There is no Epstein client list

[Earl]

There is a desperation by Earl to not figure out why trump is the source of so many children for Epstein.

So, you accused President Trump of child rape, Rarely Right Walter…with no proof, no charges, no conviction.

I hope he sues you, Rarely Right Walter.

You also accused Barr of destroying evidence …with zero proof.

Try harder not to suck, Rarely Right Walter.

 

[Walt]

You also accused Barr of destroying evidence …with zero proof.

I accuse Barr of the appearance of a conflict of interest, and have provided plenty of proof.

It is just a fact that Barr was in effect investigating himself. He is wrong for him to have possession of the evidence about the case against himself.

I should not need to prove what he did with the evidence that was supposed to be used to investigate himself. He should be able to prove he did not touch it.

 

[Earl]

I accuse Barr of the appearance of a conflict of interest, and have provided plenty of proof.

It is just a fact that Barr was in effect investigating himself. He is wrong for him to have possession of the evidence about the case against himself.

I should not need to prove what he did with the evidence that was supposed to be used to investigate himself. He should be able to prove he did not touch it.

No, Rarely Right Walter.

You posted “Barr destroyed evidence.”

That’s a federal crime and you never posted proof that he destroyed evidence.

Try telling the truth, Rarely Right Walter.

The truth will stand til the end of time…Rarely Right and Rarely Truthful Walter.

 

[Phantasmal]

I accuse Barr of the appearance of a conflict of interest, and have provided plenty of proof.

It is just a fact that Barr was in effect investigating himself. He is wrong for him to have possession of the evidence about the case against himself.

I should not need to prove what he did with the evidence that was supposed to be used to investigate himself. He should be able to prove he did not touch it.

Barr was conflicted, no appearances, he was absolutely conflicted.

 

[Jarod]

Proof that President Trump has been convicted of child rape, Rarely Right Walter, or you are wrong…as usual.

You fell for the lie, again!

 

[Earl]

You fell for the lie, again!

Post proof that President Trump has been convicted of child rape,

Rarely Right Walter could not.

Post the proof.

 

[Tobytone]

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

Hey moron, recall that pitiful first report for Pam Bondi? A sad little nothing. Then some genius spilled the NYC FBI had a truckload of evidence. Bondi demanded it fast, and boom, documents arrived. There's a lot to go through now, they will redact victim and grand jury bits before release, but relax, your pals will show up. Trump? Give it up, loser. If he ever neared Epstein's plane or Island, it would have leaked long ago, same for any big Republicans. Keep dreaming, Wally.

 

[Nordberg]

Hey moron, recall that pitiful first report for Pam Bondi? A sad little nothing. Then some genius spilled the NYC FBI had a truckload of evidence. Bondi demanded it fast, and boom, documents arrived. There's a lot to go through now, they will redact victim and grand jury bits before release, but relax, your pals will show up. Trump? Give it up, loser. If he ever neared Epstein's plane or Island, it would have leaked long ago, same for any big Republicans. Keep dreaming, Wally.

Trump was on the island at least 7 times in coverage I read, He also palled around 1 on 1 with Epstein for over a decade. Trump was deep into young girls. He said " Jeffery likes them young, even younger than I do".

 

[Diogenes]

I don't think those "files" are a priority. Nor should they be. Accused Texas cop-killer’s release from jail on $1M bond sparks outrage: ‘Got to stop these rogue judges’
There are more important things to look into...

She brought herself, her office and the administration into disrepute through her actions. She should resign or be fired.

Your ancillary argument is invalid.


The U.S. Attorney General does not have direct jurisdiction over the actions of state judges in most cases.

Here's why:

1. Federal vs. State Authority: The U.S. operates under a federal system where states have their own sovereignty, including independent judicial systems. State judges are appointed or elected under state laws and constitutions, and their oversight typically falls to state-level authorities—like state supreme courts, judicial conduct commissions, or state attorneys general—not the federal government.
2. Role of the U.S. Attorney General: The U.S. Attorney General, as head of the Department of Justice (DOJ), enforces federal laws and represents the United States in legal matters. Their jurisdiction is limited to federal issues, such as violations of federal law, civil rights cases under federal statutes, or interstate crimes. They don’t have general authority over state judicial systems or the day-to-day actions of state judges.
3. Exceptions: The U.S. Attorney General can get involved indirectly if a state judge’s actions violate federal law or constitutional rights. For example:
   • If a state judge engages in corruption or bribery that crosses state lines or involves federal crimes, the DOJ could investigate and prosecute under federal statutes (e.g., RICO or mail fraud).
   • If a state judge’s rulings or conduct violate federal civil rights (like systemic discrimination under the 14th Amendment), the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division might step in to investigate or file a lawsuit.
   • Historical examples include DOJ interventions in the Civil Rights Era, where federal authorities challenged state judges’ enforcement of segregation laws.
4. Practical Limits: Even in these cases, the U.S. Attorney General doesn’t “control” state judges. They can only act within federal jurisdiction, and state judges remain accountable primarily to their own state’s disciplinary and appellate systems.

So, while the U.S. Attorney General has significant power at the federal level, they don’t have blanket authority over state judges. Oversight of state judges is mostly a state matter—unless federal law is clearly implicated.


@Grok

 

[Tobytone]

Trump was on the island at least 7 times in coverage I read, He also palled around 1 on 1 with Epstein for over a decade. Trump was deep into young girls. He said " Jeffery likes them young, even younger than I do".

Nordy, you got suckered into gobbling up clickbait trash brewed for Trump-hating dimwits. Share your sources, I dare you. Oh wait, you won’t, because they’re pure crap. If you actually read that junk, you’d be too ashamed to admit it’s stuffed with unnamed sources and pals close to Trump nonsense. I’d be rich if I got a quarter for every libtard story too lame for legit news before the web found you suckers ready to swallow any anti-Trump slop they spew. Ha, let’s see it, I’m waiting.

 

[RB 60]

She brought herself, her office and the administration into disrepute through her actions. She should resign or be fired.

Your ancillary argument is invalid.


The U.S. Attorney General does not have direct jurisdiction over the actions of state judges in most cases.

Here's why:

1. Federal vs. State Authority: The U.S. operates under a federal system where states have their own sovereignty, including independent judicial systems. State judges are appointed or elected under state laws and constitutions, and their oversight typically falls to state-level authorities—like state supreme courts, judicial conduct commissions, or state attorneys general—not the federal government.
2. Role of the U.S. Attorney General: The U.S. Attorney General, as head of the Department of Justice (DOJ), enforces federal laws and represents the United States in legal matters. Their jurisdiction is limited to federal issues, such as violations of federal law, civil rights cases under federal statutes, or interstate crimes. They don’t have general authority over state judicial systems or the day-to-day actions of state judges.
3. Exceptions: The U.S. Attorney General can get involved indirectly if a state judge’s actions violate federal law or constitutional rights. For example:
   • If a state judge engages in corruption or bribery that crosses state lines or involves federal crimes, the DOJ could investigate and prosecute under federal statutes (e.g., RICO or mail fraud).
   • If a state judge’s rulings or conduct violate federal civil rights (like systemic discrimination under the 14th Amendment), the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division might step in to investigate or file a lawsuit.
   • Historical examples include DOJ interventions in the Civil Rights Era, where federal authorities challenged state judges’ enforcement of segregation laws.
4. Practical Limits: Even in these cases, the U.S. Attorney General doesn’t “control” state judges. They can only act within federal jurisdiction, and state judges remain accountable primarily to their own state’s disciplinary and appellate systems.

So, while the U.S. Attorney General has significant power at the federal level, they don’t have blanket authority over state judges. Oversight of state judges is mostly a state matter—unless federal law is clearly implicated.


@Grok

Look under exceptions. She can have someone look into it. Releasing a cop killer is a violation of the American public's civil rights.

 

[Diogenes]

Look under exceptions. She can have someone look into it. Releasing a cop killer is a violation of the American public's civil rights.

If you think so, ask why she isn't do it.

 

[RB 60]

If you think so, ask why she isn't do it.

Maybe she is.

 

[Diogenes]

Maybe she is.

Maybe she's not.

Your revenge fantasies have no place in pragmatic politics.

Sadly, Pulchritudinous Pam has forfeited my trust in her judgment.

 

[RB 60]

Maybe she's not.

Your revenge fantasies have no place in pragmatic politics.

Sadly, Pulchritudinous Pam has forfeited my trust in her judgment.

Somehow, I doubt she knows.

 

[Diogenes]

Somehow, I doubt she knows.

Somehow, it doesn't matter whether she does or not.

As @Jarod knows all too well, failure to discharge the basic duty of due diligence is grounds for dismissal from public service.

I'd hoped that Trump had made better personnel picks this time around, but it seems to me that he has not; at least in her case.

 

[Nordberg]

Nordy, you got suckered into gobbling up clickbait trash brewed for Trump-hating dimwits. Share your sources, I dare you. Oh wait, you won’t, because they’re pure crap. If you actually read that junk, you’d be too ashamed to admit it’s stuffed with unnamed sources and pals close to Trump nonsense. I’d be rich if I got a quarter for every libtard story too lame for legit news before the web found you suckers ready to swallow any anti-Trump slop they spew. Ha, let’s see it, I’m waiting.

Who fooled you into believing a person as bad as Trump has not done what was claimed. He is dishonest and proudly cheated on every wife. Trump bragged to Howard Stern about walking in the locker room when he was running a teenage beauty contest. Trump is disgusting.

 

[Tobytone]

Who fooled you into believing a person as bad as Trump has not done what was claimed. He is dishonest and proudly cheated on every wife. Trump bragged to Howard Stern about walking in the locker room when he was running a teenage beauty contest. Trump is disgusting.

Huh, I thought you'd show us the evidence. No, you didn't, because you can't, because you're full of shit. I told you last reply you wouldn't be able to support your lies and I was right, again. It's not hard to predict these things, all dumbass drones do and say the same bullshit. Nice try though. LOL

 

[Walt]

Barr was conflicted, no appearances, he was absolutely conflicted.

It is beyond any reasonable doubt that Barr had a conflict of interest, but all we needed was the appearance of a conflict of interest.

 

[Walt]

Hey moron, recall that pitiful first report for Pam Bondi? A sad little nothing.

You admit that Bondi lied about having anything, and that it was really a "sad little nothing."

Remember that while we move on to her next claims.

Then some genius spilled the NYC FBI had a truckload of evidence. Bondi demanded it fast, and boom, documents arrived.

Uhm... She already had an electronic version of all the evidence that the DOJ still has. Having the FBI print it all out, to ship down to DC, so it can be scanned in again is just make work. It serves no purpose.

If he ever neared Epstein's plane or Island, it would have leaked long ago, same for any big Republicans. Keep dreaming, Wally.

It has already been released that trump was on Epstein's plane. trump admits it. The island is more in question, but there are accusations. We know that trump helped Epstein buy the island.

These are facts. You need to start dealing with the facts.