Epstein Files | WSJ releases 50th bday letter from Trump to Epstein

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 887
  • Views: 21K
  • Politics 
finesse said:
Been of that mind since the early 80s. Grew up a staunch supporter. They've used us as a shield too often, sold too many of our secrets and have largely became the people they once despised. I don't know of a thing that we have gotten from them that's worth it.

Also, there's a good chance I'd like them less if the fog of war ever lifted off the USS Liberty incident.
Click to expand...
And none of what you said even touches on Jonathan Pollard, who sold secrets to Israel about the patrol paths of US ballistic missile submarines. And in turn Israel traded this information to the Soviet Union in exchange for the Soviets allowing Jewish Russian nuclear weapons scientists to emigrate to Israel so Israel could greatly improve its nuclear weapons. Supposedly, during the Clinton administration, Bill Clinton temtatively agreed to release Pollard early to Israel in exchange for concessions from Israel. But national security experts briefed Clinton on what Pollard had actually done and its repercussions and Clinton nixed the deal.
 
Kingpin said:
It’s the latter. I suspect some Dems (eg Clinton) and big political donors might be in there too. Or as has been speculated, sensitive security issues (spy stuff), or both.
Click to expand...
Nah. And if Epstein was on the payroll from a foreign country, it was almost surely Russia. In fact, if you substitute "Epstein tapes" for "pee tapes," you have a complete explanation for all of Trump's sycophancy to Putin.
 
thebruinbleedstarheelblue said:
especially #2
Click to expand...
I will answer this when I get time. From a practical viewpoint, didn't the Journal say they got the letter directly from Maxwell's camp? If so, then Maxwell was angling for a pardon or at least not opposing her appeal re: non-prosecution agreement. She sent it to WSJ, expecting there to be a catch-and-kill, except the consideration would be a pardon. Hence WSJ's notifying Trump and asking for comment. But instead of playing along, Trump tried to strongarm them and the catch and kill failed.
 
RaiGuy said:
This may have been covered before, but why didn't the Biden administration release the files? One would think that it would have won the election for them, unless they are also protecting people from their side.
Click to expand...
To put it rather simply, outside of the Trump administration, the DOJ isn’t there to do the president’s political bidding and the president does not call on the DOJ to do its political bidding. Moreover, the president and the DOJ are typically not coordinating with regard to specific cases. That is, the DOJ is not reporting to the president any details on cases that don’t involve issues of national security. I think it’s safe to assume that Biden and Garland (or other folks who are high up in the DOJ) didn’t discuss the Epstein case.
 
Last edited:
nycfan said:
But today it feels like MAGA is generally coming around to support Trump against the meanie press instead of demanding Epstein files.
Click to expand...
Former COS Mick Mulvaney said in an interview (yet to be aired), “of course Trump is in the files.” This was in defense of Trump.
The gradual boiling of the frog theory in practice. Soon, “locker room fun and games” will be a part of our cultural lexicon.
 
ChileG said:
Former COS Mick Mulvaney said in an interview (yet to be aired), “of course Trump is in the files.” This was in defense of Trump.
The gradual boiling of the frog theory in practice. Soon, “locker room fun and games” will be a part of our cultural lexicon.
Click to expand...
Good lord. This is really incredible. It's hard to imagine any of our regular posters here would be bigger pieces of shit than Ramrouser, but callatoroy has somehow managed to go on record as affirmatively defending this shitshow. That's a truly impressive abandonment of anything resembling morality.
 
Travis Clay just said that the underaged girls Epstein trafficked were 16 and 17 and in a lot of states that is the age of consent and if he did what he did in, say, Alabama, it wouldn’t even be illegal (huh?)
He also felt it was necessary to make the point that 50 year old men have sex with 16 and 17 year-old trafficked girls was not as bad as if they were 9 or 10 years old.

It’s telling how much the talking points have changed so quickly.
 
ChileG said:
Travis Clay just said that underaged the girls Epstein trafficked were, 16 and 17 and in a lot of states that is the age of consent and if he did what he did in,say, Alabama, it wouldn’t even be illegal.
Anyway, it’s not as bad as if they were 9 or 10.

It’s telling how much the talking points have changed already.
Click to expand...
Someone should remind that piece of shit that age is irrelevant when the girl is forced into sexual acts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top