Anonymous wrote:An allegation of rape made anonymously in 2016 that was also withdrawn in 2016 should not be presented as proof of anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How long before she is suicided?

They can't get away with it again particularly after seeking out her testimony. I hope she agrees to testify before Congress. She isn't stupid and I cannot imagine her trusting trump to pardon her after the 2026 the election.

Anonymous wrote:How long before she is suicided?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So now Trump is claiming Bill Clinton went to Epstein's Island 28 times -

There is no evidence of Bill Clinton flying to Epstein's Island 28 times in the Epstein flight logs, so were did this come from?

Either

A. Trump has access to the files, has read them or was briefed on them and they are full of these details AND THE BANDAID NEEDS TO BE RIPPED OFF, THE COVERUP ENDED, AND THE FILES NEED TO BE RELEASED, or

B. Trump is full of shit, or

C. Trump knows Clinton was on Epstein's Island 28 times because he saw Clinton on the Island 28 of the times that he was there.

There is no evidence or you haven't seen the evidence personally?

What's this "you" in your response? This isn't about me or anyone else in this forum. It's about Trump, who made a VERY SPECIFIC accusation. Stay focused. We need to know why. Trump actually saw the evidence, in which case there's no more denying "there's no Epstein files or client list" or Trump made it up in which case you people need to start rethinking your support for this demented liar, or Trump has some of his own first-hand knowledge of Clinton being there, in which case he needs to be producing some details.

Anonymous wrote:19:08 can quit lying. You people are toast.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most likely problem with the Epstein files, whatever they actually comprise, is probably the same as with any "raw" investigative product or intelligence material. It's piles of hearsay, gossip, and unsubstantiated innuendoes. Trying to sort out the truth from the fiction especially decades after the fact is likely impossible. The material is probably extremely defamatory to a lot of very wealthy powerful people. The Steele Dossier is an example of what the release of false defamatory made up materials for political purposes can do.

The looks of concern and fear you saw on kash Patel's and Tulsi Gabbards faces seemed to be the expressions of people who didn't want to get involved as defendants in defamation lawsuits by releasing a bunch of unverified and unverifiable file materials.

Even the grand jury transcripts if they were released are generally all complete hearsay. That's routine. And that's one of the reasons for grand jury secrecy

But now that Trump is suing the Wall Street Journal we might get some insight into what was going on. The Estates attorney says the Estate has the birthday book. Fine. Produce it and we can see what if anything Trump and any other important friends of Epstein contributed to it.

I can't wait.

The Steele Dossier wasn't entirely false or uncorroborated. It contained numerous items later corroborated and proven to be factual, like:

- Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump and hurt Clinton
- Russian officials cultivated Trump associates and had contacts with members of his campaign
- Paul Manafort received payments from pro-Russian Ukrainian interests and shared polling data with a Russian agent
- Carter Page met with Russian officials during a 2016 trip to Moscow
- Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin was pulled from Washington amid concerns he’d be exposed

Only a handful of things were either disproven or not able to be corroborated, like:
- The notorious "pee tape" - still not corroborated, but not disproven either
- Michael Cohen's alleged trip to Prague. Cohen denied it and it was never corroborated via other sources
- Some of the bribes and quid-pro-quo deals like Rosneft offering Carter Page a commission - lacked credible sourcing.
- Russia DID try to cultivate Trump as an asset, but the details on the timing, methods and individuals involved that Steele had in his report were wrong.

Steele himself said he couldn't corroborate those and had a disclaimer that it was an unfinished report containing raw info that wasn't all verified or corroborated. Yet the right wing like to pretend like it was from the start 100% a deliberately manufactured hoax and smear containing nothing but lies, which is a distortion of the facts. Steele was mainly just relaying info from other sources. Danchenko was one of those sources and when confronted he admitted to lying to Steele yet the right wing likes to pretend that Steele made it all up himself.

Thank you for setting the record straight. It's so easy to play on people's forgetfulness and claim the Democrats are just as rotten as the Republicans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most likely problem with the Epstein files, whatever they actually comprise, is probably the same as with any "raw" investigative product or intelligence material. It's piles of hearsay, gossip, and unsubstantiated innuendoes. Trying to sort out the truth from the fiction especially decades after the fact is likely impossible. The material is probably extremely defamatory to a lot of very wealthy powerful people. The Steele Dossier is an example of what the release of false defamatory made up materials for political purposes can do.

The looks of concern and fear you saw on kash Patel's and Tulsi Gabbards faces seemed to be the expressions of people who didn't want to get involved as defendants in defamation lawsuits by releasing a bunch of unverified and unverifiable file materials.

Even the grand jury transcripts if they were released are generally all complete hearsay. That's routine. And that's one of the reasons for grand jury secrecy

But now that Trump is suing the Wall Street Journal we might get some insight into what was going on. The Estates attorney says the Estate has the birthday book. Fine. Produce it and we can see what if anything Trump and any other important friends of Epstein contributed to it.

I can't wait.

The Steele Dossier wasn't entirely false or uncorroborated. It contained numerous items later corroborated and proven to be factual, like:

- Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump and hurt Clinton
- Russian officials cultivated Trump associates and had contacts with members of his campaign
- Paul Manafort received payments from pro-Russian Ukrainian interests and shared polling data with a Russian agent
- Carter Page met with Russian officials during a 2016 trip to Moscow
- Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin was pulled from Washington amid concerns he’d be exposed

Only a handful of things were either disproven or not able to be corroborated, like:
- The notorious "pee tape" - still not corroborated, but not disproven either
- Michael Cohen's alleged trip to Prague. Cohen denied it and it was never corroborated via other sources
- Some of the bribes and quid-pro-quo deals like Rosneft offering Carter Page a commission - lacked credible sourcing.
- Russia DID try to cultivate Trump as an asset, but the details on the timing, methods and individuals involved that Steele had in his report were wrong.

Steele himself said he couldn't corroborate those and had a disclaimer that it was an unfinished report containing raw info that wasn't all verified or corroborated. Yet the right wing like to pretend like it was from the start 100% a deliberately manufactured hoax and smear containing nothing but lies, which is a distortion of the facts. Steele was mainly just relaying info from other sources. Danchenko was one of those sources and when confronted he admitted to lying to Steele yet the right wing likes to pretend that Steele made it all up himself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sometimes it's helpful to step back and restate the obvious. Trump/JD Vance spin on Epstein falls apart because they're saying two things at once:

1) What's in the Epstein files will exonerate Trump and show it all to be a Dem/media hoax

2) No we won't release the Epstein files

https://bsky.app/profile/gregsargent.bsky.social/post/3lusspy5kgs2v

Yes. Let’s restate The obvious.

Biden and his crew had these files for 4 years. Given their penchant for prosecuting Trump, if there were anything in there even mildly damning against Trump, they would have exploited the hell out of it.

Not necessarily. If Israel/mossad told Biden to back off, they would have undoubtedly complied

Not that it has any relevance now, but democrats did try and they were shut down by senate republicans.

However, even if the democrats did nothing, isn’t a bit more important now since the sitting president is likely a pedo?

Not just the Democrats but both parties are controlled by Mossad and Israel so ain't nothing coming out unless Mossad wants some names out.

Mossad has the complete original evidentiary material regarding the Epstein matter. The US only has a partial material, so its up to Israel to allow Trump to release anything or nothing.

It's likely Mossad has several other similar bribe/blackmail operations going on in the US for politicians, billionaires etc.

Anonymous wrote:The most likely problem with the Epstein files, whatever they actually comprise, is probably the same as with any "raw" investigative product or intelligence material. It's piles of hearsay, gossip, and unsubstantiated innuendoes. Trying to sort out the truth from the fiction especially decades after the fact is likely impossible. The material is probably extremely defamatory to a lot of very wealthy powerful people. The Steele Dossier is an example of what the release of false defamatory made up materials for political purposes can do.

The looks of concern and fear you saw on kash Patel's and Tulsi Gabbards faces seemed to be the expressions of people who didn't want to get involved as defendants in defamation lawsuits by releasing a bunch of unverified and unverifiable file materials.

Even the grand jury transcripts if they were released are generally all complete hearsay. That's routine. And that's one of the reasons for grand jury secrecy

But now that Trump is suing the Wall Street Journal we might get some insight into what was going on. The Estates attorney says the Estate has the birthday book. Fine. Produce it and we can see what if anything Trump and any other important friends of Epstein contributed to it.

I can't wait.