I dunno, if a building exploded and I said, “China did it! It was China!” And then my next statement was, “No, no. We don’t need to do anything about it. It’s okay that China blows up our buildings.” You’d usually think that to be a suspicious stance.
Well, when we did that to a Chinese embassy we did very contritely ask for forgiveness. Despite it being a very not-nice thing to do.
Then again, contrition is not one of trump’s very limited repertoire of behaviors. It’s all attack bluster all the time.
If his position was that the Democrats accidentally and unintentionally created evidence that would make him look bad, in the Epstein investigation documents, then sure, you might argue for a neutral stance.
I’m curious how they did that?
Amazing that Epstein ‘killed himself’ over a hoax.
Whether murder or suicide, he surely understood that he was screwed; he’d brought down forces upon his head far beyond his ability to fight.
I’m personally convinced he was assassinated. But that belief isn’t essential to him being dead.
Has there been any convincing evidence of this?
I think it’s entirely possible he believed he would be killed and took matters into his own hands.
I also think it’s possible he realized he had nothing left to live for and just killed himself.
Obviously either scenario negates the idea of a hoax.
Another possibility is that Epstein was provided with the means to off himself. Adjacent to that, he may have been provided the incentive. All the same, I’ll remind everyone that plotting assassinations is really hard even when you have oodles of funds. Trump had the connections to do so, but most other visitors to the island didn’t have mob contacts. And Trump had public attention far beyond that of other perps. On the third hand a lot of people wanted Epstein out of the way: you only need one with the overlap of wealth, means, dubious judgment, bankrupt ethics, and steel testicles.
Maybe Epstein established a self-enforcing arrangement years earlier to reassure some of his clients. Oops, I forgot that this isn’t Cafe Society.
I mean, being the world’s most famous pedophile, I would think just the realization of how he was likely to be treated in prison would be sufficient incentive. He was not gonna have a good life.
…and the assertion as nonfalsifiable article of faith that the world is ruled by a cabal of privileged liberal pedos…
Just to add fodder for the conspiracy, have you ever seen his cellmate?
Dude was even a former cop.
If I’m a conspiracy theorist (I’m not: I think he died of his own accord), this is Christmas in July.
…
Meanwhile, Trump has apparently sued the Wall Street Journal for publishing that bawdy letter to Epstein alleged to come from Trump.
I, for one, certainly wonder if the Journal’s source has any other Trumpian documents.
Let the depositions begin toot suite!
I don’t have any kind of insider perspective that would make my point of view persuasive.
But I do pay attention to a lawyer/social media guy/podcaster named Ken White, who goes by the handle Popehat, and who seems broadly trustworthy to me
His perspective (as a professional who has visited that jail many times in his capacity as a lawyer) is that the amount of terrible shit that goes on there—and the indifference of its proprietors to it—is not something that the average American is equipped to even understand. He thinks that Epstein probably did in fact kill himself because even if he was a notorious guy who was placed on suicide watch, nobody in an official capacity there actually cares about the well-being of any prisoner.
Specifically, Hollywood ones.
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article183122106.html
Trump was, himself, a reality TV producer. He was largely stationed in New York, not Hollywood, but I’d venture to guess that he socialized in the same crowds.
The only reason that you can come up with for putting Donald Trump in as a fighter against Hollywood Pedophiles is because he’s so close to so many questionable sex addicts and Hollywood types that… Well, either he’s one of them or he’s “infiltrated” them. Which is, of course, like a kid finding out that his hero, P Diddy, was attacking women and, instead of accepting that, comes up with some elaborate story that Diddy had been replaced by another person that looks the same and the real Diddy - the good one - is in hiding, trying to figure out how to get back and fix everything.
Yeah, sure kid. Good luck with that.
Yeah, one thing that occurs to me is this. The Maga belief in Donald Trump as a crusader against Hollywood sex crimes was always unhinged from reality and flying in the face of a Mountain of evidence suggesting the opposite. Maybe the fact Maga seems to be turning on Trump over this has as much to do with how badly they are doing in the Trump economy than anything actually related to Epstein
After all the accusations from Qanon and the far right of Dems running sex trafficking rings and eating babies, is anyone really going to be surprised when it comes out that Trump and his buddies used to bbq up toddlers?
Tastes too much like crow.
One of the things I’ve noticed is that on the political discussion sites, the most everyone takes this weird view that either Trump/Republicans are implicated, OR Clinton/Democrats are implicated.
They seem to ignore the very real possibility that both Democratic and Republican administrations are keeping things quiet because BOTH are implicated.
Not sure why this is a tough concept for them, but would you really be shocked if both Trump AND Clinton were up to no good?
Personally, I find it more creepy that the media is buying into the idea that Merrick Garland would have released sensitive materials for the sake of his boss to campaign.
Trump promised to release the files. The Democrats didn’t promise to do so and, admirably, didn’t do so. Investigative records would be highly prejudicial against almost anyone referenced, regardless of complicity and are, by law, confidential.
As mentioned above, it’s unlikely that there’s any indication of Trump getting busy with an underage girl but, even at the minimum, it’s going to show a close connection between him and the uber-creep, Jeffrey Epstein, and very likely going to demonstrate that he had some knowledge of Epstein’s activities that he didn’t report on.
A professional DOJ, manned by ethical folk, should not release the Epstein documents and would be opposed to having them released, regardless of which party was in command of the White House.
Bill Clinton had just come off the Lewinsky scandal and he says he never visited the island. It would not surprise me if he did not do any sexual misconduct. It would be disappointing if the evidence showed flight logs with him traveling to the island and that would merit further journalistic investigation. But I would think such evidence would have already been leaked or turned up via eyewitness accounts if it exists. Probably. A fair amount of evidence has already been leaked after all.
In contrast, Maria Farmer’s interviews with the FBI have not been released. She implicated Trump in them in 1996 and 2006.
Would it surprise me if a Democratic politician was a guest at Epstein’s island? No, though I’d be interested in how that came about. Trump makes sense as he was a wealthy sex pest at the time.
How many guests at a time stayed on Epstein island? How big was the staff? Why did Epstein like to hob-nob with academics, given his ignorance about science as related by his chemist friend? As I stated upthread, I’m not familiar with a lot of the basic facts of this story.
ETA:
Maybe not in the files, but there are allegations of that. Snopes gives the rundown.
I am not saying he would. But if there is some bombshell revelation about Trump in DoJ hands it would have been in their hands for three presidential administrations (and two Trump presidential campaigns), at the very least, likely much longer. And so countless people would have seen them. I have real trouble believing none of those people would have leaked even the existence of the document. The fact that there is a document in DoJ possession of trump doing X with Epstein doing with victim Y on date Z, would have leaked IMO.
There’s the idea that Trump is pretty well immune to everything. That idea might be correct and that you could pretty well prove anything horrible about the guy, bombshell or otherwise, and it wouldn’t have any effect. In that environment, it’s not clear that there’s much to be gained by releasing the info. And, especially if it’s even a hint lower than a smoking gun of absolute despicability.
A lot of people hold that idea. They see Trump as the great teflon man.
Personally, I think that you don’t gain anything by helping the guy to maintain the teflon. While the above theory might be true and that, on the day that we find out that Trump was murdering babies, roasting their heads, and then molesting the bodies, that the Democrats just sigh in exasperation and the Republicans dismiss it as secondary to getting rid of asylum seekers.
But so, likewise, I have repeatedly recommend that Democrats point out that Trump is a hyprocrite who largely doesn’t do the things that he says. He does empty headline grabbing stuff, not real stuff. If the guy is immune because his policy is so popular, then you’re not going to get anywhere by focusing on things outside of policy, and by letting him continue to throw the wool over his followers’ eyes on that subject. CNN has been one of Trump’s greatest allies - every bit as much as FOX, and the average informed person on the SDMB thinks that Trump does all the stuff that the Conservatives are asking of him. Trump mostly does bullshit that was popular among the bottom rung liberals about 10-30 years ago, that the smarties in the party rejected as dumb. He ain’t done a Republican thing in office until he finally tariffed Russia, 6 months into his second term.
And there’s always the chance that you hit that day where there’s the straw that broke the camel’s back. At some point on the road to molesting roasted fetus heads, someone might finally decide that they should start to muster some self-respect, and stop having to live from day to day in shame. How many times do you need to excuse the guy for molesting some girl before you decide that you don’t want to support him anymore? Maybe 23 girls is still in the limits but 24 ain’t.
If you’ve got the option to move the needle from 23 to 24, whether you think of it as hopeless or not, you should go for it. You definitely don’t lose anything.
If someone wants to punish and humiliate themselves, you should just let them do that. Maybe there’s no end to it, but I’d venture to guess that the average person is going to break down at some point and come back to Jesus.