Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 7/12/2025 at 9:11 PM, SectionC3 said:

Thoughts are welcome.  I actually don't think there's a list.  But I think that if one looked through the entirety of the Epstein file, he or she easily could make a list.  That Trump would be on.  So that's why the files aren't released.  MAGA prioritizes the golden calf over children. 

If Dems REALLY wanted to get Trump, why didn’t they just release the files, themselves, when they were in power? 🤔

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

If Dems REALLY wanted to get Trump, why didn’t they just release the files, themselves, when they were in power? 🤔

If Trump has nothing to hide, then why doesn’t he honor the promise to release the files? 

Posted
30 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

If Trump has nothing to hide, then why doesn’t he honor the promise to release the files? 

 

 

 

 

Posted
47 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

If Trump has nothing to hide, then why doesn’t he honor the promise to release the files? 

 

Trump is busy arresting people. (see: action in D.C. Also they're looking into "the Smithsonian.")

 

The mainstream news media has no reason to clue you in. So Torch a Tesla, Beg for a Booster and Flail about Files.

 

It's a great look!

 

giphy.gif

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, JFKjr said:

The mainstream news media has no reason to clue you in.

As a mainstream media (only the more reliable sources!) consumer, I can assure you that the DC National Guard and the Smithsonian "cleansing" are currently competing with the Putin suck-up as the lead stories.

 

 

Posted
3 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

As a mainstream media (only the more reliable sources!) consumer, I can assure you that the DC National Guard and the Smithsonian "cleansing" are currently competing with the Putin suck-up as the lead stories.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted
On 8/8/2025 at 4:00 PM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

This would have a lot more oomph if your candidates didn’t include a former president/sexual predator who settled a massive civil suit with a sexual assault  victim, or a prior candidate who happened to be his wife who enabled the sh3t out of him and is quite well known for victim blaming, or the last president who acknowledged he was touching women and making them uncomfortable, who was also credibly accused of a violent sexual assault against apparently the one woman in the world you didn’t believe in the #believeher campaign.  
 

Of course this is nothing new—come to think of it…that guy…the liberal lion you all loved so much, the one who left an intern in his car when he flipped it into a bay and left her there for 10 hours—he’s one of the greats.  
 

As for Trump and his civil case, the law designed to protect victims of sexual crimes long in the past makes complete sense emotionally, but is problematic given how our system of justice works.   I have no idea what happened is at all, but Trump was quite clear on his position and went to jury instead of settling.   That’s unlike the former president mentioned above, who actually was one of the Dems selected headliners for Harris 24 in one of the strangest flip flops on the history of politics.  

 

As for Maxwell, again, giving bad people opportunities for a better criminal outcome in exchange for information and names is done frequently.  I feel like you’re concerned about your people getting caught up in it all again. 
 

 

 Look at all the text to justify pedo prez

Posted
11 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:

The left continues to promote the lie that Trump is stopping the grand jury testimony.  Not an Obama appointed lawyer.  

 

They choose to be ignorant and mad about falsehoods.  

 

Judge won’t unseal transcripts of grand jury that indicted Epstein ex-girlfriend Maxwell | PBS News https://share.google/Zb4Qf2KGsUpMVrEnQ

 

Actually, they promote the idea that 47's DoJ could be releasing what info is in the FBI files that doesn't include GJ testimony nor material that identifies the underage victims of Epstein's teen prostitution empire.

 

Unless that material is going to be part of ongoing or forthcoming prosecutions, they're right that the info should be released in whole and unredacted (again, except for the portions that indentifies the victims or is itself "kiddie porn") and let the chips fall where they may.

 

Do realize at this point they seem to have no intention to do so.

  • Eyeroll 1
×
×
  • Create New...