Zone1 Maybe Instead of a "Client List" There is Simply a Book Filled with Signed Birthday Greetings to Epstein, Wishing Him a "Happy 50th"?

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

So this is in response to the news story that Trump is suing Rupert Murdock for publishing a drawing that is allegedly a page from a "Happy Birthday" book given to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th Birthday. I don't know because I never really followed "the lifestyles of the rich and famous" but you'd think that a guy like Epstein would have a pretty big party thrown for him for such a significant birthday. If so, maybe this signed book could perhaps shed some light onto the questions that many have.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tr...10-billion-2025-07-19/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

The crude drawing was reportedly part of a “large birthday book” or card given to Jeffrey Epstein, something akin to a circulated card where multiple people left signatures, jokes, or sketches.​

• It was not described as a personal message from Trump to Epstein.
• The WSJ article referenced it as part of a collection of documents already published in another source, possibly linked to Epstein's seized archives or documents submitted in litigation.
• This supports your reading: it was an office-style group card, not a one-to-one exchange.

​

If the material was already in the public domain, republishing it (even in an unflattering light) doesn’t necessarily make it defamatory—especially if:​

1. The Journal clearly attributed the content as part of a previously published archive.
2. They didn’t fabricate the image or falsely claim Trump authored it (which is what Trump now denies).
3. There’s documentary or photographic proof that the image exists and was attributed at the time to him.

This could strongly support a defense under the principle of:​

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation,​

Fair report or neutral reportage if the outlet accurately conveyed what the image was and who it was attributed to.​

​

What makes his lawsuit tricky is that:​

• He’s not just denying authorship—he’s calling the entire report fabricated, implying actual malice or reckless disregard for truth.
• But if it was from a known archive (e.g., part of Maxwell or Epstein case evidence), and the Journal cited that, the burden flips to Trump to prove falsity and malicious intent.
• Filing this suit could open him up to discovery about his Epstein connections, documents, or past communications—possibly making the case backfire (as analysts are already noting)

 

[BULLDOG]

They have an extensive client list. They said the majority of Epstein's file was just thousands of porn videos, and wouldn't be released. They failed to mention that he had filed those videos in order, and each was labeled with the girl's name. the man's name and the date. Plenty of names to add to the list. Looks like he might have been blackmailing lots of people.

 

[the watcher]

They have an extensive client list. They said the majority of Epstein's file was just thousands of porn videos, and wouldn't be released. They failed to mention that he had filed those videos in order, and each was labeled with the girl's name. the man's name and the date. Plenty of names to add to the list. Looks like he might have been blackmailing lots of people.

"They" are certainly active now for some reason and seem to be supplying us with many "facts" for us to speculate on while focusing our attention on surface cracks in our existence. I do think we'd be better served if we somehow could address the money and corruption from outside sources to influence our laws, news media, social media, economy, and foreign policy. Then people like these pedophiles and crooks couldn't operate without looking over their shoulder.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

They have an extensive client list. They said the majority of Epstein's file was just thousands of porn videos, and wouldn't be released. They failed to mention that he had filed those videos in order, and each was labeled with the girl's name. the man's name and the date. Plenty of names to add to the list. Looks like he might have been blackmailing lots of people.

You don't think they're claiming that there is no list because an actual list may not exist do you? Like when you submit a FOIA or subpoena duces tecum, if you're not very specific about what qualifies as far as tangible items (for example, "all call to 911 from [specific number] / [specific name] / [specific last name AND [specific first name], OR any documents, files, databases, audio, video, referencing this specific person, etc.) there are things you can miss and the agency is not required to compile the data to create a list in order to satisfy the production in response to the subpoena or FOAI request.

 

[the watcher]

No, I think that there is so much misdirection and assumptions and half-truths here that it will be impossible to know what is what, even if there were someone in a position to really wanted to bring it to light. If it were to happen it already would have been done. There will be some half assed attempts at disclosure and maybe some low hanging fruit sacrificed, and we'll move on to the next big thing. What did you think was going to happen? Some cowboy in a white hat would unseat the deep state and things would be good? I hope you're not disappointed.

 

[shockedcanadian]

They have an extensive client list. They said the majority of Epstein's file was just thousands of porn videos, and wouldn't be released. They failed to mention that he had filed those videos in order, and each was labeled with the girl's name. the man's name and the date. Plenty of names to add to the list. Looks like he might have been blackmailing lots of people.

It was wise for Trunp to advise that as much as can be released, should be. Thie can't continue to be a bloody story people follow as they would a Soap.Opera, there were real victims. The issue may be legality. If there are.names of creeps and actualy videos of them abusing the young, that is WAY more than some list of allegations of names, that is evidence. The problem is it occurred on a foriegn island he owned right? Thus, at tis point, all that would be achieved is to shame people. Powerful people. This is what Trumps followers want and I'm not sure tthe Trump administration will give it to them.

 

[Muhammed]

​

• Filing this suit could open him up to discovery about his Epstein connections, documents, or past communications—possibly making the case backfire (as analysts are already noting)

Obviously Trump is not concerned about the discovery process, otherwise he wouldn't have initiated the action in the first place.

The WSJ likely is concerned about discovery and will seek to settle, just like another corporate fake news outlet recently did.

 

[BULLDOG]

Obviously Trump is not concerned about the discovery process, otherwise he wouldn't have initiated the action in the first place.

The WSJ likely is concerned about discovery and will seek to settle, just like another corporate fake news outlet recently did.

CBS wasn't afraid of discovery. Trump blocked their merger until they gave in to his thug behavior.

 

[1srelluc]

LOL....Look at the first four posts....When you need that many words to explain your postion (for or against) you know it's all BS.

 

[BULLDOG]

LOL....Look at the first four posts....When you need that many words to explain your postion (for or against) you know it's all BS.

I understand you have a hard time keeping up with more than a couple of words, so I'll make this easier for you.
cult member stupid.

 

[1srelluc]

I understand you have a hard time keeping up with more than a couple of words, so I'll make this easier for you.
cult member stupid.

Of the 87 things that might concern me over the course of a week it does not even make the cut.

I bet you buy every every rag at the grocery check-out line.

 

[Muhammed]

The problem is it occurred on a foriegn island he owned right?

Little St. James Island is part of the US Virgin Islands. Unlike Florida, the age of consent there is 16. In Florida it is 18 and in New York it is 17.

 

[Delldude]

If so, maybe this signed book could perhaps shed some light onto the questions that many have.

Probably loaded with names of people who had absolutely nothing to do with the island.

This GJ transcripts issue most likely will be litigated for months, if ever released.

I posted an article where cell phone geofencing data was tracked from the island and they even had the homes and identities of the people who owned the phones. They looked at the data over something like a ten year period and there was only something like 200 phones that came and went.

 

[MarcATL]

Trump cannot help himself but to signal who he is.

Even when he lies he's telling the truth.

 

[Delldude]

Little St. John Island is part of the US Virgin Islands. Unlike Florida, the age of consent there is 16. In Florida it is 18 and in New York it is 17.

So all this hysteria might be about legal consentual sex.

That'd be a kick to the 'nads.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Governments Where Diplomacy Includes Access To Females "

* When Fourth Hole Doors Of Illicit Free Enterprise Are Opened *

So this is in response to the news story that Trump is suing Rupert Murdock for publishing a drawing that is allegedly a page from a "Happy Birthday" book given to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th Birthday. I don't know because I never really followed "the lifestyles of the rich and famous" but you'd think that a guy like Epstein would have a pretty big party thrown for him for such a significant birthday. If so, maybe this signed book could perhaps shed some light onto the questions that many have.​

​

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tr...10-billion-2025-07-19/?utm_source=chatgpt.com​

​

The crude drawing was reportedly part of a “large birthday book” or card given to Jeffrey Epstein, something akin to a circulated card where multiple people left signatures, jokes, or sketches.​

• It was not described as a personal message from Trump to Epstein.
• The WSJ article referenced it as part of a collection of documents already published in another source, possibly linked to Epstein's seized archives or documents submitted in litigation.
• This supports your reading: it was an office-style group card, not a one-to-one exchange.

​

If the material was already in the public domain, republishing it (even in an unflattering light) doesn’t necessarily make it defamatory—especially if:​

1. The Journal clearly attributed the content as part of a previously published archive.
2. They didn’t fabricate the image or falsely claim Trump authored it (which is what Trump now denies).
3. There’s documentary or photographic proof that the image exists and was attributed at the time to him.

This could strongly support a defense under the principle of:​

Truth is an absolute defense to defamation,​

Fair report or neutral reportage if the outlet accurately conveyed what the image was and who it was attributed to.​

​

What makes his lawsuit tricky is that:​

• He’s not just denying authorship—he’s calling the entire report fabricated, implying actual malice or reckless disregard for truth.
• But if it was from a known archive (e.g., part of Maxwell or Epstein case evidence), and the Journal cited that, the burden flips to Trump to prove falsity and malicious intent.
• Filing this suit could open him up to discovery about his Epstein connections, documents, or past communications—possibly making the case backfire (as analysts are already noting)

The department of justice does not have proof that strump indulged in conjugal engagements with adolescents , and valid documents correlating services rendered with female identities is near absolutely absurd .

Fast forward to 17:08 and listen to what gilbert godfrey had to say , because implications of eastern european whores and a fourth hole could be believable .

 

[Muhammed]

So all this hysteria might be about legal consentual sex.

That'd be a kick to the 'nads.

Even with video, to prosecute some cases they may have to be able to prove where it happened and when it happened. In some cases positively identifying the victim can be a problem too. And a problem with witnesses disappearing or dying or simply refusing to testify.

In some cases the perp is dead too. For example, Bill Richardson was implicated by Virginia Roberts and they are both dead.

 

[Delldude]

In some cases the perp is dead too

Dershowitz said there are no current members of congress, and the women would be on either side of thirty now. So that puts the perps probably well up in age.

The only thing really known is what came out of a couple lawsuits.

And all this about 'releasing the list' during His campaign...... there's a pretty good chance Trump never saw the list either..... which would go with His claim there is no list.

So who knows.

 

[Muhammed]

Dershowitz said there are no current members of congress, and the women would be on either side of thirty now. So that puts the perps probably well up in age.

The only thing really known is what came out of a couple lawsuits.

And all this about 'releasing the list' during His campaign...... there's a pretty good chance Trump never saw the list either..... which would go with His claim there is no list.

So who knows.

Back then Trump said that he was open to releasing a list of people who went to Little St. James Island. We know that doesn't include Trump because Trump cut ties with Epstein long before he bought the islands.