Massie has a great idea for getting the names of miscreants out there from the Epstein files

[jacksonlamb]

I have read that Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.

He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.

Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.
He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.
Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

This is genius.

In the Yahoo News report, Massie states that he is willing to use the constitutional protections afforded to members of Congress to “publicly read a list of Epstein’s clients” that is being compiled by victims. This is a direct acknowledgment that he may release names on the House floor, where he cannot be prosecuted or sued for doing so.

Members of Congress are protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution.This means:

• They cannot be prosecuted for statements made during official legislative activity.
• They cannot be sued for defamation for what they say on the floor.
• They can introduce documents into the Congressional Record with legal immunity.

So if Massie chose to read names aloud, he would be shielded from legal consequences.

 

[TNHarley]

Fuc king do it. At least someone is at least acting like they give a fck about child sex trafficking.
You know the bimbo bittch or the obese mango doesnt give a damn. They literally broke federal law shielding pedos from public scrutiny.

 

[Oddball]

I have read that Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.

He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.

Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.
He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.
Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

This is genius.

In the Yahoo News report, Massie states that he is willing to use the constitutional protections afforded to members of Congress to “publicly read a list of Epstein’s clients” that is being compiled by victims. This is a direct acknowledgment that he may release names on the House floor, where he cannot be prosecuted or sued for doing so.

Members of Congress are protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution.This means:

• They cannot be prosecuted for statements made during official legislative activity.
• They cannot be sued for defamation for what they say on the floor.
• They can introduce documents into the Congressional Record with legal immunity.

So if Massie chose to read names aloud, he would be shielded from legal consequences.

That's something that he, Nancy Mace, and APL threatened to do a few months ago...So far, NADA.

 

[pknopp]

I'll give him credit only if it is done. MTG said she would do the same but never did.

 

[Mac1958]

Nail the pigs who took part in this.

This may end up being one of the biggest and ugliest things our elites have ever been a part of. At least that we KNOW about.

Anyone who doesn't want the lid blown off this thing is knowingly protecting pedos and sexual trafficking.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Some of the people in the emails might not necessarily pdfs, but still

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Read it loud and then lets see some indictments. Havent seen squat so far from any of these people, even massie who i thought was one of only a few who adhered to the constitution. Pfffft, so much for that.

 

[Hellokitty]

I have read that Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.

He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.

Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.
He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.
Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

This is genius.

In the Yahoo News report, Massie states that he is willing to use the constitutional protections afforded to members of Congress to “publicly read a list of Epstein’s clients” that is being compiled by victims. This is a direct acknowledgment that he may release names on the House floor, where he cannot be prosecuted or sued for doing so.

Members of Congress are protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution.This means:

• They cannot be prosecuted for statements made during official legislative activity.
• They cannot be sued for defamation for what they say on the floor.
• They can introduce documents into the Congressional Record with legal immunity.

So if Massie chose to read names aloud, he would be shielded from legal consequences.

So basically he's to much of a coward to name them without hiding behind a protection clause?

 

[ColonelAngus]

Naomi Campbell was in the emails.

If I was under 18, I think I would be ok if Naomi Campbell molested me.

 

[EMH]

He just needs to read one name and everyone will understand


COL TIM OSMAN

• 
  
• 
  

 

[Billiejeens]

I have read that Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.

He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.

Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.
He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.
Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

This is genius.

In the Yahoo News report, Massie states that he is willing to use the constitutional protections afforded to members of Congress to “publicly read a list of Epstein’s clients” that is being compiled by victims. This is a direct acknowledgment that he may release names on the House floor, where he cannot be prosecuted or sued for doing so.

Members of Congress are protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution.This means:

• They cannot be prosecuted for statements made during official legislative activity.
• They cannot be sued for defamation for what they say on the floor.
• They can introduce documents into the Congressional Record with legal immunity.

So if Massie chose to read names aloud, he would be shielded from legal consequences.

You Massie cultists are a hoot.

 

[Billiejeens]

He just needs to read one name and everyone will understand


COL TIM OSMAN

• 
  
• 
  

Focus

 

[TNHarley]

You Massie cultists

oh wow

 

[OldFlame]

I have read that Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.

He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.

Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

Rep. Thomas Massie says he has a major move in mind regarding the Epstein files.
He stated that if the Department of Justice, under Pam Bondi, does not release unredacted names linked to Epstein, he could take the issue to the House floor and read the names publicly under congressional immunity.
Under that protection, such statements would be part of the official Congressional Record.

This is genius.

In the Yahoo News report, Massie states that he is willing to use the constitutional protections afforded to members of Congress to “publicly read a list of Epstein’s clients” that is being compiled by victims. This is a direct acknowledgment that he may release names on the House floor, where he cannot be prosecuted or sued for doing so.

Members of Congress are protected by the Speech and Debate Clause of the U.S. Constitution.This means:

• They cannot be prosecuted for statements made during official legislative activity.
• They cannot be sued for defamation for what they say on the floor.
• They can introduce documents into the Congressional Record with legal immunity.

So if Massie chose to read names aloud, he would be shielded from legal consequences.

What's stopping him, been waiting on this for months. He's known the redacted names for months. If it's that important to him, then he should release them all without all of the bullshit fanfare.

 

[Billiejeens]

Read it loud and then lets see some indictments. Havent seen squat so far from any of these people, even massie who i thought was one of only a few who adhered to the constitution. Pfffft, so much for that.

So, the consensus from the release the files enthusiasts is that saying the names out loud will lead to indictments?

You all believe that there is actionable information in the files that will prove to be of an evidenciary nature?

 

[Billiejeens]

oh wow

a hoot.

 

[pknopp]

So, the consensus from the release the files enthusiasts is that saying the names out loud will lead to indictments?

You all believe that there is actionable information in the files that will prove to be of an evidenciary nature?

According to the women, yes.

 

[Billiejeens]

Beetlejuice
Beetlejuice
Beetlejuice

 

[OldFlame]

So, the consensus from the release the files enthusiasts is that saying the names out loud will lead to indictments?

You all believe that there is actionable information in the files that will prove to be of an evidenciary nature?

I've been saying that all along, but they don't want to listen to reason.

 

[pknopp]

Epstein accuser sues federal government for doing nothing after she reported abuse

Politically-connected financier and convicted sex abuser died by suicide in a New York jail

www.the-independent.com

Eight Epstein victims sue FBI over failure to investigate sex abuse tips as early as 1996

The women say the FBI's failure to investigate Jeffrey Epstein despite receiving countless tips amounts to negligence that allowed them to continue to be abused.

www.courthousenews.com