The Epstein Files

[jc456]

You think I'd "lie" about a file I just copied and posted this morning?

Stop snorting the Trump KoolAid, he's not a good guy, he's not worth your soul

Well I went to the site and it said it wasn't there. I posted the picture of the response. What is it you didn't understand?

 

[Delldude]

You think I'd "lie" about a file I just copied and posted this morning?

Stop snorting the Trump KoolAid, he's not a good guy, he's not worth your soul

Frank it isn't that....who the hell is in the picture?
No friggin way you can tell.

 

[jc456]

EFTA01641070

View attachment 1228831

how many FBI agents were aware of this?

that photo isn't the number you listed.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Frank it isn't that....who the hell is in the picture?
No friggin way you can tell.

It's redacted.

 

[Delldude]

It's redacted.

I know Frank but you've implied as to who it is.
You think it's Trump or Epstein?
If so, why?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Indeed. Why are so many people in our government so eager to "move on"?

I cannot speak for "so many people in our government."

I would like for them to move on because it has devolved into hyperpartasan attacking and counterattacking. Devolved, if it ever was anything more than that. it is draining time, attention, energy, and resources that could be put to far better use elsewhere.

Right now in real time, there are little girls and boys being raped multiple times per day by the human traffickers for whom the Biden administration facilitated access to unaccompanied and unaccountable children. That is a wrong that the Trump administration should be focusing its energy on righting.

Each side is desperately hoping that the Epstein files will taint the other side and leave theirs untouched. The real two sides and the epstein saga are people who are confident that they could not be tainted by the Epstein, files, and people who are not so confident about that.

For 4 years, under the Autopen administration, the government had moved on in a bipartisan way. It is highly unlikely that there are any actual convictions to be had for underage prostitution involving Epstein.

Convictions are what the d o j is supposed to be aiming for not political gain. Obviously we lost sight of that during the Autopen Administration.

It is actually considered unethical for the DOJ to pursue an investigation against someone when there is no realistic chance of conviction. Iwonder if people whose political views were formed during the previous administration have any idea that that is true.

 

[Seymour Flops]

well the question is, why hasn't congress asked Bill Barr why he stopped the search. Honestly, the TDS is surging today.

Yes, and why hasnt the media asked him?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well I went to the site and it said it wasn't there. I posted the picture of the response. What is it you didn't understand?

I posted the file from the DOJ website

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I know Frank but you've implied as to who it is.
You think it's Trump or Epstein?
If so, why?

I implied? Based on what???!!!???

It’s some fat ******* white pedophile, that’s all you can tell from that redacted photo

I personally can’t imagine working on this for the FBI and letting them walk

Is there some particular fat ******* white pedophile you feel strongly about defending?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

that photo isn't the number you listed.

I list the EFTA number I think is on page 92

 

[dblack]

I cannot speak for "so many people in our government."

Agreed.

 

[Delldude]

It’s some fat ******* white pedophile, that’s all you can tell from that redacted photo

Ever stop and think it isn't what you think it is? No way of telling how old the female is or who the other person is. That's all I'm saying.

I list the EFTA number I think is on page 92

It's a good number.

 

[jc456]

I list the EFTA number I think is on page 92

that isn't the picture for EFTA01641070. I won't post it, cause I don't want shit to do with it. But your photo doesn't match what's in the library.

 

[jc456]

Frank it isn't that....who the hell is in the picture?
No friggin way you can tell.

well in the photo he posted, that ain't no fat boi. Also, we have zero idea where it was and when it was.

 

[Delldude]

that isn't the picture for EFTA01641070.

That's the whole file. The pic's in there, pg 92.

well in the photo he posted, that ain't no fat boi.

Either way, you can't tell the age of the female either. That whole file is full of 'of age' people from what you can tell.

 

[jc456]

That's the whole file. The pic's in there, pg 92.


Either way, you can't tell the age of the female either. That whole file is full of 'of age' people from what you can tell.

I didn't look at them, only the one that was posted by frank. Can't tell shit from it. As I stated, no where, no when and no one with any ID's. So other than a sick fking photo, that's all it is. useless space.

 

[jc456]

That's the whole file. The pic's in there, pg 92.


Either way, you can't tell the age of the female either. That whole file is full of 'of age' people from what you can tell.

well again, here's the photo from the library, just so you see what I see. ONe photo with a number. It's the point of numbering them. Nor is it the photo Frank posted.

 

[Delldude]

well again, here's the photo from the library, just so you see what I see. ONe photo with a number. It's the point of numbering them. Nor is it the photo Frank posted.

View attachment 1229019

EFTA01641161 is the number.

 

[jc456]

EFTA01641161 is the number.

 

[Delldude]

View attachment 1229023

It's the number of the picture in the file on page 92. The entire file is EFTA01641070.