The New York Times finally gives up: "NO EVIDENCE IMPLICATING TRUMP IN EPSTEIN'S ABUSE AND TRAFFICKING OF MINORS"

[HikerGuy83]

There are no small government conservative politicians, and there hasn't been since Ron Paul. Was GW Bush a true conservative? Was his father? Was Reagan? Dare I say, Trump is the first GOP POTUS to actually try and slash the budget of worthless expenditures, like NSAID. Trump isn't the most likeable guy, but he is the ONLY person with the strength to stand up to the democrap machine and the establishment. How many other republicans would have persevered with what Trump had to and continues to fight against? Love him or not, when he is gone we go back to pure establishment politics and bigger, more wasteful government. We will miss Trump when he is gone and Gavin Newsom is POTUS. Yes, the democrap machine and the establishment will "make sure" that happens. And one of the ways they will do this is try to push the TDS trap while painting the democraps as the better choice. Many on the right have already fallen.

Many have fallen, not because of the left....but because of Trump.

I agree with what he's tried to do, but there is NO ESCAPING the fact that he shoots off his mouth and tweets way way way to much.

You can do the RIGHT THING the WRONG WAY.

That would be Trump in a lot of instances.

Covid was a great example. His poor imaging cost him 2020.

 

[Dorian Mode]

Many have fallen, not because of the left....but because of Trump.

I agree with what he's tried to do, but there is NO ESCAPING the fact that he shoots off his mouth and tweets way way way to much.

You can do the RIGHT THING the WRONG WAY.

That would be Trump in a lot of instances.

Covid was a great example. His poor imaging cost him 2020.

Oh well, I think a lot have jumped on the "let's be cool and hate Trump" bandwagon. Trump is an ass sometimes, but would you rather have someone like GW Bush instead? Would you like someone slick like Clinton or Obama, but are really establishment politicians? I once got a handmade boutique guitar tailor made for me, and drove the builder crazy until he looked at me and said "There is no such thing as perfection in an imperfect world." There are no perfect politicians who do exactly what I want them to do. When they finally do something I want, like close the damn border, I jump up and down with joy. Now, if that person makes a mean tweet the next day, I can forgive him. Trading a closed border for a mean tweet seems like a sweet deal to me. So, if I have to chose between an asshat who gets things done, and a slick politician who ***** up everything they touch, I'll take the asshat.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Oh well, I think a lot have jumped on the "let's be cool and hate Trump" bandwagon.

Nobody said anything about hating him.

We've said he was the better choice. That hasn't changed.

But I knew from the start that he yapped a lot and said a lot of things that were almost beyond hyperbolic.

Trump is an ass sometimes, but would you rather have someone like GW Bush instead?

You don't read much, do you. Or you don't keep context.

Not to long ago I said I could not be in the same room with GWBush. I'd break his nose. I blame him for lighting the fuse on our national debt. So, that should answer your question. But if it's not clear, the answer is not only no, it's hell no.

Would you like someone slick like Clinton or Obama, but are really establishment politicians?

Certainly not Obama.

And I would never pick a Clinton over Trump.

If you are or have been married, you know that you don't like your wife ALL THE TIME. Some times you simply disagree.

I once got a handmade boutique guitar tailor made for me, and drove the builder crazy until he looked at me and said "There is no such thing as perfection in an imperfect world."

Seriously? Who knew?

There are no perfect politicians who do exactly what I want them to do.

And no wife who does either. But you don't dump her (if you are smart) at the first sign of trouble.

When they finally do something I want, like close the damn border, I jump up and down with joy.

Yep. And if they continue to run up the debt, it pisses me off. But I'll take a victory when I can get it. With Harris, there were going to be NO VICTORIES. And what's worse, there might never have been coming back.

And for me, the big things was the SCOTUS.

I got:

Gorsuch
Kavenaugh
Barrett

And I call Trump a hero for that.

But when he does stupid stuff, I call him something else. Doesn't mean I regret my vote for him.

You guys much find it boring living in your black and white world.

So, if I have to chose between an asshat who gets things done, and a slick politician who ***** up everything they touch, I'll take the asshat.

And you are telling me this why?

Didn't I say:

1 I voted for him 3 times.
2. I'd vote for him again
3. He gave us three great Scotus Judges
4. He's not going to screw over the Constitution the way Harris/Walz (and the rest of the assholes on the left were.

So, please tell me again why I have to wade through your little rant in response to my post?

 

[HikerGuy83]

But on this site, you create votes against. Nice work Benedict, with your constant nit-piking TDS.

2nd Request:

Can you show me one instance where anyone on this board changed their mind as a result of a post or a thread?

 

[leftwinger]

Can you show me one instance where anyone on this board changed their mind as a result of a post or a thread?

Young viewers or GOVT employees (monitoring this public site) might read "SUPPORTERS" with on-going Trump bashing and increase the resistance, or vote for Hair Gel. You don't know who's reading here. You embolden resistance.


President Trump is doing what he can do AND keeping the GOVT - COUNTRY running despite deep state Congress and about 1 million Obiden GOVT employees fighting his every move.

President Trump gets a B+ to A- compared to the previous at an F+ ?

Note: Many People are programmable and ignorant. Young girl says "I'm voting for Ilhan because she's always smiling". Because that's all the dirty media shows. Yes I saw exactly that on some board.

 

[HikerGuy83]

might read

"...might"

You don't know who's reading here.

And neither do you. And, of those we do know are on this site, not one of them has changed their mind on anything.

If you know something different please share.

You embolden resistance.

This is just a whinny crybaby retort.

Maybe, just maybe it also might let people know that some who support Trump don't hang on his every word. That is the narrative that morons like Mac1958 and brainless bots like rightwinger push. I am a direct counter because I demonstrate you can be a Trump supporter and.....you can think for yourself.

Please stop posting suppositions or baseless conclusions as if they were facts.

It's the kind of thing that DOES INDEED feed the narrative you hope to defeat.

President Trump is doing what he can do AND keeping the GOVT - COUNTRY running despite deep state Congress and about 1 million Obiden GOVT employees fighting his every move.

Trump is trying to meet promises he has made. Some of his promises. Never argued that wasn't the case.

Part of politics is public trust and facing.

President Trump gets a B+ to A- compared to the previous at an F+ ?

Based on what metrics? Would love to see those.

And BTW: were those metrics in place prior to his swearing in or are we making them up as we go?

Note: Many People are programmable and ignorant. Young girl says "I'm voting for Ilhan because she's always smiling". Because that's all the dirty media shows. Yes I saw exactly that on some board.

I've seen no evidence of people changing a position on a policy or support for a candidate based on what is posted on this board.

 

[DonGlock26]

Something anyone with an IQ over 60 knew years ago when first the Clinton campaign, then the Biden campaign, and then the Harris campaign refused to release the Eptein files.

If there was anything in there implicating Trump, we would have seen it in 2016, and then ten million more times since then.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/18/us/jeffrey-epstein-donald-trump.html?unlocked_article_code=1.9k8.Nnw5.17luqjB59BrY

"The Times interviewed more than 30 former Epstein employees, victims of his abuse and others who crossed paths with the two men over the years. The Times also obtained new documents that illuminate their relationship and scoured court documents and other public records...An examination of their history by The New York Times has found no evidence implicating Mr. Trump in Mr. Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of minors."

 

[yidnar]

A pedo is a pedo, period. That is what matters. Crimes against humanity were done by Epstein and his goons. This isn't a left vs right issue.

tell that to the left claiming Trump committed vile acts when he associated with Epstein .. facts ... #1 Trump barred Epstein from his resort [before Epstein was ever indicted for sex crimes] for being a perverted creep .. #2 none of the victims that filed charges and testified in Epsteins trial and indictments ever said Trump was involved in any wrong doing ..#3 Epstein WAS a Democrat and prominent Dems still corresponded and associated with him AFTER he was convicted of sex crimes in 2008 !

 

[excalibur]

Well, we know this is the truth.

Trying to make political hay over this despicable. But that is how the Democrats and the left roll.

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, despite years of public speculation and repeated claims pushed by Democratic officials.

The article, written by Times reporters Nicholas Confessore and Julie Tate, was based on interviews with “more than 30 former employees of Jeffrey Epstein, victims of his abuse and others who crossed paths with Mr. Epstein and President Trump.”

...

While much of the article relied on decades-old photographs and quotes from the 1990s to suggest familiarity between Trump and Epstein, the Times ultimately conceded that its review found no evidence tying Trump to Epstein’s abuse or trafficking of minors.

“An examination of their history by The New York Times has found no evidence implicating Mr. Trump in Mr. Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of minors,” the article stated.

...​

NYT Buries the Lede: Admits No Proof Trump Was Involved in Epstein Crimes

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of

www.lifezette.com

 

[Concerned American]

Well, we know this is the truth.

Trying to make political hay over this despicable. But that is how the Democrats and the left roll.

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, despite years of public speculation and repeated claims pushed by Democratic officials.​

​

The article, written by Times reporters Nicholas Confessore and Julie Tate, was based on interviews with “more than 30 former employees of Jeffrey Epstein, victims of his abuse and others who crossed paths with Mr. Epstein and President Trump.”​

​

...​

​

While much of the article relied on decades-old photographs and quotes from the 1990s to suggest familiarity between Trump and Epstein, the Times ultimately conceded that its review found no evidence tying Trump to Epstein’s abuse or trafficking of minors.​

​

“An examination of their history by The New York Times has found no evidence implicating Mr. Trump in Mr. Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of minors,” the article stated.​

​

...​

NYT Buries the Lede: Admits No Proof Trump Was Involved in Epstein Crimes

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of

www.lifezette.com

Not surprising to anyone who has been paying attention. DEMOCRATS ARE LYING PIECES OF EXCREMENT.

 

[sealybobo]

Well, we know this is the truth.

Trying to make political hay over this despicable. But that is how the Democrats and the left roll.

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, despite years of public speculation and repeated claims pushed by Democratic officials.​

​

The article, written by Times reporters Nicholas Confessore and Julie Tate, was based on interviews with “more than 30 former employees of Jeffrey Epstein, victims of his abuse and others who crossed paths with Mr. Epstein and President Trump.”​

​

...​

​

While much of the article relied on decades-old photographs and quotes from the 1990s to suggest familiarity between Trump and Epstein, the Times ultimately conceded that its review found no evidence tying Trump to Epstein’s abuse or trafficking of minors.​

​

“An examination of their history by The New York Times has found no evidence implicating Mr. Trump in Mr. Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of minors,” the article stated.​

​

...​

NYT Buries the Lede: Admits No Proof Trump Was Involved in Epstein Crimes

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of

www.lifezette.com

I told you guys Trump would erase anything damaging before releasing the Epstein files.

It'll come out in years to come. That's why he didn't want to release the files because no ******* way he ever was going to.

Trump was named in the files 1600 times.

 

[sealybobo]

Well, we know this is the truth.

Trying to make political hay over this despicable. But that is how the Democrats and the left roll.

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, despite years of public speculation and repeated claims pushed by Democratic officials.​

​

The article, written by Times reporters Nicholas Confessore and Julie Tate, was based on interviews with “more than 30 former employees of Jeffrey Epstein, victims of his abuse and others who crossed paths with Mr. Epstein and President Trump.”​

​

...​

​

While much of the article relied on decades-old photographs and quotes from the 1990s to suggest familiarity between Trump and Epstein, the Times ultimately conceded that its review found no evidence tying Trump to Epstein’s abuse or trafficking of minors.​

​

“An examination of their history by The New York Times has found no evidence implicating Mr. Trump in Mr. Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of minors,” the article stated.​

​

...​

NYT Buries the Lede: Admits No Proof Trump Was Involved in Epstein Crimes

The New York Times acknowledged in a recent report that there has never been any evidence connecting President Donald Trump to the criminal activities of

www.lifezette.com

By the way, Republicans ran on releasing the Epstein files. What were they expecting to find in the files? Are they disappointed? I'm sure as conspiracy theorists they see something is fishy here. Kash patel said he would release the files, then there was no file, then there was? But nothings in it? Yea right.

 

[excalibur]

I told you guys Trump would erase anything damaging before releasing the Epstein files.

It'll come out in years to come. That's why he didn't want to release the files because no ******* way he ever was going to.

Trump was named in the files 1600 times.

The article, written by Times reporters Nicholas Confessore and Julie Tate, was based on interviews with “more than 30 former employees of Jeffrey Epstein, victims of his abuse and others who crossed paths with Mr. Epstein and President Trump.”

... the Times ultimately conceded that its review found no evidence tying Trump to Epstein’s abuse or trafficking of minors.

“An examination of their history by The New York Times has found no evidence implicating Mr. Trump in Mr. Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of minors,” the article stated.​

 

[yidnar]

By the way, Republicans ran on releasing the Epstein files. What were they expecting to find in the files? Are they disappointed? I'm sure as conspiracy theorists they see something is fishy here. Kash patel said he would release the files, then there was no file, then there was? But nothings in it? Yea right.

 

[sealybobo]

View attachment 1196642

What's funny is that you and Trump think that makes Bill guilty but Trump being in it doesn't make him guilty too.

 

[1srelluc]

I guess that The Times knows an "issue" nobody cares about when they see one.

Never fear leftists, they will plant a new memory card in your heads after Christmas.

I suspect it will be something to do with Venezuela.

 

[Anarchy666]

 

[struth]

By the way, Republicans ran on releasing the Epstein files. What were they expecting to find in the files? Are they disappointed? I'm sure as conspiracy theorists they see something is fishy here. Kash patel said he would release the files, then there was no file, then there was? But nothings in it? Yea right.

I found what I was expecting

The dems are all over the files, they protected Epstein, colluded with him, and conspired with him even after he was convicted awx offender

 

[yidnar]

What's funny is that you and Trump think that makes Bill guilty but Trump being in it doesn't make him guilty too.

ain't seen no Trump pics in a hot tub at Epstein's ..

 

[yidnar]

I guess that The Times knows an "issue" nobody cares about when they see one.

Never fear leftists, they will plant a new memory card in your heads after Christmas.

I suspect it will be something to do with Venezuela.

and when the Marxist leftwing tyrant drug trafficker flees the country the real democratically elected leader will return from exile and lead the country ! a win for Trump that the left is desperately trying to prevent ..