|
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 |
You look worse every single time you fail to actually reply to any of that. Don't think we've forgotten your embarrassing defense of his rape of E. Jean Carroll.
|
On June 20 2026 03:37 LightSpectra wrote:
You look worse every single time you fail to actually reply to any of that. Don't think we've forgotten your embarrassing defense of his rape of E. Jean Carroll. You have to say "adjudicated," like that was the law and the jury verdict. And you have to post the false claim that the Snopes article is supposed to correct, while linking the Snopes article. I'll say it one more time: The man you're excoriating can be very bad and evil and immoral and that still gives you no license to mix in false claims and act shocked and shoot the messenger when they're pointed out. You've spent a half dozen or more posts over something like a year trying to overcome this hurdle, but you simply won't.
|
Perhaps there's a reason your "lalala I can't hear you" apologia hasn't been effective? I mean, I don't know about you, but when I try to convince people of things in real life I usually attempt to engage using things like fact, reason, and rhetoric, rather than aping Monty Python's "this is a dead parrot" "no it isn't" sketch.
|
On June 20 2026 03:31 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 03:24 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 02:47 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 02:36 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 02:01 Falling wrote:
If your claim (which you have yet to correct my characterization, so I'm assuming at this point is a fair reading) is that it was only after Obama that Republicans learned to fight back, then it's not a tangent to bring up examples of the fight occurring before your proposed timeline.
As it is, I don't think you've actually established your claim as to the very specific intention you gave voters for why McCain and Romney got elected. No, that's way stronger of a claim. The polite, restrained, yet losing campaigns of McCain and Romney led directly to Trump's "get down with them in the mud/throw it right back at 'em" style of politics. Now that Trump is engaged in the Republican versions of nazi/fascist/pedo smears, it makes little sense to call out Democrats on it. I think your only direct response on the historical record and what I drew from the historical record was "Probably?," so I think you did give me an answer. It's not that "Republicans learned to fight back," they were always fighting for elections and won in 2000 and 2004. The mud wrestling wasn't new, it was just new to Presidential candidates in recent times. Obama had some veiled stuff on bitter clingers and rising above division, but it was only his allies that said McCain's rallies were like George Wallace the white-supremacist segregationist or Romney would put y'all [African Americans] back in chains. I want to stress to you, re-reading your posts, that debating the historical record and what that leads me to believe is true is radically different than condoning how it was done or whether people at the time were right for thinking about the issues that way. You’ve invented this whole alternate history where Democrats would have called Trump a pedophile even if he didn’t constantly go to parties on pedo island with his best friend the pedophile. And so in this history Trump is just returning fire after being attacked. And the attacks don’t really count because even though he does brag about liking them young they would have called him a pedophile anyway so it’s a stopped clock situation. It’s a fantasy. In the real world Trump gets called a pedophile because of all the pedophilia. I’m sure it’s a comforting fiction to you to reduce this all to Trump and Epstein. I’m absolutely loving the “constantly go to parties on pedo island,” because the last I heard the most rabid anti-Trump loon can’t even place Trump on the island at any time ever. Its like you start with a true premise of how bad Trump is, and demand that as license to just spout off nonsense (confident that good people will never call you on it!) Why is it so easy for Trump supporters to believe in conspiracy theories like "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" in 2002, 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 and has suggested he will pardon her, who gave a cabinet position to the prosecutor responsible for Epstein's sweetheart deal, who literally bought a girl from Epstein, who begged Republican Congressmen to not release the Epstein files which contain his name thousands of times, who claimed he was never on Epstein's jet before it was discovered he was many times, would've had sex with one of his trafficked girls?
Pizzagate was not a mainstream MAGA position (nor the Clinton kill list nor any number of other conspiracies). Many people who believed it did move straight to Epstein.
A week ago you said an incident with a video of a guy sitting on a man's chest slicing into the victim's neck and reported by the BBC was "alleged." Your confidence in evidence is almost entirely backwards.
|
On June 20 2026 03:47 LightSpectra wrote:
Perhaps there's a reason your "lalala I can't hear you" apologia hasn't been effective? I mean, I don't know about you, but when I try to convince people of things in real life I usually attempt to engage using things like fact, reason, and rhetoric, rather than aping Monty Python's "this is a dead parrot" "no it isn't" sketch. I'd prefer it if you'd address two lies in a substantive manner, but you've whizzed all the way past the lies into "I know why you're saying this." So, back to the basics, do you understand that you just made a false claim that the linked Snope article tried (and failed) to get you to correct? Do you understand that pivoting to five extra things about Trump when I point out “constantly go to parties on pedo island" is unsupportable makes the opposite point, or On June 20 2026 03:31 LightSpectra wrote:
Why is it so easy for LightSpectra to believe in conspiracy theories It's a castle made out of sand if you're big on correcting conspiracy theories and defending two lies accidentally and with no attempt at critical re-examination.
|
On June 20 2026 03:49 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 03:31 LightSpectra wrote:On June 20 2026 03:24 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 02:47 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 02:36 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 02:01 Falling wrote:
If your claim (which you have yet to correct my characterization, so I'm assuming at this point is a fair reading) is that it was only after Obama that Republicans learned to fight back, then it's not a tangent to bring up examples of the fight occurring before your proposed timeline.
As it is, I don't think you've actually established your claim as to the very specific intention you gave voters for why McCain and Romney got elected. No, that's way stronger of a claim. The polite, restrained, yet losing campaigns of McCain and Romney led directly to Trump's "get down with them in the mud/throw it right back at 'em" style of politics. Now that Trump is engaged in the Republican versions of nazi/fascist/pedo smears, it makes little sense to call out Democrats on it. I think your only direct response on the historical record and what I drew from the historical record was "Probably?," so I think you did give me an answer. It's not that "Republicans learned to fight back," they were always fighting for elections and won in 2000 and 2004. The mud wrestling wasn't new, it was just new to Presidential candidates in recent times. Obama had some veiled stuff on bitter clingers and rising above division, but it was only his allies that said McCain's rallies were like George Wallace the white-supremacist segregationist or Romney would put y'all [African Americans] back in chains. I want to stress to you, re-reading your posts, that debating the historical record and what that leads me to believe is true is radically different than condoning how it was done or whether people at the time were right for thinking about the issues that way. You’ve invented this whole alternate history where Democrats would have called Trump a pedophile even if he didn’t constantly go to parties on pedo island with his best friend the pedophile. And so in this history Trump is just returning fire after being attacked. And the attacks don’t really count because even though he does brag about liking them young they would have called him a pedophile anyway so it’s a stopped clock situation. It’s a fantasy. In the real world Trump gets called a pedophile because of all the pedophilia. I’m sure it’s a comforting fiction to you to reduce this all to Trump and Epstein. I’m absolutely loving the “constantly go to parties on pedo island,” because the last I heard the most rabid anti-Trump loon can’t even place Trump on the island at any time ever. Its like you start with a true premise of how bad Trump is, and demand that as license to just spout off nonsense (confident that good people will never call you on it!) Why is it so easy for Trump supporters to believe in conspiracy theories like "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" in 2002, 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 and has suggested he will pardon her, who gave a cabinet position to the prosecutor responsible for Epstein's sweetheart deal, who literally bought a girl from Epstein, who begged Republican Congressmen to not release the Epstein files which contain his name thousands of times, who claimed he was never on Epstein's jet before it was discovered he was many times, would've had sex with one of his trafficked girls? Pizzagate was not a mainstream MAGA position (nor the Clinton kill list nor any number of other conspiracies). Many people who believed it did move straight to Epstein.
The people who promoted it like Jack Posobiec are CPAC speakers and FOX News guests.
A week ago you said an incident with a video of a guy sitting on a man's chest slicing into the victim's neck and reported by the BBC was "alleged." Your confidence in evidence is almost entirely backwards.
I had to go look at my post to see what you're talking about. The "alleged" part is that the perpetrator was Sudanese.
|
On June 20 2026 04:00 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 03:47 LightSpectra wrote:
Perhaps there's a reason your "lalala I can't hear you" apologia hasn't been effective? I mean, I don't know about you, but when I try to convince people of things in real life I usually attempt to engage using things like fact, reason, and rhetoric, rather than aping Monty Python's "this is a dead parrot" "no it isn't" sketch. I'd prefer it if you'd address two lies in a substantive manner, but you've whizzed all the way past the lies into "I know why you're saying this." So, back to the basics, do you understand that you just made a false claim that the linked Snope article tried (and failed) to get you to correct? Do you understand that pivoting to five extra things about Trump when I point out “constantly go to parties on pedo island" is unsupportable makes the opposite point, or Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 03:31 LightSpectra wrote:
Why is it so easy for LightSpectra to believe in conspiracy theories
Your apologia might not be doing so hot if you're reduced to making fake quotes.
|
United States44109 Posts
On June 20 2026 03:24 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 02:47 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 02:36 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 02:01 Falling wrote:
If your claim (which you have yet to correct my characterization, so I'm assuming at this point is a fair reading) is that it was only after Obama that Republicans learned to fight back, then it's not a tangent to bring up examples of the fight occurring before your proposed timeline.
As it is, I don't think you've actually established your claim as to the very specific intention you gave voters for why McCain and Romney got elected. No, that's way stronger of a claim. The polite, restrained, yet losing campaigns of McCain and Romney led directly to Trump's "get down with them in the mud/throw it right back at 'em" style of politics. Now that Trump is engaged in the Republican versions of nazi/fascist/pedo smears, it makes little sense to call out Democrats on it. I think your only direct response on the historical record and what I drew from the historical record was "Probably?," so I think you did give me an answer. It's not that "Republicans learned to fight back," they were always fighting for elections and won in 2000 and 2004. The mud wrestling wasn't new, it was just new to Presidential candidates in recent times. Obama had some veiled stuff on bitter clingers and rising above division, but it was only his allies that said McCain's rallies were like George Wallace the white-supremacist segregationist or Romney would put y'all [African Americans] back in chains. I want to stress to you, re-reading your posts, that debating the historical record and what that leads me to believe is true is radically different than condoning how it was done or whether people at the time were right for thinking about the issues that way. You’ve invented this whole alternate history where Democrats would have called Trump a pedophile even if he didn’t constantly go to parties on pedo island with his best friend the pedophile. And so in this history Trump is just returning fire after being attacked. And the attacks don’t really count because even though he does brag about liking them young they would have called him a pedophile anyway so it’s a stopped clock situation. It’s a fantasy. In the real world Trump gets called a pedophile because of all the pedophilia. I’m sure it’s a comforting fiction to you to reduce this all to Trump and Epstein. I’m absolutely loving the “constantly go to parties on pedo island,” because the last I heard the most rabid anti-Trump loon can’t even place Trump on the island at any time ever. It’s like you start with a true premise of how bad Trump is, and demand that as license to just spout off nonsense (confident that good people will never call you on it!).
For transparency I’ll accept your correction of the record, according to Roger Stone it wasn’t on the island. The parties with Trump, Epstein, and underage girls that we have eyewitness reports of were in Palm Beach. Epstein had multiple pedo party locations.
Trump doesn’t dispute multiple parties with Epstein, nor that he had great times at them, nor that there were girls there, nor even that he likes his girls young. Donald Trump will, without any prompting at all, freely describe himself as the kind of man to do exactly what he is accused of.
That’s part of what makes this confusing. Why not just go “Epstein did nothing wrong”? If you’re going to commit then commit. Why throw Donald’s friend under the bus and then defend Trump? What real evidence do you have that Epstein was a pedophile?
|
On June 20 2026 03:29 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 03:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 20 2026 02:57 LightSpectra wrote:On June 20 2026 02:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 20 2026 00:44 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 20 2026 00:09 KwarK wrote:On June 19 2026 23:55 GreenHorizons wrote:A Democratic Socialist has jumped ahead of a Democrat that's been in office since the challenger was born. A Democratic socialist born in 1997 is threatening to unseat a veteran Democrat who first took office in 1997.
In Colorado’s first congressional district, 29-year-old Melat Kiros leads corporate-backed 30-year incumbent Diana DeGette by five points, according to a new poll.
The survey, by Data for Progress, finds Kiros leading DeGette 41% to 36%. The poll was conducted on behalf of Justice Democrats, a progressive super PAC backing Kiros’s campaign, and the American Priorities PAC.
The poll comes as outside cash floods into the Denver race. Super PACs linked to the real estate lobby, the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, and the Democratic establishment – and some that have seemed to emerge out of nowhere – have all descended into the race in support of DeGette, and against Kiros.
The race echoes dynamics playing out in Democratic primaries across the country: a progressive challenger, channeling pent-up voter frustration at the old-guard, pitching a momentous bid against an incumbent or party-friendly candidate. zeteo.comIt'll be interesting to see how establishment Democrats handle this increasing trend of voters recognizing them as oppositional to their own ostensible ideals. Sounds like you’re pushing a reformist narrative where non performing elected officials can be challenged within existing party structures. The problem with this kind of reformist narrative is that it excuses inaction, it turns waiting for change into a virtue. When direct action is required to destroy the hostile power structures there are always voices crying out “why not simply reform them gradually over time”. But in practice it’s simply another voice calling for the status quo, you’re either a revolutionary or you’re a counterrevolutionary. This is a classic example of reformist propaganda. If you think about it the people trying to make things better within the system are the worst of all, they know how bad the system is and they’re choosing to co opt and undermine the opposition to that system and turn it into just another layer of control. For that reason I regret to inform you that you were directly and personally involved in genocide (unspecified). But for a world where you actually believed and vociferously argued this with others here. The thread would be a lot more interesting, that's for sure. + Show Spoiler +What a lot of people don't understand is that people trying to make things better are the enemy because by trying to make things better within a broken system they're just propping up that system and allowing it to harm even more people. That is why I reserve all my criticism for helpers and never criticize bad actors, like Ronald Reagan. By which I mean I, like Reagan (great actor btw), reserve all my criticism for helpers.
I'm glad you think that this kind of contribution makes the thread more interesting though. There was a risk of there being an actual discussion of Kiros and her policies vs the incumbent + Show Spoiler +and I didn't want to allow that. Not when there was a high horse with nobody riding it and genocide taking place. Was there? Taking AIPAC money is something dyhb (iirc) has mentioned and an ongoing debate among these factions. What are people's thoughts on that (or any of the policy differences between them or these factions generally)? "I'll take any motherfucker's money if he givin' it away." -- Clay Davis There's no legal obligation to do what a lobbyist/PAC asked for after taking their money. It's more important to look at platform and voting/policy history, although for relatively blank slate candidates in primaries, who they take donations might be the only information you have to judge. I generally lean toward "take any money" myself, but... I think the Newsom example kinda encapsulates the way this can be exploited. Legal obligations aside, do we have any notable examples of a politician "betraying" so to speak their lobbyists and PACs after taking their money? Or is it something that ostensibly "could" happen but doesn't? Brad Lander has acknowledged taking money from pro-Israel PACs but is primarying Dan Goldman because Lander is pro-Palestine https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/17/nyregion/lander-goldman-israel-nyc-primary.html
I've heard Lander has a questionable history with swearing off funding only to take it later but not what you're suggesting? I don't see that there?
It seems like Goldman would be the candidate that would be in a position to betray AIPAC if you believe his rhetoric about them being problematic?
|
On June 20 2026 04:05 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 03:24 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 02:47 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 02:36 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 02:01 Falling wrote:
If your claim (which you have yet to correct my characterization, so I'm assuming at this point is a fair reading) is that it was only after Obama that Republicans learned to fight back, then it's not a tangent to bring up examples of the fight occurring before your proposed timeline.
As it is, I don't think you've actually established your claim as to the very specific intention you gave voters for why McCain and Romney got elected. No, that's way stronger of a claim. The polite, restrained, yet losing campaigns of McCain and Romney led directly to Trump's "get down with them in the mud/throw it right back at 'em" style of politics. Now that Trump is engaged in the Republican versions of nazi/fascist/pedo smears, it makes little sense to call out Democrats on it. I think your only direct response on the historical record and what I drew from the historical record was "Probably?," so I think you did give me an answer. It's not that "Republicans learned to fight back," they were always fighting for elections and won in 2000 and 2004. The mud wrestling wasn't new, it was just new to Presidential candidates in recent times. Obama had some veiled stuff on bitter clingers and rising above division, but it was only his allies that said McCain's rallies were like George Wallace the white-supremacist segregationist or Romney would put y'all [African Americans] back in chains. I want to stress to you, re-reading your posts, that debating the historical record and what that leads me to believe is true is radically different than condoning how it was done or whether people at the time were right for thinking about the issues that way. You’ve invented this whole alternate history where Democrats would have called Trump a pedophile even if he didn’t constantly go to parties on pedo island with his best friend the pedophile. And so in this history Trump is just returning fire after being attacked. And the attacks don’t really count because even though he does brag about liking them young they would have called him a pedophile anyway so it’s a stopped clock situation. It’s a fantasy. In the real world Trump gets called a pedophile because of all the pedophilia. I’m sure it’s a comforting fiction to you to reduce this all to Trump and Epstein. I’m absolutely loving the “constantly go to parties on pedo island,” because the last I heard the most rabid anti-Trump loon can’t even place Trump on the island at any time ever. It’s like you start with a true premise of how bad Trump is, and demand that as license to just spout off nonsense (confident that good people will never call you on it!). For transparency I’ll accept your correction of the record, according to Roger Stone it wasn’t on the island. The parties with Trump, Epstein, and underage girls that we have eyewitness reports of were in Palm Beach. Trump doesn’t dispute multiple parties with Epstein, nor that he had great times at them, nor that there were girls there, nor even that he likes his girls young. That’s part of what makes this confusing. Why not just go “Epstein did nothing wrong”? If you’re going to commit then commit. Why throw Donald’s friend under the bus and then defend Trump? What real evidence do you have that Epstein was a pedophile? The anti-Trump electorate is dogged by the passionate but foolhardy people that will say "constantly go to parties on pedo island." Maybe their head is the right place, I tend to think it is to a certain extent, but lying will defeat the exercise. So knowing that you are prone to lying and exaggeration, I have to do more than just take your word for it. What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein, and do they overlap the uncredible ones like Trump at the golf course? I know and understand that Trump and Epstein moved in the same party circuit and social circle in both Palm Beach and New York. They were also very close neighbors in Palm Beach. The most damning parts I've found were the time it took to ban Epstein from Mar-A-Lago after the first credible allegations. And, naturally, Trump's own skeezy comments about younger women.
But this is the internet, so you can't simply go "Oops, I stated something that was wrong" but also have to add "Why not just go "Epstein did nothing wrong." Well, I probably feed the trolls a little too much in these parts, but I'm going to not do it in this instance. You'll do much better in life when you stop imagining conspiracy theorists in all your disagreeable interactions.
|
United States44109 Posts
On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein
Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it.
Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony.
On November 18 2025 05:57 KwarK wrote:There is also this 1997 newspaper article that describes Anouska De Georgiou, one of Epstein's underage rape victims, being set up with Trump by their mutual friend, Ghislaine Maxwell. https://www.thefreelibrary.com/How suite! Trump's Brit of all right.-a061140675Show nested quote +After their meeting, Trump flew Madam Maxwell and the model south to the sunshine state, where all three enjoyed a happy weekend together. When they returned to New York, Anouska was installed in one of Donald's many apartments there. + Show Spoiler +https://www.threads.com/@beingliberal/post/C4nvJperkt0/media?hl=zh-hk The girl's name is Anouska De Georgiou. She was one of Epstein's rape victims. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/how-british-teen-model-was-lured-jeffrey-epstein-s-web-n1056901Now it's possible that we can't trust the source behind the newspaper article. The Sunday Mirror is a bit of a gossip rag, we don't necessarily know who they heard it from. The newspaper is printing stories about Ghislaine Maxwell but we don't know if they researched those stories or spoke to anyone close to Ghislaine. We might guess based on the fact that the Sunday Mirror was owned by Robert Maxwell, father of Ghislaine Maxwell, but I guess we can't know.
Trump definitely had sex with one of Epstein victims. Though Anouska was over 18 by the time Ghislaine "installed" her in Trump's apartment.
The point about "why not defend Epstein while you're at it" is that the burden demanded by Trump apologists for a man who openly brags about being attracted to minors is so absurd that they might as well. It's not good faith. It is insisting that we suspend any and all ability to extrapolate from what we can see and what he tells us. If you're going to do that then do it properly. Otherwise quit pretending that you can't see what we see.
|
On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know).
Ahh, there's an edit here, let's see
On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:
the burden demanded by Trump apologists for a man who openly brags ... I'm going out on a limb for you, who act like just another troll "I know why you demand evidence for claims, and that's because you're a Trump apologist," and are literally an hour past claiming that Trump was constantly with his best friend Epstein on Epstein Island. I'm used to the gish gallop, where one claim is dropped, and another claim is about to be dropped (multiple eyewitness reports of Trump and Epstein and underage girls on Palm Beach), and here's another side-claim (Trump had sex with flew a 20-year-old British model to Florida in the late 90s according to an uncorroborated UK gossip column). So if this is all just you playing games, then I'll settle with you that Trump dated and cheated on his wife with women much younger than him, which makes him of bad moral character. It's not as salacious as Trump partying with Epstein and underage girls at Palm Beach according to multiple witnesses, but it has the benefit of provided evidence.
On June 20 2026 04:51 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know). If you're now demanding that only men of good repute can be eyewitnesses of what goes on at Jeffrey Epstein's parties then we're going to have problems here for reasons that even you ought to be able to work out. Maybe a little less citing a conspiracy theorist to prove underage minor partyers with Trump and Epstein. Unless you think Vince Foster didn't commit suicide and Hillary Clinton and others covered it up with the help of Kenneth Starr. There's kind of a gap between bad eyewitnesses and Infowars.
|
United States44109 Posts
On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know).
If you're now demanding that only men of good repute can be eyewitnesses of what goes on at Jeffrey Epstein's parties then we're going to have problems here for reasons that even you ought to be able to work out. Of course Roger Stone is a massive piece of shit, that's why he was at the party with Trump, Epstein, and a bunch of underage girls! This is exactly what I'm talking about.
On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:
here's another side-claim (Trump had sex with flew a 20-year-old British model to Florida in the late 90s according to an uncorroborated UK gossip column).
The source for that one is Ghislaine Maxwell herself, she's an eyewitness to her setting Trump up with Anouska. Anouska also says it happened. Again, this is exactly the issue, Maxwell's newspaper publishes an article about Maxwell setting Trump up with Anouska, Anouska confirms it, but you're here saying it doesn't count because it's uncorroborated. Uncorroborated by who? The floor in the room?
And you're insisting that we don't know that they had sex after reading an article in which she literally describes herself as a Madam in the context of providing introductions of 20 year old models who like to be in relationships with rich older men who then fly off with the older man in question for a happy weekend at their mansion.
|
On June 20 2026 04:51 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know). If you're now demanding that only men of good repute can be eyewitnesses of what goes on at Jeffrey Epstein's parties then we're going to have problems here for reasons that even you ought to be able to work out. Of course Roger Stone is a massive piece of shit, that's why he was at the party with Trump, Epstein, and a bunch of underage girls! This is exactly what I'm talking about. Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:
here's another side-claim (Trump had sex with flew a 20-year-old British model to Florida in the late 90s according to an uncorroborated UK gossip column). The source for that one is Ghislaine Maxwell herself, she's an eyewitness to her setting Trump up with Anouska. Anouska also says it happened. Again, this is exactly the issue, Maxwell's newspaper publishes an article about Maxwell setting Trump up with Anouska, Anouska confirms it, but you're here saying it doesn't count because it's uncorroborated. Uncorroborated by who? The floor in the room? What's your source on that? You have an unsigned gossip column that doesn't name a source, and an article about how De Georgiou fell prey to Epstein years earlier. So I'm guessing you have something else that says what you say it says?
Your edit: What source are you getting this "she literally describes herself?"
|
United States44109 Posts
On June 20 2026 05:33 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 04:51 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know). If you're now demanding that only men of good repute can be eyewitnesses of what goes on at Jeffrey Epstein's parties then we're going to have problems here for reasons that even you ought to be able to work out. Of course Roger Stone is a massive piece of shit, that's why he was at the party with Trump, Epstein, and a bunch of underage girls! This is exactly what I'm talking about. On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:
here's another side-claim (Trump had sex with flew a 20-year-old British model to Florida in the late 90s according to an uncorroborated UK gossip column). The source for that one is Ghislaine Maxwell herself, she's an eyewitness to her setting Trump up with Anouska. Anouska also says it happened. Again, this is exactly the issue, Maxwell's newspaper publishes an article about Maxwell setting Trump up with Anouska, Anouska confirms it, but you're here saying it doesn't count because it's uncorroborated. Uncorroborated by who? The floor in the room? What's your source on that? You have an unsigned gossip column that doesn't name a source, and an article about how De Georgiou fell prey to Epstein years earlier. So I'm guessing you have something else that says what you say it says?
I guess it's possible that the newspaper was writing scandalous lies about Madam Maxwell. That would certainly be an awkward conversation for her to have with the newspaper's owner, Mr. Maxwell.
|
On June 20 2026 05:38 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 05:33 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:51 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know). If you're now demanding that only men of good repute can be eyewitnesses of what goes on at Jeffrey Epstein's parties then we're going to have problems here for reasons that even you ought to be able to work out. Of course Roger Stone is a massive piece of shit, that's why he was at the party with Trump, Epstein, and a bunch of underage girls! This is exactly what I'm talking about. On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:
here's another side-claim (Trump had sex with flew a 20-year-old British model to Florida in the late 90s according to an uncorroborated UK gossip column). The source for that one is Ghislaine Maxwell herself, she's an eyewitness to her setting Trump up with Anouska. Anouska also says it happened. Again, this is exactly the issue, Maxwell's newspaper publishes an article about Maxwell setting Trump up with Anouska, Anouska confirms it, but you're here saying it doesn't count because it's uncorroborated. Uncorroborated by who? The floor in the room? What's your source on that? You have an unsigned gossip column that doesn't name a source, and an article about how De Georgiou fell prey to Epstein years earlier. So I'm guessing you have something else that says what you say it says? I guess it's possible that the newspaper was writing scandalous lies about Madam Maxwell. That would certainly be an awkward conversation for her to have with the newspaper's owner, Mr. Maxwell. What's the source for "she literally describes herself." Not whether she said something that was untrue. I'm glad somebody's daddy owned the paper that published an unsigned gossip column whose only in-article attribution is that Frank Sinatra listens to a particularly recording according to ex-wife Nancy.
|
United States44109 Posts
On June 20 2026 05:47 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 05:38 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 05:33 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:51 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know). If you're now demanding that only men of good repute can be eyewitnesses of what goes on at Jeffrey Epstein's parties then we're going to have problems here for reasons that even you ought to be able to work out. Of course Roger Stone is a massive piece of shit, that's why he was at the party with Trump, Epstein, and a bunch of underage girls! This is exactly what I'm talking about. On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:
here's another side-claim (Trump had sex with flew a 20-year-old British model to Florida in the late 90s according to an uncorroborated UK gossip column). The source for that one is Ghislaine Maxwell herself, she's an eyewitness to her setting Trump up with Anouska. Anouska also says it happened. Again, this is exactly the issue, Maxwell's newspaper publishes an article about Maxwell setting Trump up with Anouska, Anouska confirms it, but you're here saying it doesn't count because it's uncorroborated. Uncorroborated by who? The floor in the room? What's your source on that? You have an unsigned gossip column that doesn't name a source, and an article about how De Georgiou fell prey to Epstein years earlier. So I'm guessing you have something else that says what you say it says? I guess it's possible that the newspaper was writing scandalous lies about Madam Maxwell. That would certainly be an awkward conversation for her to have with the newspaper's owner, Mr. Maxwell. What's the source for "she literally describes herself." Not whether she said something that was untrue. I'm glad somebody's daddy owned the paper that published an unsigned gossip column whose only in-article attribution is that Frank Sinatra listens to a particularly recording according to ex-wife Nancy.
Many papers are owned by somebody's daddy. This one that was writing puff pieces about Madam Maxwell was owned by her father. This is yet another example of exactly what I'm talking about.
Anouska said it happened. There's a contemporary newspaper article about it. You're insisting that we can't possibly know if the Maxwell newspaper had some kind of source for what happened at the party with Madam Maxwell. But we can know that they knew someone at that party. In fact, we can guess who the source was.
You don't see this from both sides. Nobody here goes "well how do you know that Hunter Biden wasn't just the best candidate for the consulting job". "okay but how do you know he wasn't the most qualified applicant". "okay but did you see the resumes of the other candidates". "okay but did it say nepotism anywhere on the job listing". You have an exclusively Trump issue with saying what you see.
|
And now Israel and Hezbollah have supposedly agreed to a ceasefire again, just a day after Israel's attack and Hezbollah's retaliation, and apparently the fighting is still happening anyway: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2026/6/19/iran-war-live-jd-vance-defends-iran-deal-as-us-says-naval-blockade-lifted
Israel vs. Anyone "agreeing to a ceasefire" is really feeling like a never-ending series of pranks. It seems like both sides just attack each other whenever they want, and then whenever they want to take a smoke break or a power nap, they "announce a ceasefire". And then they just go at it again whenever they feel refreshed, sometimes just hours or days later.
|
On June 20 2026 05:56 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2026 05:47 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 05:38 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 05:33 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:51 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:On June 20 2026 04:35 KwarK wrote:On June 20 2026 04:26 dyhb wrote:
What are the eyewitness reports of underage girls partying with Trump and Epstein Roger Stone wrote that he was there and saw it. Also Trump himself. He's on record joking in 2002 about Epstein's habits, his first hand knowledge is evidenced by his own testimony. Roger Stone, the big Vince Foster conspiracy theory promoter regarding Clinton? And Trump said he went to parties with Epstein and underage girls? Sorry that I'm not going to take your word for "we have eyewitness reports of ... Palm Beach," or if that one's leaving your posts to be replaced with "Trump joked about Epstein's habits" (by which I'm guessing this is rich men dating younger women and the post-hoc insinuation attaching to that, but I don't really know). If you're now demanding that only men of good repute can be eyewitnesses of what goes on at Jeffrey Epstein's parties then we're going to have problems here for reasons that even you ought to be able to work out. Of course Roger Stone is a massive piece of shit, that's why he was at the party with Trump, Epstein, and a bunch of underage girls! This is exactly what I'm talking about. On June 20 2026 04:48 dyhb wrote:
here's another side-claim (Trump had sex with flew a 20-year-old British model to Florida in the late 90s according to an uncorroborated UK gossip column). The source for that one is Ghislaine Maxwell herself, she's an eyewitness to her setting Trump up with Anouska. Anouska also says it happened. Again, this is exactly the issue, Maxwell's newspaper publishes an article about Maxwell setting Trump up with Anouska, Anouska confirms it, but you're here saying it doesn't count because it's uncorroborated. Uncorroborated by who? The floor in the room? What's your source on that? You have an unsigned gossip column that doesn't name a source, and an article about how De Georgiou fell prey to Epstein years earlier. So I'm guessing you have something else that says what you say it says? I guess it's possible that the newspaper was writing scandalous lies about Madam Maxwell. That would certainly be an awkward conversation for her to have with the newspaper's owner, Mr. Maxwell. What's the source for "she literally describes herself." Not whether she said something that was untrue. I'm glad somebody's daddy owned the paper that published an unsigned gossip column whose only in-article attribution is that Frank Sinatra listens to a particularly recording according to ex-wife Nancy. Many papers are owned by somebody's daddy. This one that was writing puff pieces about Madam Maxwell was owned by her father. This is yet another example of exactly what I'm talking about. Anouska said it happened. There's a contemporary newspaper article about it. You're insisting that we can't possibly know if the Maxwell newspaper had some kind of source for what happened at the party with Madam Maxwell. But we can know that they knew someone at that party. In fact, we can guess who the source was. Please link me the article where De Georgiou said it happened.
I don't really care that the UK had a paper owned by Mr Maxwell that referred to his daughter as a Madam.
When you have an unsigned gossip column that itself makes no claims of sourcing, the reader is left wondering if the unknown writer heard a rumor, embellished details, had it on good authority that he or she couldn't reveal, or made it up to get the gossip starting. You're saying that you don't know if Anouska confirmed it, you don't have a source that says she confirmed it, but you're just assuming the source and think I ought to make the same assumption that you did. I don't operate on such unverified and unsourced assumptions. I'm really trying to find another article that has a named author and makes a claim of source, but the best I could do is De Georgiou saying that Maxwell introduced her to Trump, but there was no impropriety on the part of President Trump.
|
United States44109 Posts
On June 20 2026 06:07 dyhb wrote:
You're saying that you don't know if Anouska confirmed it
No I'm not.
I met him on several occasions. Ghislaine Maxwell did introduce me to him and she introduced me to him with a clear message of my "being with him" in the same way that she had trafficked me and brought me to Jeffrey Epstein.
She doesn't deny that Ghislaine set her up with Trump, she's saying that she wasn't raped. When trying to explain what it was like being introduced to Trump by Ghislaine the closest comparison she could come up with was that it was a whole lot like being trafficked for sex.
In this instance the best you can do, to use your words, is to grab the sentence from the interview following the one where she literally uses the word "trafficked".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
