|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
One thing that is commonly said to dismiss various "conspiracy theories" is that it'd be impossible to keep such a thing quiet.
Where are we on the Epstein stuff? As in has the pedophile (or whateverphile) conspiracy ring been exposed or not? Because it feels like we all know that there were a bunch of rich and powerful people (that are still rich and powerful) that were part of a pretty elaborate sex trafficking ring that Epstein was at the center of.
But also that we don't know that because none of the rich and powerful people that abused these 100's of victims have been convicted or anything (save Maxwell).
If the "it'd be impossible to keep quiet" thing is sound reasoning, then we'd have to expect for some bombshells to leak/drop soon right?
|
On July 16 2025 10:41 LightSpectra wrote:
I know the time before 2025 was practically a lifetime ago, but in the good old days, the Department of Justice was considered apolitical, and it would've been considered wildly inappropriate for a sitting President to order them to release files amidst an ongoing investigation for partisan gain. But that was way back when things like the Constitution and legal precedent were considered important principles, and Pam Bondi didn't say the thing was sitting on her desk waiting to be released.
"I know the time before 2025 was practically a lifetime ago," - You mean 2020.
"the Department of Justice was considered apolitical" - by who???
" it would've been considered wildly inappropriate for a sitting President to order them to release files amidst an ongoing investigation for partisan gain" - so you dont want Epstein files to be released??
"But that was way back when things like the Constitution and legal precedent were considered important principles"
They never were, they are pieces of paper:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. - aren't you against the bolded?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Anything about shouting fire in crowded theater?? (it was overturned btw)
|
On July 16 2025 10:36 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2025 08:51 Billyboy wrote:On July 16 2025 07:56 Razyda wrote:
Sorry but autopen discussion reads as if I moved back in time about 15 months where people are debating whether Biden, or Trump suffer more from cognitive decline...
As for who is arguing in bad faith, surely people must have some at least vague understanding that signing something without care what it is, is somewhat different than somebody else using your signature (which is the situation oBlade refers to: " if you have legal documents signed by autopen by a guy who was a near vegetable, it's necessary to investigate whether anyone around him surreptitiously usurped his authority"). First one for whatever is worth is still legally binding, second is not.
Edit: some typo I think it is very clear that Biden declined more than Trump, the interesting question would be who is more competent. Like even Biden at 25% of his max likely give Trump at his peak a good run for competency. The issue is that 25% is generous by row of magnitude if not 2. We talking about dude whose uncle was eaten by cannibals and who randomly wandered off while speaking. It also doesnt even matter, US voted for Trump as he is, whether he is competent means f... all. And his mental capacity is as it was when he was voted in. Show nested quote +On July 16 2025 09:02 LightSpectra wrote:
The difficult thing is that child rapist Donald Trump sounds like such an idiot every time he talks that nobody's sure if he's in cognitive decline, or if he was always that dumb. My men, you may wanna chill with child rapist thing, Democrats were sitting on the very same files for 4 years.Edit: "nobody's sure if he's in cognitive decline, or if he was always that dumb." - you are way behind the curve, he was always that dumb and most of people knows that.
This your first time seeing actual nonpartisanship?
|
I’m quite certain that the Epstein files would
1- not incriminate anyone.
2- not disprove that he indeed killed himself.
3- be mildly embarrassing for a looot of people.
4- not show any ring of any kind.
Epstein was an influential financier. He was connected to basically everyone of significance in those spheres. And it’s quite certain he must have had contacts, friends even that had nothing to do with his sexual activities.
Now if the files were released, anyone who has been close to him or visited his island would be branded a pedophile and part of a ring. That’s not a very good idea, especially when we have no idea who was even aware he was doing stuff like that.
Americans loooooove conspiracy theories, especially if it’s about child trafficking. I find quite amusing to see maga being eaten by the conspiracy theory it has fed on for years.
|
That class of predator like Epstein and Jared Fogle also probably aren't the super "sharing" or pimping type. Ultra narcissist or megalomaniac. They want the fresh children for themselves. Every child they traffic to someone else is an opportunity that's ruined for them. And somehow every side has convinced themselves that the other side is covering up Epstein because everyone in every side are pedophiles. Some trafficking to people other than Epstein probably happened, but most people just aren't pedophiles, even if they're powerful psychos. Stephen Hawking and Noam Chomsky are the funniest names I've seen so far. Like never even a hint of a blemish of that kind of moral issue in their entire lifetimes, but they were on a rich guy's plane once? Shows how far off the deep end people have gone with their commitment to a legend they've built up.
|
On July 16 2025 17:23 oBlade wrote:
That class of predator like Epstein and Jared Fogle also probably aren't the super "sharing" or pimping type. Ultra narcissist or megalomaniac. They want the fresh children for themselves. Every child they traffic to someone else is an opportunity that's ruined for them. And somehow every side has convinced themselves that the other side is covering up Epstein because everyone in every side are pedophiles. Some trafficking to people other than Epstein probably happened, but most people just aren't pedophiles, even if they're powerful psychos. Stephen Hawking and Noam Chomsky are the funniest names I've seen so far. Like never even a hint of a blemish of that kind of moral issue in their entire lifetimes, but they were on a rich guy's plane once? Shows how far off the deep end people have gone with their commitment to a legend they've built up.
Except Republicans strongly oppose the release of the files while Democrats attempt to release them. You're once again wrong.
|
Norway28712 Posts
I do agree that probably only a small fraction of people who flew on the airplane and were in some way affiliated with Epstein were actual pedophiles, and I have no idea how detailed the information in the files is. Of the Norwegian names that have been listed in the past that I've seen, I'm convinced none are pedos or even predators.
Honestly though Trump brags about being a creepy sexual offender and it doesn't seem to matter so even if there was actual proof that he raped a 13-year old 30 years ago I'd picture his supporters handwave that, too.
|
The american fascination with paedophile cults/conspiracies is really something. Reddit has rarely been this entertaining.
|
Maybe Republicans shouldn't have literally campaigned on "we know the Epstein list is real, Democrats are on it, and we're going to release it" if they didn't want blowback for saying it didn't exist two months after saying it was sitting on Bondi's desk waiting to be released 🤷
Just going to repost this here:
On July 07 2025 22:27 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2025 19:34 oBlade wrote:If Trump were raping children decades ago, it would have come out in the last 10 years. You mean like the accusations of Katie Johnson? Something exactly like that would've come out, and in fact did? Why is it so easy for Trump supporters to believe in conspiracy theories like the "Deep State" or a "cabal of globalists" or "a pizza restaurant with no basement was harvesting adrenochromes in its basement", but it's inconceivable that a billionaire who said that Jeffrey Epstein was a "terrific guy," and added, "It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side", who bragged about walking into the changing room of underage beauty pageants, who gave Ghislaine Maxwell well wishes several times after she had already been indicted for trafficking Epstein's sex slaves, who gave a cabinet position to the prosecutor responsible for Epstein's sweetheart deal, would've had sex with one of his trafficked girls? Ah, right, because of the "leftist media". They surely wouldn't have covered that up. The same media that spent more time talking about Obama being an elitist for putting Dijon mustard on his burger than Trump having been found by a court of law to have raped Jean Carroll. That media.
|
United States43251 Posts
On July 16 2025 17:23 oBlade wrote:
That class of predator like Epstein and Jared Fogle also probably aren't the super "sharing" or pimping type. Ultra narcissist or megalomaniac. They want the fresh children for themselves. Every child they traffic to someone else is an opportunity that's ruined for them. And somehow every side has convinced themselves that the other side is covering up Epstein because everyone in every side are pedophiles. Some trafficking to people other than Epstein probably happened, but most people just aren't pedophiles, even if they're powerful psychos. Stephen Hawking and Noam Chomsky are the funniest names I've seen so far. Like never even a hint of a blemish of that kind of moral issue in their entire lifetimes, but they were on a rich guy's plane once? Shows how far off the deep end people have gone with their commitment to a legend they've built up.
Prince Andrew
|
On July 16 2025 17:28 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2025 17:23 oBlade wrote:
That class of predator like Epstein and Jared Fogle also probably aren't the super "sharing" or pimping type. Ultra narcissist or megalomaniac. They want the fresh children for themselves. Every child they traffic to someone else is an opportunity that's ruined for them. And somehow every side has convinced themselves that the other side is covering up Epstein because everyone in every side are pedophiles. Some trafficking to people other than Epstein probably happened, but most people just aren't pedophiles, even if they're powerful psychos. Stephen Hawking and Noam Chomsky are the funniest names I've seen so far. Like never even a hint of a blemish of that kind of moral issue in their entire lifetimes, but they were on a rich guy's plane once? Shows how far off the deep end people have gone with their commitment to a legend they've built up. Except Republicans strongly oppose the release of the files while Democrats attempt to release them. You're once again wrong.
Republicans are neither praising Democrats for not releasing "the files" when they were in power, nor blaming Democrats for releasing them against their opposition of the release (since they didn't).
As Razyda futilely explained to you, Democrats had 4 years they controlled the presidency, FBI, DOJ, and even Congress, and didn't "release the files" or prosecute hundreds of pedophiles that everybody somehow knows exist (which is what people really want more than "muh files"). They get heat from the Republican base for that. Because it's Kash Patel and Dan Bongino that hyped this up for if Trump won. And then Bondi after getting in. That is where this specific impetus came from, outside of the 5 years of "and Epstein didn't kill himself" memes the entire culture shared. Now, you can see the base revolt about this issue on Truth in real time. They do not strongly oppose the release, they ratioed Blumpf on his own website. Republicans who are all-in on this are honestly upset with both sides, you're right, whereas most Democrats who jumped conveniently on the Trump must be a pedo train seem to have no thought to blame or inquire what the fuck their own people were doing at the time they were in power. So at any rate, the blame distribution network is nothing but consistently inconsistent and contradictory.
For conservative influencers it's only after very recent administration outreach that (some) of them have been convinced by and are relaying the messaging of maybe some ambitious people bit off more than they could chew, and this thing has snowballed to people promising things that just aren't going to ever come to pass in a way that satisfies those who are out for blood.
The House voted against Ro Khanna's motion, possibly for a few reasons:
1) Democrat representatives only vote for things people want when they know it's not actually going to happen and continue to not take heat from their base for not having done it themselves
2) The motion is worded as to publish "evidence" within 30 days which is not smart if the "evidence" includes alleged thousands of hours of child porn, and if you release evidence outright it means you probably aren't prosecuting, or you have to redact the evidence to avoid character assassinating associations, to which people then say aha! the real crime is hidden in the redaction - and then no one is never satisfied anyway so it'd be quicker to just move on
3) Can get people like Ghislaine and Patel and Bondi in a Congressional hearing under oath first for better context
|
The House voted against Ro Khanna's motion, possibly for a few reasons:
1) Democrat representatives only vote for things people want when they know it's not actually going to happen and continue to not take heat from their base for not having done it themselves
"You see, Republicans covering up child abuse is actually the fault of Democrats for voting for uncovering it. They definitely would've released the Epstein list if only Democrats voted against it."
|
Northern Ireland26058 Posts
People on the left side of the ledger aren’t necessarily criticising the lack of release cos Trump’s a paedo or whatever. Some are, sure.
They’re criticising the cohort of Pizzagaters, who were demanding the release of the Epstein files, but who seemingly don’t give a shit about that when it’s their bloke.
Personally I think the idea Epstein ran some paedo island is fanciful nonsense. Probably not limited just to him and Maxwell, but equally I don’t think anyone who came into his orbit was indulging in such things.
If there’s actual evidence to the contrary it should be of course public and the long arm of the law should be involved.
|
On July 17 2025 00:25 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +The House voted against Ro Khanna's motion, possibly for a few reasons:
1) Democrat representatives only vote for things people want when they know it's not actually going to happen and continue to not take heat from their base for not having done it themselves "You see, Republicans covering up child abuse is actually the fault of Democrats for voting for uncovering it. They definitely would've released the Epstein list if only Democrats voted against it."
Whom are you quoting, and how does that person know there is a list?
|
Stormfront pretending like Pam Bondi didn't explicitly say the Epstein list was on her desk ready to release just two months before saying it doesn't exist is chuckleworthy.
|
On July 17 2025 00:35 LightSpectra wrote:
Stormfront pretending like Pam Bondi didn't explicitly say the Epstein list was on her desk ready to release just two months before saying it doesn't exist is chuckleworthy.
You are angry at Republicans for not releasing something for which your only source alleging its existence is Republicans, and never stopped to ask your rational self why Democrats waited until 2025 to vote for it?
|
On July 17 2025 00:40 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2025 00:35 LightSpectra wrote:
Stormfront pretending like Pam Bondi didn't explicitly say the Epstein list was on her desk ready to release just two months before saying it doesn't exist is chuckleworthy. You are angry at Republicans for not releasing something for which your only source alleging its existence is Republicans, and never stopped to ask your rational self why Democrats waited until 2025 to vote for it?
So Republicans repeatedly lied about the Epstein list to win the 2024 election, and I shouldn't be upset because I should've already known they were willfully lying? And I should instead be mad at Democrats for only trying to force a release of the files after Republicans flip-flopped and said they would never release the list because it doesn't exist, before saying it does exist but it was made up by Comey and Biden?
I mean, as fucked up as that makes MAGA look by itself, that already is debunked by the fact that Bondi was still going around saying she had the Epstein list well after the election was over and she was appointed AG. So clearly that wasn't just a lie to win gullible idiots like yourself, it was a real, physical piece of evidence. Which means either they didn't actually bother to read it until sometime after February, saw that Trump or other high-level Republicans were on the list, after which they panicked and changed their story, OR they were flaunting the fact they had the list so that any rich people on it could bribe them into never releasing it between February and July. Which of those is supposed to vindicate Republicans, Stormfront?
On July 17 2025 00:32 WombaT wrote:
Personally I think the idea Epstein ran some paedo island is fanciful nonsense. Probably not limited just to him and Maxwell, but equally I don’t think anyone who came into his orbit was indulging in such things.
"Locals say Epstein was flying in underage girls long after his conviction for sex crimes—and authorities did nothing to stop him. “It was like he was flaunting it,” says an employee at the airstrip on St. Thomas."
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/07/horrors-of-jeffrey-epstein-private-island
|
United States43251 Posts
Financial managers like Epstein typically offer their clients and associates unique experiences or access as a way of winning business. Tickets to events, access to celebrities, parties etc. This is normal business practice in the industry.
We know that guests at some of his parties had sex with children (prince Andrew for example).
We know that Trump/Clinton are sexual predators and that Trump in particular has an interest in underage girls (for example his brags about abusing his power over the miss teen USA pageant).
We know that they repeatedly flew to the island where the underage sex parties were held on a plane called the Lolita Express to attend parties.
We know that Trump knew what was going on because he’s on video talking about how he and Epstein both love young girls and they have that in common.
We know Acosta (Trump cabinet appointee in 2017) intervened in Epstein’s previous trial for raping minors to get him released. Lied to the judge a bunch too.
We know that Epstein died disappeared in government custody while under protection while on suicide watch and that the footage of his death was deleted. He never stood trial and the evidence of the crimes of him and his associates has all been sealed.
We do not know that every person who went to Epstein’s island attended a party and had sex with underage girls. It seems very unlikely to me that everyone he propositioned would have accepted because most people don’t want to have sex with kids.
But it seems exceptionally unlikely to me that he wasn’t cultivating a network of rich and influential people for whom he offered access to rape children. That much seems pretty obvious, none of the victims have ever alleged that it was only Epstein and not his clients too.
So that leaves us with two possibilities.
1. Trump, a known rapist and sexual predator with a confessed interest in underage girls, flying on the Lolita Express to the island where the underage sex parties where happening and knowing about the underage girls but being in a different room when they actually raped the girls.
2. He was involved.
We don’t really have a luxury of a third option in which he’s not a rapist (court found that he was), not a close friend of Epstein (he said he was), not aware of the underage girls (he’s on tape talking about them), not at the parties (frequent flier to the island). Also one of the Epstein victims alleges she was raped by Trump.
The idea that Trump, and Clinton for that matter, didn’t fuck kids on Epstein’s island has always seemed rather outlandish to me. They’re sexual predators who are friends with the guy who procures rape victims for his friends and they repeatedly went to the place where the rape victims were kept. Of course they fucking did.
|
On July 17 2025 00:49 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2025 00:40 oBlade wrote:On July 17 2025 00:35 LightSpectra wrote:
Stormfront pretending like Pam Bondi didn't explicitly say the Epstein list was on her desk ready to release just two months before saying it doesn't exist is chuckleworthy. You are angry at Republicans for not releasing something for which your only source alleging its existence is Republicans, and never stopped to ask your rational self why Democrats waited until 2025 to vote for it? So Republicans repeatedly lied about the Epstein list to win the 2024 election, and I shouldn't be upset because I should've already known they were willfully lying? And I should instead be mad at Democrats for only trying to force a release of the files after Republicans flip-flopped and said they would never release the list because it doesn't exist, before saying it does exist but it was made up by Comey and Biden?
Can't parse most of this so the answer is going to be "no."
On July 17 2025 00:49 LightSpectra wrote:
I mean, as fucked up as that makes MAGA look by itself, that already is debunked by the fact that Bondi was still going around saying she had the Epstein list well after the election was over and she was appointed AG. So clearly that wasn't just a lie to win gullible idiots like yourself, it was a real, physical piece of evidence. Which means either they didn't actually bother to read it until sometime after February, saw that Trump or other high-level Republicans were on the list, after which they panicked and changed their story, OR they were flaunting the fact they had the list so that any rich people on it could bribe them into never releasing it between February and July. Which of those is supposed to vindicate Republicans, Stormfront?
So you seem to be cognizant enough to realize Republicans can lie and exaggerate and tell tall tales before an election. But once an election is over, Republicans are a convenient source of infallibility for you. If the month is February. But ah, if the month is July, we can't believe them anymore - again.
It couldn't be that Bondi got into office in February, got a text message "Madam Attorney General, the relevant files you requested are in your office," proudly overplayed her hand at a press conference proclaiming "I have the list," then went to actually open it and realized there was no notarized list of child rapists after all, and it turns out being AG is harder than that. No no, that's far-fetched and impossible. It must be that they texted her "The list is on your desk," she said, "I have the list," then read it and changed her mind. Oh and also Trump nominated her and Patel and all these people while letting them walk around talking about the list of child rapists all the time even though he's on it, never taking a minute to tell them to knock it off and there is no list, or to simply hire someone else unconcerned with lists. That definitely adds up.
Like the people who control the list would let her see it if it implicates people so powerful she can't reveal it. If the Illuminati were on the list, they wouldn't let her see it and then say you can't tell anyone. They would either not show her the list, or they would destroy the list.
Basically, you believe Bondi's actions prove there is a notarized list of proven child rapists. Okay. Problem is her actions are from this year. So let's do thinking cap time. Who bribed the Biden administration to keep it under wraps? The fucker died in 2019. Forget vindicating Republicans. Who cares about Republicans? You are an exact example of the inconsistent blame distribution system at work. Reserve 1 second of thought for thoughts like, gee, if this alleged conspiracy were true, what Democrats would it implicate? Think of an idea like subpoenaing Merrick Garland and asking what he knew and who bribed him. Otherwise it's nothing but unfounded partisan hot air.
|
United States43251 Posts
I would more willingly believe a man with multiple prior convictions for paying for sex who visited an ATM, pulled out $1000 in cash, spent a weekend in a motel room with a known prostitute, and consumed a lot of viagra during that weekend if he told me that he and the prostitute were actually both into Warhammer and they spent the weekend tabletop gaming and he took the viagra as a heart medication and a bird swooped in and stole the $1000 and he lied about all of this because he was ashamed of his nerdy hobby.
That seems more plausible to me than the narrative where Trump wasn’t in some way involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
