What interest is it of yours? Did you squeal on him like you do so many others?
There is no Epstein client list
- Thread starter Walt
- Start date
What interest is it of yours? Did you squeal on him like you do so many others?
Why not destroyed? If one has evidence, wouldn't that person try to destroy it? Especially if that person was in a position of power, say a Attorney General personally investigating a crime he was involved in, or a president known to go over lines.
We have fallen into trump's trap on this. he keeps promising he will release the evidence, thereby distracting us from asking why people with a conflict of interest were allowed to control (and possibly destroy) the evidence.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
I don't know if it hasn't been destroyed. There were reports it was. It hasn't been released as promised. What was released was already in the public domain. Overall it's a nothingburger.
I believe Trump would have his MAGAt Cabinet members destroy any incriminating evidence.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Justice, Arbie. Something you care little about.
No. Why would I report Walt? He didn't do anythinig wrong. I only report rule violators.
BTW, squeal and snitch are terms used by schoolyard bullies and convicts. Which are you, son? Since you've proved to be such a petty person, I'm guessing both; a schoolyard bully who ended up doing time for petty crimes. 6 months? A year? How long were you in for, Arbie?
So then it was you who squealed on Walt if "justice" is what you claim to care about?
I was not surprised. Felonious doesnt ever want it released, he said so on several occasions in his Felonious fashion, “it might contain some untruths”, meaning he’s in there and it’s damning.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
He denied knowing Jeffrey and Ghislaine when the evidence is clear that they were good friends.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
IMO, Walt did nothing wrong. If you believe he violated a rule, please quote it for me and cite which rule you believe he broke.
If you can't do it, I understand.
But But But Trumppers say CLINTON all day long, its been a huge thing, they know he is in the list... WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL>His address book has been made public. As much of his flight files as are known have been made public. There is no client list. There were not actual clients as such.
If I am wrong, then trump can release it and prove me wrong. he already promised to release it. I say if he does not release it, we say it was a list of one: him.
Even Glenn Beck admits, "the #Epsteinfiles are a total joke.
How Longtime Epstein Watchers Reacted to the Release of the ‘Epstein Files’
Reporters who have covered the case for years publicly explained why they think an ‘Epstein List’ is unlikely to ever be released.www.yahoo.com
My perspective is that Trump must be in the documents.
Why? Because you got away with it yourself?
I did tell him to watch what he said, although I didn't squeal on him. Did you? You're the forum squealing coward...
It depends on what you are "just asking" about.
In this case the crime is a full step away.
If, for instance, an AG deleted some names from the list and was a member and we asked them if they destroyed evidence, it would not be a violation of 12b. If, however, we asked them if they "killed children" to cover up a crime of their own, that would be an entirely different subject.
Which AG do you think was involved in the crime? You think Pam Bondi's name was on that list?
Don't you think you've spent enough time and energy on explaining what a 12b is to Walt? He should know by now...
He should... but it is a discussion. I want people to be able to talk about the subject on here, but without direct or sideways walking the line "you're a molester" accusations. Asking if someone participated in deleting names from a list is not an accusation of pedophilia. If you have to explain how you twist logic to get there in order to get folks to "see" you've been "accused" of something then every question on nearly any subject could be twisted into 12b...
In this case we are on a subject that is easy to cross a line on, and I get that. However, we have to draw an actual line somewhere. I draw it at the point where you have to twist logic to find an accusation, this isn't a "have you stopped molesting children?" type of question, it is one on subject where folks are saying that someone is "destroying evidence" but do not believe they participated in anything untoward or were ever on the Island to get voted off...
I say it is not the same thing, and in order to let the conversation flow I made a ruling on whether it was a violation.
trump is clearly making a distraction by promising a huge release, and then just throwing together some random things we already know.
So the question becomes, what is trump trying to distract us from?
The list claim has been used by the right since Epstein died. There is no evidence. It is how the Trumpys play the game. They will say we have the proof, just wait, any day now. It works on Trumpys, since they are totally conned. It work's great on you.
Ok, then riddle me this...
Why did I get a 2 week ban for my FIRST offense, which was asking a poster if he was an officer in his local chapter of NAMBLA.
It was not a direct accusation of pedophilia, and an officer doesn't always reflect what the chapter might be guilty of.
My opinion is that Epstein had blackmail evidence on trump, and Barr. That evidence was either never found, or was among the evidence left in Barr's custody. I do not believe Barr would have hidden, or sealed the evidence. Logic says that Barr would have destroyed the evidence.
There are documents that trump could release. he could release the documents around the attempted child rape civil trial that he had blocked. he could release his employment records on Guiffre. he could release his own flight logs of the flights Epstein were on, and the people he delivered to Epstein. Speaking of people he delivered to Epstein, trump could release the visa documents he had prepared for Marcinko.
These are all documents under the control of trump, personally.
Barr introduced Epstein to Barr's father. Barr's father was the headmaster of the Dalton School, and gave the completely unqualified Epstein a teacher job there. The Dalton School is one of the most exclusive schools in America, and that gave Epstein access to wealthy people. It basically started his path. Barr continued to be a friend in close contact with Epstein. It appears that Epstein introduced Barr to trump.
Barr as AG, personally investigated Epstein. He took personal custody of any evidence found in the investigation. Then a month before Epstein's death, he recused himself from the case. He should have recused himself at the beginning of the case. There is a clear conflict of interest here. Barr could have destroyed evidence, and we may never know if he did. The whole point of conflict of interest laws is to make sure we know they did not destroy evidence, so this is unacceptable.
As a side note, Barr was not just trump's first AG, he was the elder Bush's last AG. He was the AG who gave the shoot to kill order at Ruby Ridge. We can debate if it was a crime, or just incompetence, but is anyone willing to debate Barr should be reappointed AG?
So for some reason, trump appointed Barr AG, even though trump knew that Barr was connected to a pedophile, and was the AG who commanded Ruby Ridge.
Everything points to Trump Co being in the documents.