Now that we know Trump was mentioned in the Epstein files, it’s time to put up or STFU.

[Nostra]

lol ...

sux to be in a cult, cultist.

You have that problem as well.

 

[playtime]

OhPleaseJustQuit

i see you.................................

 

[X.Onasis]

Never said anything about your delusions of “Trump victims”, Short Bus.

Learn to read.

You think your half-assed dodge is fortified by crybaby insults when it actually shows how weak your argument is.

You're insisting there's no evidence of any crimes claiming trump is a pedophile, yet there are sworn statements that he is, AND there are survivors, some of whom were at Bondi's hearing this past week, who claim they were never interviewed by the DOJ.

 

[playtime]

You have that problem as well.

^^^ exactly what a cultist would think ^^^

 

[playtime]

.

You'd know.






.

i know what a fan looks like!

 

[Nostra]

You think your half-assed dodge is fortified by crybaby insults when it actually shows how weak your argument is.

You're insisting there's no evidence of any crimes claiming trump is a pedophile, yet there are sworn statements that he is, AND there are survivors, some of whom were at Bondi's hearing this past week, who claim they were never interviewed by the DOJ.

Quote them, liar.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

i know what a fan looks like!

 

[playtime]

View attachment 1219441

 

[X.Onasis]

Quote them, liar.

Here's an interview with victim Lisa Phillips, who was at Bondi's hearing, speaking for thousands of trump and epstein's victims who are fighting for the transparency that trump's defenders are withholding from the public.
You can deny that there's proof all you want, but defending their hiding of evidence and actively ignoring the facts, especially of victims claiming that trump raped them when they were children, makes you an enabler, not just a loyal sycophant.
Denying this reality is not clever; it's sadistic and exposes you as a groveling follower of criminals. As I've said before, you people take pride in your loyalty to a rapist.
Enjoy it, it's all you've got... Well, that and childish insults.

 

[Nostra]

Here's an interview with victim Lisa Phillips, who was at Bondi's hearing, speaking for thousands of trump and epstein's victims who are fighting for the transparency that trump's defenders are withholding from the public.
You can deny that there's proof all you want, but defending their hiding of evidence and actively ignoring the facts, especially of victims claiming that trump raped them when they were children, makes you an enabler, not just a loyal sycophant.
Denying this reality is not clever; it's sadistic and exposes you as a groveling follower of criminals. As I've said before, you people take pride in your loyalty to a rapist.
Enjoy it, it's all you've got... Well, that and childish insults.

Where is it?

 

[Nostra]

You can deny that there's proof all you want, but defending their hiding of evidence and actively ignoring the facts, especially of victims claiming that trump raped them when they were children,

Quote them, liar.

 

[X.Onasis]

What is it that you need? Quotes that they were abused, or quotes that Bondi's investigators won't meet with them?

You need names and stories of victims? How many accusations of sexual assault would it take? Or are accusations not evidence? Or is evidence not proof?

If your best friend of 15 years and you had a reputation for throwing parties and orgies and chasing young girls, AND bragged about it, AND hundreds of women claimed being assaulted by you, why wouldn't others think you were a sexual predator?

How many stories or women coming forward do you need? From his wife, Ivana, to others who came forward, telling stories of being assaulted, suing him, or succumbing to threats or payoffs, how many make it plausible?

Like Jill Harth, Katie Johnson, E Jean Carroll, Summer Zervos, Alva Johnson, Jessic Leeds, Kristin Anderson, Stacey Williams, Ninna Laaksonen, Beatrice Keul, Lisa Boyne, Cathy Heller, Temple Taggart, Amy Dorris, Karena Virginia, Karen Johnson, Mindy McGillivray, Rachel Crooks, Natasha Stoynoff, Jessica Drake, and Cassandra Searles?

Do you need only the statements of the children?

Does it matter that he hasn't sued any of his accusers like he said he would, for fear of discovery? How about the fact that some women claim to have DNA poof, but trump refuses to submit a sample?

I suspect men like Andy Lucchesi, who claims that when he was friends with trump, he witnessed him raping children, won't convince you either. Or are you only in need of the videos of the children actually being raped? I'll bet when they come out, you'll claim they're fake too. Right?

I guess we'll see.

Oh, here's someone you can claim is lying, or it's hearsay, or not credible, or under oath, or some other convenient dodge, proving once again that your loyalty to protect a pedophile cannot be shaken.

 

[hadit]

ask ^^^ that ^^^ *****. she could release everything unredacted.

as the law dictates. but i guess selling her self cheap for only $25K ... she'll just do it for free now.

& holy cow - she needs acting lessons.

And so it is released. It's kind of cool how they had to remind the congresscritters that all their search activity would be recorded.

 

[Nostra]

What is it that you need?

I put a yuuuuuge hint in the OP, Short Bus.

Look for a word beginning with "E".




.

 

[Nostra]

You're insisting there's no evidence of any crimes claiming trump is a pedophile, yet there are sworn statements that he is, AND there are survivors, some of whom were at Bondi's hearing this past week, who claim they were never interviewed by the DOJ.

Post the sworn statements.

You are long on claims, but have yet to produce any evidence from the Epstein/Clinton files.


.

 

[playtime]

And so it is released. It's kind of cool how they had to remind the congresscritters that all their search activity would be recorded.

you mean the unconstitutional surveillance? you do know that's a problem for pammy et al, right?

btw, only partly released & heavily redacted. both of which are in violation of the law as well. it's all a stall to get to the supremes, but congress' actions will prevail.

 

[Nostra]

you mean the unconstitutional surveillance? you do know that's a problem for pammy et al, right?

btw, only partly released & heavily redacted. both of which are in violation of the law as well. it's all a stall to get to the supremes, but congress' actions will prevail.

Link us up to redactions being a violation of the law, Short Bus.

 

[X.Onasis]

Some people on this thread don't understand what "evidence" means.

Apparently, they think until it's "undeniable proof positive" it isn't evidence.
That leaves them with the ability to insist that if they don't believe it, it isn't true.
I wonder if they believe OJ's prosecuors had no evidence as well.

Newly uncovered details in the Epstein files reveal that the FBI spoke with a victim who accused Donald Trump of sexual assault, despite Attorney General Pam Bondi’s vehement denial that the Justice Department had any such evidence, as of last week.

Agents apparently spoke with a victim of Jeffrey Epstein who also accused Trump of sexually and violently assaulting her. It is unclear what happened with the investigation, though the government deemed her to be a “credible accuser,” according to independent journalist Roger Sollenberger. A woman with identical biological details sued Epstein’s estate and won a settlement in 2021.

The investigation into the accuser is made apparent on a page titled “prominent names” in an internal, 21-page slideshow cataloguing the Justice Department’s various investigations into Epstein and his longtime criminal associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Trump’s name is listed in the document, along with two allegations against the sitting president.



“[REDACTED] stated Epstein introduced her to Trump who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out,” reads the first entry, noting that the victim would have been between 13 and 15 years old and that the incident took place sometime between 1983 and 1985.

But the second accusation against the president, which involves Trump agreeing with Epstein that a 14-year-old victim was a “good one,” carries a different kind of credibility inside the DOJ, since the person who provided the statement was also used as a key government witness to convict Maxwell, according to the files.

“[REDACTED] remembered Epstein introduced her to Trump saying ‘This is a good one, huh’ and Trump responded ‘Yes’. (date range roughly 1984, [REDACTED] would have been 14),” the slide reads.

New Evidence Torpedoes Pam Bondi’s Claim About Trump and Epstein

A DOJ slideshow suggests that the FBI spoke with an Epstein victim who accused President Trump of assault.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Nostra]

Some people on this thread don't understand what "evidence" means.

Apparently, they think until it's "undeniable proof positive" it isn't evidence.
That leaves them with the ability to insist that if they don't believe it, it isn't true.
I wonder if they believe OJ's prosecuors had no evidence as well.

Newly uncovered details in the Epstein files reveal that the FBI spoke with a victim who accused Donald Trump of sexual assault, despite Attorney General Pam Bondi’s vehement denial that the Justice Department had any such evidence, as of last week.

Agents apparently spoke with a victim of Jeffrey Epstein who also accused Trump of sexually and violently assaulting her. It is unclear what happened with the investigation, though the government deemed her to be a “credible accuser,” according to independent journalist Roger Sollenberger. A woman with identical biological details sued Epstein’s estate and won a settlement in 2021.

The investigation into the accuser is made apparent on a page titled “prominent names” in an internal, 21-page slideshow cataloguing the Justice Department’s various investigations into Epstein and his longtime criminal associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Trump’s name is listed in the document, along with two allegations against the sitting president.



“[REDACTED] stated Epstein introduced her to Trump who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit. In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out,” reads the first entry, noting that the victim would have been between 13 and 15 years old and that the incident took place sometime between 1983 and 1985.

But the second accusation against the president, which involves Trump agreeing with Epstein that a 14-year-old victim was a “good one,” carries a different kind of credibility inside the DOJ, since the person who provided the statement was also used as a key government witness to convict Maxwell, according to the files.

“[REDACTED] remembered Epstein introduced her to Trump saying ‘This is a good one, huh’ and Trump responded ‘Yes’. (date range roughly 1984, [REDACTED] would have been 14),” the slide reads.

New Evidence Torpedoes Pam Bondi’s Claim About Trump and Epstein

A DOJ slideshow suggests that the FBI spoke with an Epstein victim who accused President Trump of assault.

www.yahoo.com

Anonymous accusations, huh? Any evidence these things actually happened?

 

[X.Onasis]

Anonymous accusations, huh? Any evidence these things actually happened?

Did OJ's prosecutors have any evidence against him, or are you completely unfamiliar with the meaning of the word "evidence"?

You see, when the government deemed her a “credible accuser,” that makes it credible evidence, regardless of whether or not she remains anonymous.
Kinda like even though trump's name got redacted, it doesn't exonerate him.

Like I said, "evidence", the thing you've been whining about this entire thread, does not mean "proof positive."