Epstein Files | Ghislaine Maxwell

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 75K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
If Maxwell has anything approaching competent counsel, they will get the full pardon in hand before they play ball. Maybe they will agree to delay the announcement but Maxwell is 63. She wants to spend three and a half more years in jail to help Trump?

I don't see the parameters for a deal. Especially since, I would imagine, she might still have state level liability. If for nothing else, for bribery.
Click to expand...
I dunno. If the deal is "sign this affidavit that says you never saw Donald Trump touch an underage girl and in exchange the President will commute your sentence" I find it hard to see what the downside for Ghislaine would be. Who cares if she could be separately brought up on state charges? That can already happen anyway. if the choice is living in jail or out of jail, seems pretty obvious. Hell, she can probably make a fortune by going on a barnstorming tour after she gets out talking about how the corrupt media persecuted her and Trump, if she wants to.
 
So, if Bondi knew Trump was in those files since back in May, and Johnson clearly knows Trump is in those files, it's well within reason to believe that Trump's entire cabinet now knows that he's in those files. Therefore, IF Trump's name ends up being associated with any illegal actions or associations within those files, then all of these people (based on their rhetoric and their actions currently) are unequivocally aiding and abetting ("protecting") a known pedophile.

Given that they want to indict former-president Biden's cabinet for "protecting" a man in decline by not coming forth with what they knew about his mental state during the 2024 election cycle, then it's no stretch at all to say that—IF this Epstein stuff turns out to be true—Trump's entire cabinet should duly be indicted for aiding and abetting a known pedophile, who also happens to be president. Right?

And if that's the case, it shouldn't take a Rhoades scholar to realize which one of these misdeeds is way, WAY worse.

I swear the entire lot of these Trump cohorts are absolute bilge water. They ARE the swamp.
 
BlueSteel said:
So, if Bondi knew Trump was in those files since back in May, and Johnson clearly knows Trump is in those files, it's well within reason to believe that Trump's entire cabinet now knows that he's in those files. Therefore, IF Trump's name ends up being associated with any illegal actions or associations within those files, then all of these people (based on their rhetoric and their actions currently) are unequivocally aiding and abetting ("protecting") a known pedophile.

Given that they want to indict former-president Biden's cabinet for "protecting" a man in decline by not coming forth with what they knew about his mental state during the 2024 election cycle, then it's no stretch at all to say that—IF this Epstein stuff turns out to be true—Trump's entire cabinet should duly be indicted for aiding and abetting a known pedophile, who also happens to be president. Right?

And if that's the case, it shouldn't take a Rhoades scholar to realize which one of these misdeeds is way, WAY worse.

I swear the entire lot of these Trump cohorts are absolute bilge water. They ARE the swamp.
Click to expand...
From a moral perspective, you're right about their complicity, but from a legal perspective, knowing about a supposed crime (or evidence relevant to a potential crime) and not saying anything about it is not sufficient to give rise to your own criminal liability for aiding and abetting. That's even assuming that whatever is in the files actually tends to show that Trump committed a crime, versus just showing how often he hung out/partied with Epstein generally. And without getting into various immunity issues for government figures.

Your last sentence is dead on. But you can't out-Trump Trump by threatening to counter his baseless legal claims with even more baseless claims of your own.
 
Carolina Fever said:
There are probably Dems involved, too. Don't care. If they were involved with sex trafficking and pedophilia then they should be brought to justice. And some people will just have to be sacrificed to get rid of Trump.
Click to expand...
Absoluetly
I do however think there will not much-even about orangeturd-other than porn parties etc
I am sure Bondi has purged a lot
 
rodoheel said:
I honestly don't think they'll see the need to go to such efforts to hide the quid pro quo. (Nor do I think Maxwell and her counsel will accept an "IOU" from Trump of all people.) They'll just announce that she's been pardoned or her sentence commuted or whatever and MAGA won't give two craps about the obvious quid pro quo.
Click to expand...

You're probably right.
 
rodoheel said:
I always get a kick out of listening to Mullin speak. He's about as intelligent as you would expect a guy named "Markwayne" to be.
Click to expand...
And hailing from the very red and very-consistently-ranked-among-the-bottom-states-for-education State of Oklahoma.
 
rodoheel said:
From a moral perspective, you're right about their complicity, but from a legal perspective, knowing about a supposed crime (or evidence relevant to a potential crime) and not saying anything about it is not sufficient to give rise to your own criminal liability for aiding and abetting. That's even assuming that whatever is in the files actually tends to show that Trump committed a crime, versus just showing how often he hung out/partied with Epstein generally. And without getting into various immunity issues for government figures.

Your last sentence is dead on. But you can't out-Trump Trump by threatening to counter his baseless legal claims with even more baseless claims of your own.
Click to expand...
Hence exactly why I said: "Therefore, IF Trump's name ends up being associated with any illegal actions or associations within those files"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top