There is no evidence you'd believe it if it were presented. I'll leave you to your derangement now.There is no evidence what you say is true
There is no evidence you'd believe it if it were presented. I'll leave you to your derangement now.
So there are rumors and reports left and right and old pictures going back decades of powerful people smiling and shaking hands with Epstein. The right are gleefully predicting Clinton will finally get his comeuppance and the Left's media are are pointing fingers at Trump.
So a simple poll to gauge the DP community's opinion...
Google it. I've wasted enough time in this lunacy.
I don't know if we can say that either Clinton or Trump actually partook in the same actions as Epstein. I believe that both knew what he was doing, however.
And neither Trump nor Clinton will see any repercussions from this.
Learn to google better.I googled for it. I didn't find it.
Color me surprised that you can't find a link either.
Both have had uncomfortably close relationships with Epstein, and that's while he was operating what everybody was calling "Pedophile Island."
They already look pretty dirty, and if Epstein starts naming accomplices, then I don't think either of them are going to come out smelling very good. The only difference between Clinton and Trump is that Clinton would be absolutely destroyed publicly if this blew up on him, whereas nothing would change with Trump one iota.
Sorry for writing about your comprehension level.I'm glad you agree there is no evidence.
Thanks.
Dismissed
Sorry for writing about your comprehension level.
Promise? :clap:Yep. You got nuthin'.
Buh bye.
Promise? :clap:
I googled for it. I didn't find it.
Color me surprised that you can't find a link either.
Alan Garten, an attorney for the Trump Organization, has said Trump had “no relationship” with Epstein.
....
The relationship, whatever it was, appears to have cooled by 2007. Garten said in an interview Monday that although Epstein was never a member of Mar-a-Lago, Trump prohibited him from visiting the club around that time, as a reaction to criminal charges that had been filed against Epstein.
Fair enough, Same story is repeated in many other media outlets - could come from same root source. WaPo is pretty solidity rooted in the LW dugout.https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.4e9a5ed7c680
I'm keeping this one solidly in the unconfirmed rumor drawer for now because, for all I know, the rumor that Trump banned Epstein from Mara Lago may have been started by Trump himself. If only just in the WaPo story, the claim is made by an attorney for Trump Org. I'm giving this a 75% chance of being false.
If the banning turns out to be true, however, then according to the Washington Post, it was in reaction to Epstein's sex abuse legal troubles. But that doesn't mean Trump is innocent; it only tells us that he believed Epstein had become too radioactive to continue associating with.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.4e9a5ed7c680
I'm keeping this one solidly in the unconfirmed rumor drawer for now because, for all I know, the rumor that Trump banned Epstein from Mara Lago may have been started by Trump himself. If only just in the WaPo story, the claim is made by an attorney for Trump Org. I'm giving this a 75% chance of being false.
If the banning turns out to be true, however, then according to the Washington Post, it was in reaction to Epstein's sex abuse legal troubles. But that doesn't mean Trump is innocent; it only tells us that he believed Epstein had become too radioactive to continue associating with.
Just a point of context to the “young girls” comment. Trump was in his 50s when he said that. Isn’t it at all plausible he was referring to women in their 20s or 30s? I’m in my 50s now and I certainly consider 20 year old women to be very young.
... no court in the country will cut him any slack this time.
Fair enough, Same story is repeated in many other media outlets - could come from same root source. WaPo is pretty solidity rooted in the LW dugout.
I'm kicking off with number five: either or both knew. Trump has said as much ("some of the girls were on the younger side") and Clinton can't not have heard the same rumors. I guess there's a sort of don't ask, don't tell policy among the rich and powerful.
We're going to know in the trial anyway. This is more of a panic-o-meter.
If the banning turns out to be true, however, then according to the Washington Post, it was in reaction to Epstein's sex abuse legal troubles. But that doesn't mean Trump is innocent; it only tells us that he believed Epstein had become too radioactive to continue associating with.
That's a different flavor from what Bullseye said ... but it actually would put Trump in a better light than what Bullseye said. Banning him in response to actual criminal charges is better than "kicking him out of a party for molesting a young girl" and then banning him, with no indication that he reported Epstein to the proper authorities. So that's why I wanted the link. Well, that's one of the reasons I wanted the link.
The Clintons have always stayed on the right side of the law, and they know that if they sneeze the wrong way, there will be an investigation. But Trump has always thought himself above the law, and has never been careful in his private life.
Ummmm...
He recused himself? Yeah, I heard that he recused himself, don't believe it for a second.
I don't believe Barr worries about having said that in the least.
He might SAY he recused himself but I'd bet money he's got tentacles reaching out to every single plaintiff in the case.
There is no evidence what you say is true
You have a link for that?
Some people value honesty above bias. Making wild "he works for Trump therefore he's lying" is intellectual dishonesty.Left leaning or not, WaPo is not out of line for simply quoting a Trump Org. lawyer. At least the reader is aware that the claim is made by somebody who is clearly biased.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?