Epstein, Kiddies, And Trump. Oh, My

[Jimmy Higgins]

The Snopes link provides evidence that makes the conclusion that the promoter of the allegations is not credible. No where does it debunk the allegations. In fact, the link even states it does not show that the allegations are false.

The Snopes link puts into question what specific event Trump was referring to as gawking at the competition. It confirms Trump was bragging about gawking.

Competitors in the Miss Teen competition allege Trump did likewise to them. But it isn't clear that Trump bragged about doing that with the Miss Teen comp.

To conclude, at best, the Snopes link demonstrates Trump is a pervert. It is one thing to find it attractive, it is another thing to invade a person's privacy to do so!

You obviously did not read that Snopes link.

I find it incredible that I defended most of your post... yet... you say I must not have read the Snopes link. Are you on auto-post mode?

Did Trump Walk in on Partially Dressed Contestants?
Trump, in his own words from 2005, admitted to doing so with regard to some of the pageants (referring to either Miss USA or Miss Universe). However, his representatives would deny years later that he ever behaved that way.

He said he did, definitely for Miss USA and/or Miss Universe.

But some former Miss Teen USA pageant contestants have accused him of walking into their changing room. In a 2016 Buzzfeed News investigation, nearly half a dozen former contestants of Miss Teen USA claimed that Trump walked in on them changing — some of the girls in those rooms were reportedly 15 years old when it happened.

Teens did allege he peeked.
More specifically with how I conclude the website:

According to Miss USA and Miss Universe websites, contestants have to be at least 18 years old. In the above conversation with Stern, Trump was referring to those contests. He did not reference Miss Teen USA in his comments, indicating that the above X post edited his actual words.

The conversation was on the terms of Miss USA / Universe, however, Trump does not not say Miss Teen USA. So it is ambiguous to me as to the limits of what he is referring to.

Snopes article confirms Trump states he was taking advantage of the situation and gawking at women 1/3 his age.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

We get it beave. Trump is completely innocent and this is just a witch hunt by radical Marxist leftists like Marjorie Taylor-Greene .

He’s just saying “pictures, or it didn’t happen”.

So the video deposition of one of his victims doesn't count. Cause you know, she's a woman and obviously a liar.

Depositions don't carry the weight that many people think they do. Questions can be asked that would never be allowed in court. For example, you might object to a question on behalf of your client but that's more for letting opposing counsel know that you'll object to any question like that in court. Otherwise, your client will have to answer the question. The idea is to set boundaries (more or less). It may be different in different states, but in California, the discovery rules are far more relaxed and liberal than they are in court.

With respect to who lies and who doesn't, it's definitely not gender specific. I'm not saying that the woman in this instance was lying. My guess is that she wasn't because while one or two might trying to cash in, the pattern of Trump's conduct over the decade and by his own words leads one to the reasonable belief that he did do horrible things to girls and young women. Also, when it's so many women who have said this, then it's likely not just smoke.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You obviously did not read that Snopes link.

I did. Seems like it has been accurately characterized.
But so what? The fact that Trump is a rapist fraud is not in question.
Trying to leverage that particular “content creator”s dubious creation into some kind of indication of reduced seriousness of Trump’s crimes, is at least as dishonest as that particular piece of “content”.

I must be losing my mind then. I read the link as it being about the Katie Johnson rape allegation. Jimmy, you and Playball40 think its about the Miss Teen USA gawking.

Your post addressed multiple claims. I was speaking to the other material in that post.

 

[Elixir]

Also, when it's so many women who have said this, then it's likely not just smoke.

Just wait until Trump’s enablers have had a chance to dummy up some payments from Gavin Newsom to Trump “victims”.

 

[Patooka]

Keep in mind that its the left leaning New York Times

Three decades ago maybe.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You obviously did not read that Snopes link.

I did. Seems like it has been accurately characterized.
But so what? The fact that Trump is a rapist fraud is not in question.
Trying to leverage that particular “content creator”s dubious creation into some kind of indication of reduced seriousness of Trump’s crimes, is at least as dishonest as that particular piece of “content”.

I must be losing my mind then. I read the link as it being about the Katie Johnson rape allegation. Jimmy, you and Playball40 think its about the Miss Teen USA gawking.

What about Calendar Girl sex assaults just after partying with Epstein? Let's not sweep that under the rug!

 

[Elixir]

You obviously did not read that Snopes link.

I did. Seems like it has been accurately characterized.
But so what? The fact that Trump is a rapist fraud is not in question.
Trying to leverage that particular “content creator”s dubious creation into some kind of indication of reduced seriousness of Trump’s crimes, is at least as dishonest as that particular piece of “content”.

I must be losing my mind then. I read the link as it being about the Katie Johnson rape allegation. Jimmy, you and Playball40 think its about the Miss Teen USA gawking.

What about Calendar Girl sex assaults just after partying with Epstein? Let's not sweep that under the rug!

There seems to be a damn lot of room under the rug. Surely plenty of room for Calendar and many other girls. Just don’t be looking under the rug because - Iran!
Next week, Cuba.

 

[Politesse]

Keep in mind that its the left leaning New York Times

Three decades ago maybe.

The Times is a family business, and its marketing has always been "enlightened centrists" not "leftists".

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Epstein’s possible suicide note has been hidden for years, report says

The note has been stored in a courthouse vault since a judge ordered it sealed, The New York Times reports

www.independent.co.uk

I found it:

Spoiler

 

[Jarhyn]

Epstein’s possible suicide note has been hidden for years, report says

The note has been stored in a courthouse vault since a judge ordered it sealed, The New York Times reports

www.independent.co.uk

I found it:

Spoiler

View attachment 54165

Speaking of Epstein and his "suicide" there is now some discussion about a "Palm Beach Pete", a wealthy individual who apparently looks identical to Epstein, has a private jet that may be the fuselage/jetframe of the Lolita Express.

This combined with the sketchy and strange events around the alleged corpse/autopsy, and it might well be the case that Epstein didn't kill himself because he might actually still be alive.

Then, I have my doubts if only because Epstein himself living would be too much of a liability.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why don’t you believe the victims are credible?

Is it because they are female? I’ve read that some of the victims are, in fact, male.

But I suppose any kid dumb enough to allow themselves to be raided can hardly have enough sense to be a good witness.

At least, for certain people

Why do you assume they are? Abusers are very good at picking those that won't be believed.

You are kind of refuting your own point here. Are they the kinds of people abusers abuse and thus credibly "abused" or aren't they?

Is this Schrodinger's abuse victim here?

At some point you have to acknowledge that most people don't have a parade of accusers against them, even public figures.

When they're otherwise insistinguishable from everyone else except for that train of accusers, there are very few explanations as to "why them in particular," which don't conclude with "because they are abusers".

The thing is there are a lot of allegations that are nothing and usually don't reach the press in the first place. Got in the local paper quite some time ago--allegations against a local entertainer. The police said it was extortion, happens all the time. They look into things but keep it quiet. Remember the Duke case? That's the typical allegation. And even when the events are real it often turns out the actual perpetrator simply looked similar to the well known person--humans are terrible eyewitnesses, an initial impression of looks like someone they recognize can easily become a memory of it being that person. (I'm not saying they are lying. There have been cases where it has been figured out how the false memories came about, yet the people still have the memory despite knowing it's impossible. False positives of threat are far less harmful than false negatives, the human mind is optimized towards false positives.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ffs, I cannot be the only person with a FB acct or who knows how to use Google:

What action are we supposed to take?

The Epstein data is known to be compromised. It's like Biden's laptop--absolutely useless as evidence because we can't tell what's real and what's planted.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If we're going by pure statistics and human nature here, people who are prone to accusing others of sexual abuse will almost always pick a target of opportunity close to them, and will have some history of making accusations if they are a false accuser.

On average, this means there will be less than a single accuser per alleged abuser.

"Average".

Your logic works for independent accusations against average people. But allegations are very non-randomly distributed, the average person has zero, the well known and/or powerful attract false allegations in an attempt to get go-away money. And they attract mistaken-identity allegations because people know their face.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Does anyone think that a full exposé of Trump’s heinous acts would have any effect on those still enamored of the hideous demented sack of fetid lard?

Exactly. We have enough proven stuff on him to know he's a sack of shit. Just how big said sack is isn't going to change anything.

Is he guilty? Probably. Can it be proven? Almost certainly not.

Is the "Justice" department doing enough to figure out what's real? Probably not. But images in the files are not proof, they are only a starting point.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Unraveling rumor that US senator has seen video evidence of Trump 'raping a child'

Rumors circulated in March 2026 that a U.S. senator had seen a video in the files related to investigation into the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein that showed U.S. President Donald Trump raping a child.

There was no evidence any U.S. politician had said they've seen such a video, and no credible news outlets had reported such a statement.

The claim appeared to stem from a statement made by Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., on Feb. 3, 2026, in which he called for the resignation of Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche over comments about the Epstein case on Fox News. Lieu said the Epstein files contained "highly disturbing allegations of Donald Trump raping children," but did not say there was video evidence.

A spokesperson for Lieu confirmed to Snopes the congressman was speaking strictly about allegations in the files, not any video evidence.

I'll note, that's a very interesting framing there: no video evidence of Donald Trump himself raping a child.

They are careful, it seems, in not saying that there isn't video evidence of people raping children.

They are also careful in saying "video" and not "photographic" or "images".

I wonder why that is...

You're reading too much into it here.

Note the first two inner quotes refer to a claim of having seen a video. Of course the response will also say "video."

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We get it beave. Trump is completely innocent and this is just a witch hunt by radical Marxist leftists like Marjorie Taylor-Greene .

He’s just saying “pictures, or it didn’t happen”.

Because of AI we can no longer believe pictures.

AI just makes it easier. Photoshop has existed for a long time.

 

[ZiprHead]

The Epstein data is known to be compromised.

How is that? we know the Biden data was compromised but I never heard that about the Epstein data being compromised.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We get it beave. Trump is completely innocent and this is just a witch hunt by radical Marxist leftists like Marjorie Taylor-Greene .

He’s just saying “pictures, or it didn’t happen”.

Because of AI we can no longer believe pictures.

Because of AI we can no longer believe videos either.

You could have faked video even before. It just would have been a lot harder. But for something like the Epstein files there might be state-level efforts.

 

[Toni]

Ffs, I cannot be the only person with a FB acct or who knows how to use Google:

What action are we supposed to take?

The Epstein data is known to be compromised. It's like Biden's laptop--absolutely useless as evidence because we can't tell what's real and what's planted.

I don’t think that is true.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think there is more than enough evidence that Trump should be arrested and tried for sexually abusing young women, including possibly minors.

Statute of limitations.

https://www.torhoermanlaw.com/legal...sexual-abuse-statute-of-limitations-by-state/

Since Trump was a resident of New York when these crimes were committed, if he sexually abused a minor and she has not yet reached age 55, he can still be charged with a civil suit. At least one state has no statute of limitations when it comes to sexually abusing minors. It varies greatly from state to state. I think it's disgusting that some states only have one or two years before the statute of limitations end. Abusing minors sexually is a terrible crime that can often leave the minors with PTSD or suicidal. Sadly, many minors are too terrified to charge their assaulters or adults don't take them seriously.

Statute of limitations is about whether the ability of the accused to defend themselves degrading over time.

Personally, I would like to see statute of limitations changed to increase the burden of proof rather than outright bar prosecution. Witnesses degrade, but sometimes there is physical evidence that does not.