Epstein, Kiddies, And Trump. Oh, My

[Gospel]

There are talks (on reddit) circulating that the DOJ may have also released material considered CSAM. I haven’t seen reports from any notable news outlets, but even if it’s true, don’t expect anyone at the top to face consequences for that either.

 

[ZiprHead]

There are talks (on reddit) circulating that the DOJ may have also released material considered CSAM. I haven’t seen reports from any notable news outlets, but even if it’s true, don’t expect anyone at the top to face consequences for that either.

Yes, they included naked photos of the kids. These people are vile.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

In the DoJ's defense, their Epstein department is understaffed for the job because the remaining DoJ employees are busy trying to prosecute Democrats, the media, comedians, journalists, immigrants, universities, and anyone who looks at them sideways.

 

[Ford]

Patrick Boyle is not the most electrifying financial reporter on the internets, but if you can cope with his incredibly dry delivery (and equally dry sense of humor) for 45 minutes, this is worth a watch. He is very meticulous in his investigations and presentations, and near the end he sums it up well... "this isn't about politics. It's not about the right and the left. It's about monstrous people who've done terrible things."

 

[Playball40]

"If this Committee and the American public truly want to hear the unfiltered truth about what happened, there is a straightforward path. Ms. Maxwell is prepared to speak fully and honestly if granted clemency by President Trump. Only she can provide the complete account. Some may not like what they hear, but the truth matters," his statement said.

Maxwell claims she will only testify if Trump grants her clemency. Like I would believe a single word out of that witch's mouth.

 

[crazyfingers]

"If this Committee and the American public truly want to hear the unfiltered truth about what happened, there is a straightforward path. Ms. Maxwell is prepared to speak fully and honestly if granted clemency by President Trump. Only she can provide the complete account. Some may not like what they hear, but the truth matters," his statement said.

Maxwell claims she will only testify if Trump grants her clemency. Like I would believe a single word out of that witch's mouth.

There really needs to be something illegal here. She'll say whatever she wants to "exonerate" Trump if she gets clemency.

She's a known mega-liar. Just like Trump.

It's so obvious.

Who wants to bet Trump will do it? He gets to tell his MAGA cult members that he was exonerated (by a convicted sex trafficker) and everyone else will know it's a scam. Just like everything else.

 

[Toni]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

 

[Playball40]

"If this Committee and the American public truly want to hear the unfiltered truth about what happened, there is a straightforward path. Ms. Maxwell is prepared to speak fully and honestly if granted clemency by President Trump. Only she can provide the complete account. Some may not like what they hear, but the truth matters," his statement said.

Maxwell claims she will only testify if Trump grants her clemency. Like I would believe a single word out of that witch's mouth.

There really needs to be something illegal here. She'll say whatever she wants to "exonerate" Trump if she gets clemency.

She's a known mega-liar. Just like Trump.

It's so obvious.

Who wants to bet Trump will do it? He gets to tell his MAGA cult members that he was exonerated (by a convicted sex trafficker) and everyone else will know it's a scam. Just like everything else.

Yup. It's so fucking frustrating.

 

[Playball40]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

She was already found guilty. She claims she will exonerate TRUMP with her testimony if he will grant her clemency. I can't see how that's even legal.

 

[Jarhyn]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

She was already found guilty. She claims she will exonerate TRUMP with her testimony if he will grant her clemency. I can't see how that's even legal.

It's textbook offer of "tit-for-tat".

 

[Derec]

I will accuse the people who stood by with all aplomb, that they have neither done the needful, as it were, nor even spoken the truth of things since.

So, again, you want people to commit murder in order to kill somebody you suspect of crimes.
Quite beside the point of how wrong it is for you to appoint yourself as judge and jury, and force others (like Dobson) to be your executioner, what happens when you are wrong? Do you just go "oops, my bad"? It's not like we do not have numerous instances of false allegations and mistaken suspicions. And even in our criminal justice system, with many procedural rules and "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard, there have been wrongful convictions. How much more are you Jarhyn, a private individual, likely to get it wrong in your self-righteous quest for vengeance?

And what about crimes that are just as serious, or more serious, than sexual assault, but are not your personal hobby horse? Do people suspected of those crimes also deserve to be murdered by anybody in the same room as them too? I do not see you condemn people who were in the same room as OJ Simpson, but failed to take him out.

 

[crazyfingers]

It's textbook offer of "tit-for-tat".

Can you imagine any other president taking this "offer" not being impeached? If Clinton were to have done this..

 

[southernhybrid]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

She was already found guilty. She claims she will exonerate TRUMP with her testimony if he will grant her clemency. I can't see how that's even legal.

Since when is something being illegal a problem with the current administration? We have a narcissistic psychopath with dementia running the country along with his sicko minions.

 

[Elixir]

Yup. It's so fucking frustrating.

It? Do you mean “they”?
Teh Donald’s sheer stupidity is one thing, but the number of people still buying his schtick is truly amazing.

 

[southernhybrid]

Glad I never hero worshipped this guy.

Noam Chomsky advised Epstein about 'horrible' media coverage, files show

The exchange was among the latest release of files from the US government's investigation into Epstein.

www.bbc.com

There were always rumors about him among my female colleagues. I'm surprised if his disciple Steven Pinker hasn't been dragged into this yet, as he was likewise often talked about in that certain way.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-did-jeffrey-epstein-cultivate-famous-scientists/

It wasn’t a great flight even in 2002, years before Epstein’s first criminal conviction, Pinker says of the trip, which was heading to a TED Talk. “I immediately disliked Epstein and thought he was a dilettante and a smartass,” he says. Pinker has not been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.

I looked this up just for you. Yes. Pinker was on one trip with Epstein but so were many scientists. He was on the trip in 2002. It's believed that a lot of scientists associated with Epstein because they needed money for projects and hoped to get some. Most of them were with Epstein years before his first charge of sex trafficking. Have you seen the list of people in the files. OMG! It's huge, so I'm pretty sure at least a good number of those on the list had no idea who Epstein was or what he did. Who knows? It will take a long time to figure out which ones were actually guilty of crimes.

 

[Jarhyn]

I will reiterate that it is dishonest, to say the least, to say I want people I accuse of crimes to die on account of some guy out in the world saying "I think he did it". I'm pointing out that we know such events have happened, and that criminal murders continue to happen, and there are actual parties to these actions when and where they are both ordered and carried out.

We know boats are being shot up, people are being murdered. But who knows. More, I think that when a crime is happening that people have to make sure that crime, and particularly a lethal one, fails for the people committing it.

Rather, I want people with first hand knowledge of crimes, actual witnesses, and/or those present at the giving of criminal orders or the expression of such orders even in an indirect "mafia-esque" way to make decisions that prevent such continued actions.

Today, in today's environment (or one like today's, but where someone complicit grows a backbone and says "never again"), there are few avenues of justice that will hear evidence or witness against such crimes.

People jump in with a stage act any time anyone discusses this fact, that people have obligations when criminal actions are underway which are of the like as a child being raped.

I'm not such a person. I have no such obligation. I've never been, nor wanted to be party to acts as went on between Epstein and Trump. I imagine some people have such obligations, and the evidence is overwhelming that such obligations existed and continue to exist.

The Epstein files contain CSAM, and that CSAM was released by the federal government. We know, as a population (and I will reiterate that I have NOT gone digging in that cesspit of info-hazards) that these crimes have happened.

This is proof many such events have happened where people should have decided to do different things at all manner of times, that this wouldn't happen.

But here, the people with the obligations, they were the people behind the cameras. They are the people in front of the cameras. They are the people beside them. They are the people waiting for their turn in front of the cameras.

There are victims. There are actions taken. There is proof in the form of CSAM. There are people who had some obligation to act with all due force as to stop those events.

That is unquestionable.

To pretend that this unquestionable fact equates to a desire to see someone murdered is a farce.

 

[ZiprHead]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

She was already found guilty. She claims she will exonerate TRUMP with her testimony if he will grant her clemency. I can't see how that's even legal.

If she says under oath Trump never did anything which we know is BS she could be subject to perjury charges.

 

[crazyfingers]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

She was already found guilty. She claims she will exonerate TRUMP with her testimony if he will grant her clemency. I can't see how that's even legal.

If she says under oath Trump never did anything which we know is BS she could be subject to perjury charges.

And Trump will just say she told the truth and pardon her.

 

[Patooka]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

She was already found guilty. She claims she will exonerate TRUMP with her testimony if he will grant her clemency. I can't see how that's even legal.

If she says under oath Trump never did anything which we know is BS she could be subject to perjury charges.

"Not that I recall"
"Not that I remember"
"Not to my knowledge"
"Not where I was present"

To the MAGA cult, that means complete exoneration.

EDIt: waiting for bilby to point out the obvious Can I have a glass of water? meme.

 

[ZiprHead]

You only need clemency if you’re guilty….

She was already found guilty. She claims she will exonerate TRUMP with her testimony if he will grant her clemency. I can't see how that's even legal.

If she says under oath Trump never did anything which we know is BS she could be subject to perjury charges.

And Trump will just say she told the truth and pardon her.

If he's still in office. And it will be another example to the world that Trump is a scumbag. Pardon a known sex offender cuz MAGAts love those people.