Trump's DOJ: There Is No Epstein List

[canpakes]

Under most President's not named Trump, the Justice Department operates more-or-less independently from the White House. It would have been weird (not to mention dumb) to derail possible future prosecutions if Biden had meddled in that manner.

Related to that, didn’t the Trump Administration actually set some conditions on the initial investigation that limited what Epstein was charged for? I forget which official from that Administration worked out a deal to that effect, so will have to do a bit of looking.

[ajax18]

Under most President's not named Trump, the Justice Department operates more-or-less independently from the White House. It would have been weird (not to mention dumb) to derail possible future prosecutions if Biden had meddled in that manner. Aside from that, for most of Biden's presidency the Epstein files were actually sealed by court order.

As they are now and as they should be to protect the reputations of people who bear false witness like Virginia Giuffre

Trump's relationship with Epstein is already well-known, as is his documented history of sexual improprieties, his multiple convictions for fraud, etc. What could the Epstein files reveal about Trump's character that we don't already know?

Nothing.

[Chap]

people who bear false witness like Virginia Giuffre

Against which person or persons did Virginia Giuffre 'bear false witness', and when?

What court, if any, ruled that she had done so?

[ajax18]

people who bear false witness like Virginia Giuffre

Against which person or persons did Virginia Giuffre 'bear false witness', and when?

What court, if any, ruled that she had done so?

She likely bore false witness against Prince Andrew. People thought that because the royal family paid that there must have been some truth to her claim. In hindsight, it's pretty apparent there was not. I believe she bore false witness against Allen Dershowitz as well. She was discredited to the point that the prosecution wouldn't even call her as a witness in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. That's as much evidence of bearing false witness as you are going to get. Courts have a pro female accuser bias in the western world. They rarely if ever punish women for bearing false witness nor rule that they have done so, i.e. Crystal Mangum, Tawana Brawley, Lena Dunham. The best a male victim of false witness can hope for is for a jury to say he's not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and let him walk free even though the damage to his reputation is already done. The Duke Lacrosse players' families spent millions of dollars a piece in attorneys trying to keep their freedom and prove their innocence. As far as I know they were never reimbursed by Mangum, Nifong, Duke University, the media that convicted them on television, nor the city of Raleigh or the state of North Carolina. This is true even though it is now a proven fact that both Mangum and Nifong (D) were lying the entire time!

[canpakes]

Trump's relationship with Epstein is already well-known, as is his documented history of sexual improprieties, his multiple convictions for fraud, etc. What could the Epstein files reveal about Trump's character that we don't already know?

Nothing.

You’d be OK with Trump having sex with minors?

MAGA sure has gone off the rails.

[Bret Ripley]

Nothing.

You’d be OK with Trump having sex with minors?

When asked if he had an age limit for dating, he indicated that 12 was out-of-bounds. So you can't say he has no standards.

MAGA sure has gone off the rails.

The thing about red hats is that any red lines are undetectable.

[Chap]

[/quote]

Against which person or persons did Virginia Giuffre 'bear false witness', and when?

What court, if any, ruled that she had done so?

She likely bore false witness against Prince Andrew. People thought that because the royal family paid that there must have been some truth to her claim. In hindsight, it's pretty apparent there was not. I believe she bore false witness against Allen Dershowitz as well. She was discredited to the point that the prosecution wouldn't even call her as a witness in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. That's as much evidence of bearing false witness as you are going to get. [...]

As a British person with a long-term familiarity with Prince Andrew, I was not at all surprised to hear the accusations against him. I have to say that the Giuffre accusations seem quite consistent with his character.

You might like to watch this interview with him, broadcast on the BBC.

Prince Andrew & the Epstein Scandal: The Newsnight Interview - BBC News

Pay attention to how he deals with the question of why he continued to be in contact with Epstein after his initial exposure as a pedophile.

At 8:00 the interviewer asks why, after Epstein's first conviction, Andrew went to stay with him at his New York mansion ... enjoy!

[ajax18]

You’d be OK with Trump having sex with minors?

No, I never said that. I said there is no Epstein file with anything more embarrassing about President Trump than what we already know. If there were, the Biden administration would have surely leaked this during their 2024 lawfare and election interference campaign.

Illegal border crossings are at zero. Those here illegally are being sent back to their native countries, saving the taxpayer enormous amounts of money and raising the hourly pay of legal American workers. US AID and other abuses of the working American taxpayer has been DOGED. Iran's nuclear weapons facility has been destroyed. Taxes have been decreased and entitlement programs have been cut through the big beautiful bill. What more could I want from Trump than what he has delivered? I don't give a rip about the Epstein files.

[Bret Ripley]

You’d be OK with Trump having sex with minors?

No, I never said that. I said there is no Epstein file with anything more embarrassing about President Trump than what we already know. If there were, the Biden administration would have surely leaked this during their 2024 lawfare and election interference campaign.

Awesome, then Trump has nothing to fear by doing what he said he would do and declassify them. Which is why he isn't trying to prevent the Epstein files from being made public. And why Mike Johnson is isn't twisting himself in knots to try to prevent a vote on releasing them.

If there is nothing there, what sane reason is there for Trump to divide his own party over this issue?

[canpakes]

Courts have a pro female accuser bias in the western world.

Even you found it necessary and prudent to finish that sentence with, “in the Western world”.

Throughout history - from biblical tales about how everything was Eve’s fault and right on up to burning women as witches ‘just because’, and beyond - the arc of persecution has not bent favorably for women. Yet here you are again obsessing over the one case you can point to from 19 years ago, to justify your feelings of victimization.

Imagine how Epstein’s girls felt. Not that MAGA gives a damn about that any more, after their greasy orange fraudster browbeat them into tucking their tails and scurrying off.