About that signature

[Airyaman]

Massie is no point on this.

 

[HumblePi]

This is an interesting video where MTG seems to show the signature matches.



Is this real though, or AI? The hands look weird to me.

Holy shit Trump is not going to like her very much . I figure Laura Loomer got her kicked out of the inner circle.

 

[Callen]

Trump wrote that letter and signed it too. Just admit that there is no way the Epstein estate could have inserted that into a book over 20 years ago. Do you think they knew then that he would be President?

This can be, and likely, is true

Trump was a fellow pedophile with Jeffery for many years. Just admit it and admit that you do not care. What is so hard about that? It's not like he was a socialist although he was a Democrat.

But it doesn't mean this is

 

[Logophile]

Trump wrote that letter and signed it too. Just admit that there is no way the Epstein estate could have inserted that into a book over 20 years ago. Do you think they knew then that he would be President? Trump was a fellow pedophile with Jeffery for many years. Just admit it and admit that you do not care. What is so hard about that? It's not like he was a socialist although he was a Democrat.

You dont know any of that to be true. You know what all the lies, Democratic witch hunts and name calling earned you?? A federal defeat. You and those like you are why Trump was elected. Good job.

And if you'd been reading through the thread you'd know that I don't care about analyzing the signature. I've made it very clear. And just so you know, unless there is proof, the term you use to describe Trump is libelous. But, lucky for you, nobody with a reason or the funds to sue you cares an iota about what you think. Here, you just come across as a raging, hyperbolic accuser with no proof of anything. Unless you have that, your credibility is the only thing to suffer

 

[RedFishBlueFish]

Lol!! I've never witnessed anything so insidious as the Democratic party. THIS is what they're focused on: signatures. They have nothing else to do because they have no legitimate policies to offer and nothing productive to contribute in the way of American betterment, so instead it's whether Trump's signature on a stupid piece of paper is "real." LOL!I Save us from socialism, especially the Canadian brand of socialism!! I think sometimes they must be regressing, lol!!

There would be no need to focus on signatures if Trump told the truth, which he seems incapable of doing.

Trump could have said, "Yes, Jeff and I were friends in the distant past and I sent him this card." That would have created less furor than lying about it.

Now that everybody knows he is lying about his friendship with Epstein, people are questioning all his statements on that matter.

Trump has handled this really stupidly.

The focus isn't on the signature. The focus is on the fact that Trump is almost certainly a pedophile.

 

[RedFishBlueFish]

Nobody is gonna get this situation right first try or even the third try. There's no way to manage it without fall out. And yes, I do blame the Democrats. Instead of pulling the party together and having a constructive HONEST way forward, it's the same ol slimy crap

Maybe you don't understand what news is?

When the Wall Street Journal writes an article about the President of the United States' birthday card to a notorious, convicted sex trafficker and pedophile - that's news.

When the POTUS then sues the WSJ for billions - that's news.

When the WSJ then publishes proof that the card is real - that's news.

Just because you don't like the news, doesn't mean it's not news.

 

[Jagged]

You dont know any of that to be true. You know what all the lies, Democratic witch hunts and name calling earned you?? A federal defeat. You and those like you are why Trump was elected. Good job.

And if you'd been reading through the thread you'd know that I don't care about analyzing the signature. I've made it very clear. And just so you know, unless there is proof, the term you use to describe Trump is libelous. But, lucky for you, nobody with a reason or the funds to sue you cares an iota about what you think. Here, you just come across as a raging, hyperbolic accuser with no proof of anything. Unless you have that, your credibility is the only thing to suffer

Of course it's true. That is known based on Trump's lies about it. Trump wouldn't have to lie if truly didn't give it to Epstein.

 

[Callen]

And if you'd been reading through the thread you'd know that I don't care about analyzing the signature. I've made it very clear. And just so you know, unless there is proof, the term you use to describe Trump is libelous. But, lucky for you, nobody with a reason or the funds to sue you cares an iota about what you think. Here, you just come across as a raging, hyperbolic accuser with no proof of anything. Unless you have that, your credibility is the only thing to suffer

What are you going to think when the case against the WSJ is tossed out of court? No doubt you will think what a victim Trump is ......yet again.

 

[element94]

You didn't prove what this poster below alleged, friend, and now you are goal-post shifting. See ya!

NJBob said:
and the depth of his involvement in the abuse of young girls.

Underage victims' statements answers the question you want to avoid, because it's bad, very bad. See ya!

 

[Logophile]

Of course it's true. That is known based on Trump's lies about it. Trump wouldn't have to lie if truly didn't give it to Epstein.

You're another that is posting an absolute with ZERO proof. What concerns me is the length liberals will go to in order to reestablish their utmost desire for a tyrannical, federal government. It's the same methodology used before: innuendos, assignations, guilt by association and pure deceit. Unless you have definitive proof, you have nothing. In the recent past, what liberals tried to do is pervert justice through biased systems or tried to socially engineer a takeover by inculcating youth with unsubstantiated claims. At this juncture, neither is going to work. The American majority has wised up. So again, unless you have proof, you're simply making libelous claims

 

[Logophile]

What are you going to think when the case against the WSJ is tossed out of court? No doubt you will think what a victim Trump is ......yet again.

The WSJ - like many established news organizations that were born of print - is facing a subscription deficit. When it comes to money, especially in New York, the gloves come off and any low blow is deemed acceptable. Salacious news about Trump translates to national attention and coffer filling. The two questions you should be asking yourself is why the WSJ didn't print the signature right off the bat with the testimony of handwriting experts, and more importantly, how does this piece of "correspondence" prove Trump is guilty of having had sex with an underaged girl

 

[Callen]

The WSJ - like many established news organizations that were born of print - is facing a subscription deficit. When it comes to money, especially in New York, the gloves come off and any low blow is deemed acceptable. Salacious news about Trump translates to national attention and coffer filling. The two questions you should be asking yourself is why the WSJ didn't print the signature right off the bat with the testimony of handwriting experts, and more importantly, how does this piece of "correspondence" prove Trump is guilty of having had sex with an underaged girl

Where did I say it had anything to do with proving he had sex with an underage girl? In fact where have I have ever said he did?

Now back to the question you didn't answer....what are you going to do when the liable case gets tossed?

 

[Logophile]

Where did I say it had anything to do with proving he had sex with an underage girl? In fact where have I have ever said he did?

Now back to the question you didn't answer....what are you going to do when the liable case gets tossed?

It won't be tossed. Third question: why the interest in the signature if it proves nothing, specifically your interest??

 

[Callen]

It won't be tossed. Third question: why the interest in the signature if it proves nothing, specifically your interest??

It will be tossed or dropped. No way he is going to be deposed.

It is the incompetence, hubris and deceit of this administration that needs to be exposed that interests me.

 

[Ikari]

You're another that is posting an absolute with ZERO proof. What concerns me is the length liberals will go to in order to reestablish their utmost desire for a tyrannical, federal government. It's the same methodology used before: innuendos, assignations, guilt by association and pure deceit. Unless you have definitive proof, you have nothing. In the recent past, what liberals tried to do is pervert justice through biased systems or tried to socially engineer a takeover by inculcating youth with unsubstantiated claims. At this juncture, neither is going to work. The American majority has wised up. So again, unless you have proof, you're simply making libelous claims

MAGAs care about "proof"? They went all in on "election fraud" and never produced an ounce of proof. They did the whole "Hunter laptop" and tried to claim Biden was a paid actor, with no proof of it, even repeated Russian disinformation to try to make the leaps. MAGA is all about lies with no proof.

 

[Emlee]

Massie is no point on this.

Massie is on point on this as well.

All these spineless clowns who have been out parroting things such as the signature is fake etc know it’s lies, but they’re more afraid of the mad king’s revenge if they tell the truth.

 

[Jagged]

You're another that is posting an absolute with ZERO proof. What concerns me is the length liberals will go to in order to reestablish their utmost desire for a tyrannical, federal government. It's the same methodology used before: innuendos, assignations, guilt by association and pure deceit. Unless you have definitive proof, you have nothing. In the recent past, what liberals tried to do is pervert justice through biased systems or tried to socially engineer a takeover by inculcating youth with unsubstantiated claims. At this juncture, neither is going to work. The American majority has wised up. So again, unless you have proof, you're simply making libelous claims

He lied. Provably. In a vain attempt to show he didn't give that letter to Epstein, he claimed he doesn't draw pictures, as though that's proof he didn't make it. But that was quickly debunked by the news, showing other pictures he had drawn. Same thing with his signature. He denies it's his signature and his White House staff posted images of his signature from recent signings. Again, as proof he didn't make that letter. Except the signature on that 22 year old letter matches precisely what his signature looked like 22 years ago. Then there's the conundrum of, if that's not his gift to the birthday book, where is his gift to it.

He's a pathological liar and he's clearly lying again. Your bizarre denials are incapable of cleansing his stench on this. And your devotion to him is wasted. He doesn't give a shit about you.

 

[Jagged]

It won't be tossed. Third question: why the interest in the signature if it proves nothing, specifically your interest??

Maybe, maybe not. We'll see. Given his suit is based on the falsehood that the letter doesn't even exist, compounded with the reality he can prove neither malice by the WSJ, nor the WSJ published that article knowing it was fake, I believe thd odds are not in Trump's favor. But again, we'll see.

 

[The AntiDonald]

What I'm finding so insidious is the dedication here to "getting Trump," to the point where now all the witch hunt socialists think it boils down to a stupid signature. "Ooooh, is it real?? Yeah, we're gonna git im this time. That'll teach him for winning an election."

As far as @trixare4kids is concerned, she's pretty much right. You may have the legal right, but you sure don't have much in the way of moral grounds. I can't help but have my suspicions about a foreign, clearly socialist poster parked in a foreign country finding fault with everything a conservative US administration does, as if his own, so called native country doesn't need his "insights"

I think you're missing a lot of the point. What most of us can't understand is why Trump feels he needs to lie if he did nothing wrong. Release all the files unredacted and with out a doubt he'll be exonerated, right.

Or will he? Care to explain.

 

[Jagged]

I think you're missing a lot of the point. What most of us can't understand is why Trump feels he needs to lie if he did nothing wrong. Release all the files unredacted and with out a doubt he'll be exonerated, right.

Or will he? Care to explain.

He won't be exonerated. That's why he refused to release phase 2. Because he's named in it.

 

[HumblePi]

He won't be exonerated. That's why he refused to release phase 2. Because he's named in it.

His attempts at denying the birthday card to Epstein is fake, is something only his MAGA base will believe. "It's not my signature" "I don't draw pictures" "That's not my language"

 

[Decypher]

Ad hominem fallacy.

None of you who have posted on this thread have evidence, concrete proof of Trump being involved in crimes of pedophilia.

Well hold on to your hat Trix, while I reveal that the Epstein Files may contain that very evidence!

And that’s why people have been calling for their release!

 

[Logophile]

Maybe, maybe not. We'll see. Given his suit is based on the falsehood that the letter doesn't even exist, compounded with the reality he can prove neither malice by the WSJ, nor the WSJ published that article knowing it was fake, I believe thd odds are not in Trump's favor. But again, we'll see.

The onus is on the WSJ to prove the validity of the signature or even the validity of the document as originating from him. Not so easy to do, especially in this day and age. A lot of very well respected art experts - and I'm talking academics that have studied particularly artists all their professional lives - have been fooled by proven fakes and as a result, investors have lost a lot of money on some very big names. Some of these paintings that were sold through Sothebys and Christies - doesn't get much more researched than that - and these auction houses were held accountable. Soooo, my guess is that the WSJ legal team is trying to track down every single person who had access to those docs to try to see if it's "really real," and may eventually settle out of court with a "not sure, sorry"

 

[Logophile]

I think you're missing a lot of the point. What most of us can't understand is why Trump feels he needs to lie if he did nothing wrong. Release all the files unredacted and with out a doubt he'll be exonerated, right.

Or will he? Care to explain.

How he is gonna be exonerated exactly?? As far as "the file" is concerned , it will only contain more interpretive "smoking guns" to be used by his detractors. People who hate the man have already built what they think is an airtight case for pedophilia and have tried their darnedest to convict him in the court of public opinion. Even if they don't have a shred of actual evidence, it doesn't matter to them. Why would anybody put himself through more of it?? I've seen enough of this in my life to know that mobs are capable of horrible accusations, and take no responsibility for ruining lives. A classic example is the Jon Benet Ramsey case. Another is Richard Jewell. What the press did was absolutely immoral. You think providing his enemies with more information will stop them?? Nothing will shut them up no matter what's disclosed. I see it here. All Trump can do is get through his presidency by keeping his eye on running the country

 

[devildavid]

The onus is on the WSJ to prove the validity of the signature or even the validity of the document as originating from him. Not so easy to do, especially in this day and age. A lot of very well respected art experts - and I'm talking academics that have studied particularly artists all their professional lives - have been fooled by proven fakes and as a result, investors have lost a lot of money on some very big names. Some of these paintings that were sold through Sothebys and Christies - doesn't get much more researched than that - and these auction houses were held accountable. Soooo, my guess is that the WSJ legal team is trying to track down every single person who had access to those docs to try to see if it's "really real," and may eventually settle out of court with a "not sure, sorry"

No, the onus is on Trump to prove the letter doesn’t even exist, as was claimed in his lawsuit. So much for that.

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/trump-sues-wsj-over-epstein-birthday-letter.pdf