Wah wah so you’re upset that Trump is mentioned too much. Enough with the lame lectures. I’ll join everyone else here saying if Clinton goes to prison due to involvement I wont shed a tear but will be disappointed. In the meantime we have a current POTUS with a cabinet member with potential ties, strange quotes, and previous lawsuits directly linked to rape and epstein.
3 Likes
You’re being too mean to Trump focus on Clinton!
When is this stuff gonna be released?
Maybe this the thing, the one thing, that some folks will not defend the President on.
The only recourse left is a perverse new form of whataboutism—insisting that others engage in it too or the discussion is over.
It’ll be an interesting Infrastructure Week.
3 Likes
There is nothing that millions will not line up to defend Trump about. There could be video evidence of him raping a young girl and many would claim it was all part of a deep state coup.
3 Likes
I could be way off (have been before), but I’m curious about Dershowitz’s role in this thing. He used to represent Epstein and has been accused by at least one of the “victims” as being involved in the operation.
I’ve always found Dershowitz’s protective position on Trump a little odd.
3 Likes
I gave up on Dershowitz when he started flogging “torture warrants” during Bush’s GWOT.
You’re right, though. His persistent running air cover for Trump is intriguing. And his willingness to be a tool for Foxnews.
It’s interesting how often Trumpists hereabouts trot him out as a “liberal.”
“Victims were as young as 14 years old”
https://twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/status/1148228240173096962?s=21
On a quick scan, it does not seem the indictment contains any mention of perpetrators other than Epstein.
No mention of Bill Clinton or Donald Trump. Can everyone calm down now?
If the case of Epstein can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, I hope that he is punished severely.
1 Like
.^
.
.
.
Everyone here nows that I don’t like Trump and think he was a mistake for my party to nominate.
But dear God I pray that he has no involvement in this. It’s one thing to boink a pornstar while your wife is at home recovering from just having given birth to your son. This would be totally different.
.
.
.
.^^^^
5 Likes
I am glad to see that this piece of ■■■■■■■ FINALLY being held accountable. Where this leads, pointing to others who were also involved…will be interesting to witness…just how honestly accountable these pieces of ■■■■ accomplices will also be held? My guess…our country is so deeply embedded in the swamp, it won’t go far but…“we” will see?
1 Like
The sweetheart deal Acosta gave to Epstein was highly disturbing and most likely illegal.
So, why is Acosta still in the fat donald administration?
1 Like
As I posted earlier in this thread, a whole bunch of adult men are gonna get away with having sex with under age girls.
More likely that Bill Clinton will be caught up in this than Trump. IMHO
1 Like
An excellent question, but not one dependent on the prosecution of Epstein in New York. There is an ongoing investigation into Acosta’s actions, which do seem highly questionable.
Why would you say that?
From the attached story. Note the difference in access between Trump and Clinton.
Epstein, who once counted as friends former President Bill Clinton, Britain’s Prince Andrew and President Trump, was arrested Saturday at an airport near New York City after his private jet touched down from France. Court documents obtained by Fox News in 2016 showed that Clinton took at least 26 trips flying aboard Epstein’s private jet, known as the “Lolita Express,” and apparently ditched his Secret Service detail on some of the excursions.
Records showed Trump apparently flew on the jet at least once, however, his legal team more recently has denied the two were friends.
Trump banned Epstein from his Mar-a-Lago estate “because Epstein sexually assaulted an underage girl at the club,” according to court documents filed by Bradley Edwards, the lawyer who has represented several Epstein accusers. That claim has not been confirmed by Trump or Mar-a-Lago, however, Trump has previously cited the allegations against Epstein in interviews.
Did you read that link? Not only is that story inconclusive, but it makes suppositions about Clinton without evidence. Not saying it’s not possible, but come up with some real evidence. It also says the Trump “banning” is not confirmed either. Strike two.
1 Like
And why do posts in this thread have to be approved by a mod? What’s triggering them, I wonder?
1 Like
