Trump 47

[milehighpoke]

• Mark Epstein, brother of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, has alleged that the Epstein files are being edited to remove Republican names

not sure if this is accurate at all, however, if it is...bear with me...if Democrats start to get prosecuted or whatever, and they ARE in the files, you would think they would start ´spilling the beans´ on republicans who were originally involved...Iḿ all for bringing down ANYONE who was involved!!

I saw that interview with the brother, and I have no doubt he's telling the truth. Trump has been fighting this tooth and nail for months, as have Johnson, Bondi, Patel, etc. etc. Bondi testified recently that the files didn't even exist, right?

It's all just a ploy by trump and maga. They can say "see, we released the files and trump isn't in them! you loser libtards just can't handle the truth that trump = jesus".

There are a lot of people who know exactly what / who are in the files, and are doing everything in their power to protect them. It's sickening.

 

[steross]

The government has had these files for years. Maybe this is naive but would there only be one copy at this point? Would they be able to not just redact for public release but actually remove names permanently?

 

[Polds4OSU]

 

[TheMonkey]

The government has had these files for years. Maybe this is nieve, but would there only be one copy at this point? Would they be able to not just redact for public release but actually remove names permanently?

Trump has been fixated on why Nixon didn’t burn the Watergate tapes. So, it may not be that naive at all.

 

[milehighpoke]

The government has had these files for years. Maybe this is naive but would there only be one copy at this point? Would they be able to not just redact for public release but actually remove names permanently?

I would really, really hope that somebody out there was smart enough, or had just enough of a conscience, to make copies.

MAGA started because they wanted our current govt burned to the ground. I can think of no better way than releasing the entirety of the files, unredacted.

 

[CowboyJD]

I would really, really hope that somebody out there was smart enough, or had just enough of a conscience, to make copies.

MAGA started because they wanted our current govt burned to the ground. I can think of no better way than releasing the entirety of the files, unredacted.

That's where I'm at.

Redact the names and identifying information of victims.

The rest can go (*&^% themselves. Name them all. Whatever connection they had with Epstein. No matter how small or supposedly "innocent" they are.

 

[Polds4OSU]

 

[steross]

That's where I'm at.

Redact the names and identifying information of victims.

The rest can go (*&^% themselves. Name them all. Whatever connection they had with Epstein. No matter how small or supposedly "innocent" they are.

Yep, this idea that these women (and the country, really) should have justice delayed further to protect some possibly innocent men is nuts. Sorry, sometimes you get caught in something and you have to explain your way out.

Easy Pre-2008:
I knew Epstein, I was not involved in any of his sex crimes, and I discontinued any contact with him after he was prosecuted in 2008. Done.

Harder Post-2008:
I knew Epstein. I decided to continue a relationship with him because............. I was not involved in the sex crimes as shown by ............

 

[steross]

View attachment 15951

Hey @RxCowboy, she is pretty cute, and obviously dumber than a box of rocks. I think you should hit her up. Maybe you could be her next "rookie mistake."

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/comey-airs-newly-popular-defense-strategy-claiming-retaliation-by-trump-a1bc9814?mod=hp_lead_pos10

Comey Case Hit by Surprise Setbacks on Legal Basics​

Under questioning from judge, prosecutors acknowledge grand jury didn’t see final version of indictment​

Paul Grimm, a retired federal judge, said it would be highly unusual for an experienced prosecutor to fail at following basic procedural rules that govern criminal cases, “which is why rookie prosecutors usually appear with more experienced ones to make sure such fundamental mistakes are not made.”

 

[CowboyJD]

Yep, this idea that these women (and the country, really) should have justice delayed further to protect some possibly innocent men is nuts. Sorry, sometimes you get caught in something and you have to explain your way out.

Easy Pre-2008:
I knew Epstein, I was not involved in any of his sex crimes, and I discontinued any contact with him after he was prosecuted in 2008. Done.

Harder Post-2008:
I knew Epstein. I decided to continue a relationship with him because............. I was not involved in the sex crimes as shown by ............

I want to know and call out ANYONE that even ASSOCIATED with him….DID BUSINESS with him….WHATEVER.

As far as I’m concerned at this point, while “innocent until proven guilty” still applies in a court of law, but not the court of public opinion.

If you associated with this scumbag, you HAD to know he was a scumbag you shouldn’t deal with in ANY manner. If you chose $$$ he could make you or power he could give you or children you could rape, I WANT TO KNOW because you’re a scumbag too.

Birds of a feather flock together as far as I’m concerned.

 

[RxCowboy]

Hey @RxCowboy, she is pretty cute, and obviously dumber than a box of rocks. I think you should hit her up. Maybe you could be her next "rookie mistake."

View attachment 15957

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/comey-airs-newly-popular-defense-strategy-claiming-retaliation-by-trump-a1bc9814?mod=hp_lead_pos10

Comey Case Hit by Surprise Setbacks on Legal Basics​

Under questioning from judge, prosecutors acknowledge grand jury didn’t see final version of indictment​

Paul Grimm, a retired federal judge, said it would be highly unusual for an experienced prosecutor to fail at following basic procedural rules that govern criminal cases, “which is why rookie prosecutors usually appear with more experienced ones to make sure such fundamental mistakes are not made.”