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

[Delldude]

Because you are a hypocrite and a MAGA troll.

Yeah, I'm starting to see that. A lot of nasty name-calling on here.

Still no link...

 

[Alicia J]

Still no link...

Why do I need a link when the 4 FBI interviews have been widely reported?

Where is your link that Trump won the 2020 election?

Why are you a MAGA troll who has 2 different standards for Democrats and Republicans?

 

[jacksonlamb]

Link?

Already given. You are a troll.

 

[Delldude]

Where is your link that Trump won the 2020 election?

Where is your quote showing I said that.

Why do I need a link when the 4 FBI interviews have been widely reported?

You haven't read it, that's obvious.

 

[Delldude]

Already given. You are a troll.

Paid professional too.....

 

[Alicia J]

Where is your quote showing I said that.

So are you prepared to say that Biden won the 2020 election? Are you prepared to say that Trump is full of shit?

I didn't think so. Again...by your own standard, you are a total hypocrite and a total MAGA troll.

You haven't read it, that's obvious.

Why does it matter? The truth is the truth, my reading it doesn't change that truth.

 

[Delldude]

So are you prepared to say that Biden won the 2020 election?

That was him in the White House wasn't it....?

Why does it matter? The truth is the truth, my reading it doesn't change that truth.

Ok, you admit you haven't read it.

Noted.

 

[Alicia J]

That was him in the White House wasn't it....?

Oh....so then you have no problem typing this -- Joe Biden won the 2020 election.

I don't think you have the intellectual honesty to do it. Prove me wrong.

Ok, you admit you haven't read it.

Noted.

Evidence is evidence. That's what matters. My reading it doesn't magically make it "evidence".

You are in the debating minor leagues, my friend.

 

[jacksonlamb]

This guy never won the 2020 election.

 

[Delldude]

Evidence is evidence. That's what matters.

From the FBI 302 released under the EFTA:

Prior to being asked any questions regarding the case, the agents asked
whether they could audio record the interview. II advised she was not
comfortable being recorded at that time. II requested agents explain to her
the goal and parameters of the fourth interview. She indicated she was
aware that because she was victimized several years prior, the statutes of
limitation of any viable federal violation may have run. She asked agents,
"what's the point?" The agents explained that all victims of crime should
have the opportunity to tell their story; they wanted to provide her with
that opportunity should she choose to accept. The agents also explained why
they wished to keep the fourth interview focused on abuse • endured at the
hands of individuals associated with JEFFREY EPSTEIN. II previously
mentioned she had sexual contact with (current U.S. President) DONALD TRUMP
while she was a minor. She previously explained the contact was facilitated
through her association with EPSTEIN. • was asked whether she felt
comfortable detailing her contacts with TRUMP. ■ again asked what the
point would be of providing the information at this point in her life when
there was a strong possibility nothing could be done about it.

The agents asked II to go home and take as much time as she needed to
think about speaking with the agents further. ■ agreed and the interview
ended.



She balked at doing a sworn statement to FBI, this was the last time FBI ever heard from her and completed the interview process.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/27774249/new-epstein-files-related-to-trump.pdf?utm_source=Byron%20York%27s%20Daily%20Memo_03/09/2026&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WEX%20-%20Alerts%20-%20York&rid=24918354&env=dc7182d0539e99fbd39e0d7296e60ee549f23684f572043c3a7a61c310edbeab

 

[jacksonlamb]

 

[Alicia J]

From the FBI 302 released under the EFTA:

Prior to being asked any questions regarding the case, the agents asked
whether they could audio record the interview. II advised she was not
comfortable being recorded at that time. II requested agents explain to her
the goal and parameters of the fourth interview. She indicated she was
aware that because she was victimized several years prior, the statutes of
limitation of any viable federal violation may have run. She asked agents,
"what's the point?" The agents explained that all victims of crime should
have the opportunity to tell their story; they wanted to provide her with
that opportunity should she choose to accept. The agents also explained why
they wished to keep the fourth interview focused on abuse • endured at the
hands of individuals associated with JEFFREY EPSTEIN. II previously
mentioned she had sexual contact with (current U.S. President) DONALD TRUMP
while she was a minor. She previously explained the contact was facilitated
through her association with EPSTEIN. • was asked whether she felt
comfortable detailing her contacts with TRUMP. ■ again asked what the
point would be of providing the information at this point in her life when
there was a strong possibility nothing could be done about it.

The agents asked II to go home and take as much time as she needed to
think about speaking with the agents further. ■ agreed and the interview
ended.



She balked at doing a sworn statement to FBI, this was the last time FBI ever heard from her and completed the interview process.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/27774249/new-epstein-files-related-to-trump.pdf?utm_source=Byron%20York%27s%20Daily%20Memo_03/09/2026&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WEX%20-%20Alerts%20-%20York&rid=24918354&env=dc7182d0539e99fbd39e0d7296e60ee549f23684f572043c3a7a61c310edbeab

Thank you for this irrelevant post.

When are you going to type this? -- Joe Biden won the 2020 election.

Oh that's right....NEVER.

Because you are a MAGA troll and a total hypocrite who only cares about "evidence" and "proof" when a Republican like Trump is implicated of wrong doing.

But you are still welcome to prove me wrong and force me to apologize to you.

 

[Delldude]

Because you are a MAGA troll and a total hypocrite who only cares about "evidence" and "proof" when a Republican like Trump is implicated of wrong doing.

 

[Alicia J]

View attachment 1239109

Wow...such a MAGA coward.

You can't do it. I guess you are afraid all of your MAGA troll buddies will hate you.

And you are correct about that....they will hate you. Free, independent thinking is not allowed in your evil MAGA cult.

 

[jacksonlamb]

So is he

 

[Delldude]

Wow...such a MAGA coward.

You can't do it. I guess you are afraid all of your MAGA troll buddies will hate you.

And you are correct about that....they will hate you. Free, independent thinking is not allowed in your evil MAGA cult.

President Bidens official White House portrait, even signed:

 

[Delldude]

Because you are a MAGA troll and a total hypocrite who only cares about "evidence" and "proof" when a Republican like Trump is implicated of wrong doing.

My name is Alicia. I'm close to 30 years old and I'll be voting for the third time in my life in November. I would just like to join a message board to talk about politics from time to time in a civilized manner.

 

[Natural Citizen]

 

[justoffal]

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.

But not shielded from his own elected buddies....
Kudos Thomas! Better buy a BP vest after that though.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Kudos Thomas! Better buy a BP vest after that though.

Sadly, that likely isn't too awfully far from the truth.