Flagging trump in the Epstein files

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

So now you admit he said it?... shutup dummy...

Rambunctious admits he is not implicated.

 

[Rambunctious]

Rambunctious admits he is not implicated.

Trump is not guilty tards... try something else...

 

[rightwinger]

There were 6,000 pages. She hadn't yet looked at them. The claim was that there was some "list". When she finally had the time to go through the files, lo and behold, those who pined for a list proving Clinton and Hollywood liberals and Soros's son were there, were sad that there wasn't some list.

Blondie was specifically asked about releasing a client list

If she hadn’t looked at the file, she should have said so
Instead, she was asked about a client list and said it was on her desk

 

[Nostra]

Blondie was specifically asked about releasing a client list

If she hadn’t looked at the file, she should have said so
Instead, she was asked about a client list and said it was on her desk

Why did Tater not release the files, Trollwinger?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Blondie was specifically asked about releasing a client list

If she hadn’t looked at the file, she should have said so
Instead, she was asked about a client list and said it was on her desk

Blondi Bondi is not trustworthy. We know that of Trump and Rambunctious.

 

[rightwinger]

Why did Tater not release the files, Trollwinger?

Who?

 

[Rambunctious]

Who?

Biden=Tater.....

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Biden=Tater.....

Tater=Rambunctious

 

[rightwinger]

Biden=Tater.....

makes no sense

 

[Rambunctious]

makes no sense

Maybe because you are a tater too....

 

[rightwinger]

Maybe because you are a tater too....

?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Rambunctious very much is taterish.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Blondie was specifically asked about releasing a client list

If she hadn’t looked at the file, she should have said so
Instead, she was asked about a client list and said it was on her desk

I love the coulda, shoulda, woulda's of the armchair lawyers here who one would think are law professors and instead they are in their parents basement still at 35.

You would also think the hullabaloo of this list was new and only discovered the day Trump took office, whereas it was talked about for all of Biden's term and Garland and Biden were silent about whether or not there was any "list"

It was ONLY when the Demonacrats wanted to go after Trump that they once again concocted a ruse that Trump was on the list and wanted to shove it under the rug. But they never clamored for their boy (Biden, Blinken, Obama/Garland to release the list that Schumer and all the other evil Demonacrats say exists and reveals that Trump boffed young girls. Any effing lame brain idiot can see right through that. The same AG and president(s) who tried to ruin Trump with lawfare wouldn't release the "list" if it existed and implicate Trump?

Pam spoke out of turn. She had thousands upon thousands of documents to go through and because YOUR side said it existed and strangely hid it, she thought for sure there was some list. I would too because the talk of a list was rampant during the dreadful Biden years and yet it was never released.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Paradoxical is always in his parents' basement, always in his head even when not physically there.

Release the Epstein file.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Paradoxical is always in his parents' basement, always in his head even when not physically there.

Release the Epstein file.

Again no answer as to why Garland didn't release the "files" or that they destroyed the files before they were terminated.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Again no answer as to why Garland didn't release the "files" or that they destroyed the files before they were terminated.

No answer needed.

Trump must release the Epstein file if the GOP has any chance next year as the economy is beginning to turn south.,

 

[Paradoxical#1]

No answer needed.

Trump must release the Epstein file if the GOP has any chance next year as the economy is beginning to turn south.,

Garland destroyed the file.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Garland destroyed the file.

No, Blondi Bondi said she had it on her desk.

If it is not released and with the economy heading as it is, the GOP could lose 40 to 50 seats in the House next year, regardless of how the Dems screw up,.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

No, Blondi Bondi said she had it on her desk.

If it is not released and with the economy heading as it is, the GOP could lose 40 to 50 seats in the House next year, regardless of how the Dems screw up,.

MY question to Grok: Did Pam Bondi ever say she had seen the Epstein list or had the Epstein list, or did she only say she had the file on her desk?


Response from Grok: Attorney General Pam Bondi stated in a February 2025 Fox News interview that the Jeffrey Epstein “client list” was “sitting on my desk right now” for review, implying she had a specific document listing Epstein’s clients. She told host John Roberts, “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review. That’s been a directive by President Trump. I’m reviewing that,” in response to a question about whether the Department of Justice would release such a list. She also mentioned reviewing JFK and MLK files alongside the Epstein files, suggesting she was referring to a broader set of documents but specifically highlighted the “client list” when asked.


However, in July 2025, the Justice Department released a memo concluding that no such “client list” existed, contradicting Bondi’s earlier statement. During a cabinet meeting on July 8, 2025, Bondi clarified that her February comment referred to the entire Epstein case file, not a specific client list, saying, “I did an interview on Fox, and it’s been getting a lot of attention because I said I was asked a question about the client list, and my response was, it’s sitting on my desk to be reviewed – meaning the file along with the JFK, MLK files as well.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt and Justice Department spokesperson Chad Gilmartin also defended Bondi, asserting she meant the overall Epstein case files, not a distinct client list.




Bondi never explicitly said she had seen the client list, only that it was on her desk for review in February. Her later clarification and the DOJ’s findings suggest she may have misspoken or been mistaken about the existence of a specific list. The evidence indicates she claimed to have the “client list” on her desk but did not confirm reviewing its contents before the DOJ’s July memo clarified no such list existed.


PS. I hope this helps put this matter to bed.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

This guy nails it and he he good.