct, so I can also root for the whole thing to drive Trump (more) inane
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top