Jeffrey Epstein files

Status
Not open for further replies.
Since the Democrats have clearly gone through the files, anyone find it odd they've not released any other names?

Only redacted emails regarding Trump.

Again, partially proving they don't care about justice for the victims by naming the perpetrators. Only their intense hatred of Trump.
 
dude d
I agree with you 100%. I've no doubt whatsoever. And, I've no doubt there are people on that list with the means to ensure those lists aren't released.

Where I've been consistent is that if President Trump had been engaging in sexual contact with underage women, and there was indeed evidence of that in the form of photos or videos as has been alleged, then that would have been all over the news front and center 4 years ago.

Democrats ran the show for 4 years. They could have released the files at any time. Yet they didn't? Why? Further, I am convinced they have already gone through the files, repeatedly, looking for anything that could be used on Trump. SDNY, not known for being the most ethical DOJ District for quite awhile now, had the bulk of those files. They were even sitting on many after Bondi had ordered the transfer to DC.

Yet, after 4 years, there was clearly no scathing evidence of Trump diddling little girls. So they instead went after him via James and Bragg.

Now, knowing they are about to lose yet another fight against the President, they are resorting again to innuendo and releasing redacted emails clearly ignoring the fact those same emails are being released unredacted to show there is no "there" there.

Next, I expect the Democrats to trot out victims in the same league as Christine Ballsy-Ford.

Yes, I want justice for the victims as much as anyone does. But the President is not one of those who needs to be held accountable.
bro don't be like Megyn Kelly and shift the narrative from child abuse to "underage women" or barely legal. I wouldn't proclaim innocence or guilt until the truth is laid bare. Something you need to realize about the rich and powerful. They constantly push the boundaries of decency, morality and the law just to feel alive. When all their earthly desires are handed to them on a silver platter they seek the forbidden the taboo.
 
dude d

bro don't be like Megyn Kelly and shift the narrative from child abuse to "underage women" or barely legal. I wouldn't proclaim innocence or guilt until the truth is laid bare. Something you need to realize about the rich and powerful. They constantly push the boundaries of decency, morality and the law just to feel alive. When all their earthly desires are handed to them on a silver platter they seek the forbidden the taboo.
Agreed. Need to remain more consistent with my terminology.
 
push the boundaries

Well it isn't really about pushing the boundaries... since some may have fetishes that money can buy others... desire proximity to the sun... raise ranks. The initiation rituals that sink all in murky waters... some willingly others coerced.... Bell the kitty. The kompromat isn't really used for legal channels... and I doubt if there is any actual evidence of such except all indicators pointing towards such...

All the list does is point to the inner circle. Some initiates and others compromised....
 
Last edited:
Likely doctored pages filled with ink. May as well not release it without names.
If these documents were correctly handled then only the identity of victims, ongoing investigations, or privacy rules for uncharged individuals are redacted.

Why do you think Trump instructed the DOJ yesterday to open a new investigation?
 
If these documents were correctly handled then only the identity of victims, ongoing investigations, or privacy rules for uncharged individuals are redacted.

Why do you think Trump instructed the DOJ yesterday to open a new investigation?
Is it now simply a matter of Trump "signing off" this bill to make it happen? Any other steps that could stall it?
 
If these documents were correctly handled then only the identity of victims, ongoing investigations, or privacy rules for uncharged individuals are redacted.

Why do you think Trump instructed the DOJ yesterday to open a new investigation?
Bear in mind, the Epstein file is basically FBI/DOJ investigation note from 2017 when the case file of Jeffrey Epstein was originally opened. This is a very thorough investigation with 100,000 pieces of evidence collected (about half is released) and it result in 1 single indictment, that's Epstein.

As I said on the other post, even with the released file material, I can probably arrange an indictment of Trump (and on balance, selective members in the Democratic party) with conspiracy to commit child sex abuse, conspiracy to commit prostitution or IOW, Diddy'ed, yet none of them, regardless of party, were charged, either this really do mean they don't have enough evidence to think it can push thru the court system (you only need 51/49 to charge, but you will need 95/5 to convict) or someone, somewhere is hiding those indictment. You can't charge Epstein with Trafficking without knowing where, who, and when those women were trafficked, which means you must have solid proof that some sort of crime was committed before you can go ahead and charge him. But miraculously, no one was indicted but him. And what do you think Trump's DOJ would find if they hadn't already? You are basically investigating the FBI investigation.

I don't really care whether or not Clinton or Trump or Obama was in the list, justice is not about those people, justice is for victim to find their solace, some crime, like murder, cannot ever be made whole, but this can, the reason why people hated Trump here is not because he may be a Pedo, you don't need him to be a pedo to hate him, there are plenty of reason to hate him already, people mad at him, MAGA included, is because he is dragging this down, up until yesterday he was fighting the process at every angle and every turn, you either don't release it, and don't talk about it, but when you campaign for 4 years and had all your talking head talking about this and dragging your feet for 10 months fighting against it. That's what people mad about.
 
Last edited:
Is it now simply a matter of Trump "signing off" this bill to make it happen? Any other steps that could stall it?
It still need to pass the Senate, if they call a vote, it will need 60 senators to pass that bill before it landed on Trump's desk, and then even after Trump signed the bill, DOJ can cite ongoing investigation and redact or refused to release any document, that's probably the reason why Trump order the DOJ to investigate the Democrats relationship with Epstein
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
La. Rep. Clay Higgins is lone dissenting vote to release the Epstein files, passes 427-1

https://www.wbrz.com/news/la-rep-cl...te-to-release-the-epstein-files-passes-427-1/



Rep. Clay Higgins

@RepClayHiggins

I have been a principled “NO” on this bill from the beginning. What was wrong with the bill three months ago is still wrong today. It abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure in America. As written, this bill reveals and injures thousands of innocent people – witnesses, people who provided alibis, family members, etc. If enacted in its current form, this type of broad reveal of criminal investigative files, released to a rabid media, will absolutely result in innocent people being hurt. Not by my vote. The Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough investigation that has already released well over 60,000 pages of documents from the Epstein case. That effort will continue in a manner that provides all due protections for innocent Americans. If the Senate amends the bill to properly address privacy of victims and other Americans, who are named but not criminally implicated, then I will vote for that bill when it comes back to the House."

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
And, soon, Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., is expected to take to the floor to bring attention to one of Epstein’s survivors, Virginia Giuffre.

Gallego will read excerpts of Giuffre’s memoir, "Nobody’s Girl: A Memoir of Surviving Abuse and Fighting for Justice." The book was released in October, months after she died by suicide in April. Her publisher released an email from Giuffre saying that it was her “heartfelt wish” that the book be released "regardless” of her circumstances.

Gallego will quote this excerpt, according to plans shared first with NBC News:

“Maxwell says she knows a wealthy man— longtime Mar‑a‑Lago member, she says—who is looking for a massage therapist to travel with him. [...] My lack of experience doesn’t concern her a bit. 'I’m sure you’d be terrific,' she insists, looking me up and down. 'Will you come for an interview?'
“Maxwell says she knows a wealthy man— longtime Mar‑a‑Lago member, she says—who is looking for a massage therapist to travel with him. [...] My lack of experience doesn’t concern her a bit. 'I’m sure you’d be terrific,' she insists, looking me up and down. 'Will you come for an interview?'
30m ago / 3:08 PM EST
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Pakistan Defence Latest

Back
Top