• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged why the release of names associated with Epstein mean little to absolutely nothing.

It'll be fun to see what the next distraction will be. Will Trump bomb Portland, or Chicago? Or tear down another part of the White House?
 
I find it amusing that censors redacted Virginia's name, as if she hasn't already been publicly known for a decade. Note the date of the earlier email...a month after the explosive Daily Mail articles about Roberts meeting all those prominent people. They did it in the Maxwell proffer interview as well. If people didn't know anything about Roberts except that she was a victim of Epstein, it'd be easy to overlook the fact that she and her father were employees of Trump and she remained a staunch Trump supporter until her death. It'd be nice to see the full email exchange for more context.

This is what we can look forward to in the Khanna and Massie bill if lawyers get their way. There will be excuses to redact the names of accusers and snip out important context. And the public appears perfectly okay with names without context.

Another 2011 email where Epstein says he and his staff did get their pictures taken with Prince Andrew, though he denies he lent Roberts out to Andrew plus I'm not sure whether he actually conceded that that particular photo is real. The media seems to be twisted his words a bit. Perhaps the FBI could clear it up since Roberts claimed they took a copy.
 
dirtywick said:
and yet it's not khanna or massie or the public or the press that is desperately trying to keep the context hidden from everyone
Click to expand...
Except they will, if the provisions of the bill, like the victims' information clause is followed to its fullest extent.

The public and press, not knowing any better, will just go along with it and make the most of what's released, as they've done in previous file dumps.
 
yeah maybe, we'll see what happens. luckily the president of the united states has all the power in the world to defend himself from such slanderous accusations. i'm assuming he'll stop making himself look guilty as ◊◊◊◊ and start doing so at some point.
 
In related news, it's been two months since that Epstein press conference organized by Brad Edwards and Congressmen Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie during which some accusers claimed they'd be creating their own "list" since the government refuses to release names of accused individuals. And Marjorie Taylor Greene (and I think Massie) claimed they'd read it on the floor of the House, protected by the Speech or Debate Clause.

Greene was recently asked for an update and she replied "there hasn't been any movement forward on that". CNN
 
Planigale said:
I think you also need to look at Maxwell as a victim as a groomer. when epstein first took her on she was young, she had just moved to the US, had no family near, her father died, she lost her job and home and was penniless as her father's estate took a long time to sort out. She was shunned because of the scandal around her father. If Epstein groomed young women that included grooming Maxwell. Like Giuffre / Roberts she was both a victim and a facilitator.
Click to expand...
She wasn't that young and she had been a major part of her father's criminal enterprises for a while before he topped himself.
 

coffeezilla goes over the email dump. interesting revelations about michael wolff, and some conversation between steve bannon and epstein

a whole den of liars
 
dirtywick said:

coffeezilla goes over the email dump. interesting revelations about michael wolff, and some conversation between steve bannon and epstein

a whole den of liars
Click to expand...
First off there is no further context to that email from the Reuters journalist to Weinberg to Wolff. Did a part where Epstein or his lawyers called it out as BS get cut out of that conversation?

Here's How That Wild Lawsuit Accusing Trump of Raping a 13-Year-Old Girl Hit The Headlines​

In recent weeks, several national press outlets have retailed a set of very unflattering allegations about Donald Trump—namely, that he raped a 13-year-old at a 1994 orgy hosted by notorious celebrity sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. What no one’s reported on yet is the fact that the recent round of coverage is the culmination of an almost year-long campaign to quietly push these allegations into the public discussion, and maybe make some money in the process.
Click to expand...

We're just supposed to assume all of this political and legal advice to Epstein is scandalous, as if he wasn't subjected to false accusations on top of real ones, except nobody talks about the real ones anymore, cause they aren't as scandalous.
 
They had to delete this post. This is BEYOND embarrassing.

G5rBezWWkAENvho
 
Trump was oogeling young girls so much that he walked into a glass door - creating a running gag in the Epstein crowd.

What might be the worst thing is that all of this was known by so many people, including reporters (who are part of the email exchanges), and there was a deliberate decision to keep Trump out of all of it.

legacy Media needs to be destroyed.
 
Achievement Unlocked: Technically it's Ephebophilia

Also, I'll wait to link to it when an actual news site covers it instead of a ◊◊◊◊ storm on X, but I can genuinely say I did not have "photos of Donald Trump blowing Bill Clinton" on my bingo card.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom