Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

LOLOL9LOLOLOLOLOL¡¡¡!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WAIT!

Just to make sure.

This is what you're going with?

I am happy to see some videos to the contrary. Everything I recall when Epstein was brought up he got real cagey real quick. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

LOLOL9LOLOLOLOLOL¡¡¡!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WAIT!

Just to make sure.

This is what you're going with?

I can't believe that I'm saying this, but I think I agree with Anastasis. Trump certainly let the dipshits around him run with the Epstein stuff to help his re-election (and general Deep State conspiracy mongering), but I don't ever recall any personal promises from him. It's been evident that he's been hiding something for 6+ years with this stuff and has sidestepped questions about releasing the files accordingly.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, aggie08 said:

I can't believe that I'm saying this, but I think I agree with Anastasis. Trump certainly let the dipshits around him run with the Epstein stuff to help his re-election (and general Deep State conspiracy mongering), but I don't ever recall any personal promises from him. It's been evident that he's been hiding something for 6+ years with this stuff and has sidestepped questions about releasing the files accordingly.

This is all obvious stuff. Al is just out here wilding. 

Posted
7 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

LOLOL9LOLOLOLOLOL¡¡¡!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WAIT!

Just to make sure.

This is what you're going with?

The White House invited a bunch of internet people to come over, then gave them a bunch of binders labeled “Epstein Files Tranche 1” and did a news release. 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.e137b5931858f325deb71032c3bc4124.jpeg

  • Like 4
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, 'stache said:

@TwiceHorn has explained a number of times why this wouldn’t happen, but your “both sides” schtick requires you to believe that the Biden administration was incapable of following prosecutorial ethics and norms. It’s telling that you’re so hung up on accusing the left of “performative bs” and ignoring that, even if that’s the case, it’s in response to years of performative bs from trump and co. saying for years that the list exists and that he would release them and expose a bunch of leftist pedophiles. Again, please answer why they should just let it go and not respond in kind? Performative bs won them control of all three branches of government. Why do you insist that the left should not respond in kind unless your ultimate objective is for them to keep losing elections? All the data shows that the American electorate at large cares only about performative bs.

We have gotten spoiled by all kinds of criminal investigation by-product as a result of Special Counsel, where that tends to be, but isn't always, part of the deal.

If you think back to just about any terminated investigation or acquittal or dismissal, we never got a whole load of evidence to speculate and conspiracy theorize about, except in the case of Special Counsel. It's just not normal.

And, for those bagging on the Dems, you can probably find some of your posts bagging on them for sticking too closely to norms.  Why would you expect them to have broken from norms in this particular instance?

This.  Is.  Norm.  Breaking.

All that said, I'm thrilled that Dems are being political opportunists about it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Yeah.

Trump breaking a promise would be a game changer.

That's not the point whatsoever. 

I don't see how acknowledging that Trump himself has been, historically, extremely quiet on the Epstein stuff makes the situation any better for him. It just makes him look all the more guilty. Pretty clearly, he allowed the conspiracy to serve his re-election purposes but planned to squash it when necessary and play dumb about what those around him say and do (which he's exceptional at).

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am happy to see some videos to the contrary. Everything I recall when Epstein was brought up he got real cagey real quick. 

 

7 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

The White House invited a bunch of internet people to come over, then gave them a bunch of binders labeled “Epstein Files Tranche 1” and did a news release. 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.e137b5931858f325deb71032c3bc4124.jpeg

“Most transparent admin evar!” LOL. As in, the other admin was not. Keep trying dipshit. 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.8075ac578739890bf73fe8dfd5a90f32.jpeg

 

IMG_6553.jpeg

  • Like 3
Posted
1 minute ago, aggie08 said:

That's not the point whatsoever. 

I don't see how acknowledging that Trump himself has been, historically, extremely quiet on the Epstein stuff makes the situation any better for him. It just makes him look all the more guilty. Pretty clearly, he allowed the conspiracy to serve his re-election purposes but planned to squash it when necessary and play dumb about what those around him say and do (which he's exceptional at).

He literally had DC Draino in the West Wing and let Pam Bondi hand out Epstein shit to him there after the election. “He didn’t say it personally” is splitting some extremely fine hairs. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

but I don't ever recall any personal promises from him

Yeah, that's super weird. Almost as if by design. Like consistently implying the same point over the course of years and yet still being able to technically say-

"I didn't say that"

Weeeeeiiiiiiirrrrrdd how almost mathematically consistent that pattern is. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am happy to see some videos to the contrary. Everything I recall when Epstein was brought up he got real cagey real quick. 

Trump randomly brought up Epstein/Clinton at CPAC in 2015. Not even sure he was officially running for President yet. 

 

Posted
Just now, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Yeah, that's super weird. Almost as if by design. Like consistently implying the same point over the course of years and yet still being able to technically say-

"I didn't say that"

Weeeeeiiiiiiirrrrrdd how almost mathematically consistent that pattern is. 

 

Yes, exactly. So you agree with me? Trump's usual modus operandi is keeping just enough separation to let others take the fall while keeping himself unscathed. He thought this would be the same as all the others, but it's not going according to plan, and it's been a refreshing change of pace to watch thus far.

What are we arguing exactly?

Posted
4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

“Most transparent admin evar!” LOL. As in, the other admin was not. Keep trying dipshit. 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.8075ac578739890bf73fe8dfd5a90f32.jpeg

 

IMG_6553.jpeg

This stuff is extremely stage managed and this Admin, more than perhaps any other, is EXTREMELY cautious about the use of symbols and signaling around the President. 
 

DOJ and the FBI have press rooms and places for photo-ops.  Nothing is ever done at the White House without the explicit aim to show direct presidential support and direction. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
8 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

He's going to sue The Wall Street Journal NewsCorp/Fox News, and Rupert Murdoch?

Lets Go Yes GIF by UEFA

Seems more likely he's trying to get the editor hurt by one of his crazies to send a message.

Posted
15 hours ago, 'stache said:

@TwiceHorn has explained a number of times why this wouldn’t happen, but your “both sides” schtick requires you to believe that the Biden administration was incapable of following prosecutorial ethics and norms. It’s telling that you’re so hung up on accusing the left of “performative bs” and ignoring that, even if that’s the case, it’s in response to years of performative bs from trump and co. saying for years that the list exists and that he would release them and expose a bunch of leftist pedophiles. Again, please answer why they should just let it go and not respond in kind? Performative bs won them control of all three branches of government. Why do you insist that the left should not respond in kind unless your ultimate objective is for them to keep losing elections? All the data shows that the American electorate at large cares only about performative bs.

There are two possibilities:

 

1. The information is so damning for all in involved that no one wants to produce the details of the investigation.

2. The investigation produced nothing outside of the need to jail Epstein and Maxwell ( which is also what Trump is saying once you dig past the hoax nonsense). That outcome is preferable to believing that our elites, power brokers and celebs aren’t debauched assholes sexually abusing minors. 

It is difficult to believe that the DOJ’s investigation has produced nothing of consequence 6 years after Epstein was arrested. You might be able to pull the “its standard procedure to not reveal any information during an investigation” in year one, two or three. 6 years later, 5 and a half years to Trump’s second inauguration, and nothing? Zilch? Nada?

It is no stretch at all to assume the Biden Administration and any department under it was capable of fucking anything up btw.

Yes, I can see “performative BS” has stuck in your craw. So much so that you’re not even trying to deny the Dems are using it. Making no issue of this at all, or even trying to counter it in anyway while the Trump campaign at least loudly hinted about pursuing it, is the Dems failure. Making a stink about it now that it’s politically expedient to stage a vote in Congress that they knew they were going to lose is the definition of performative. Showing any hint of caring about this before the recent vote might have assuaged such accusations, but the Dems gave no fucks about it, and now are trying to hide behind DOJ procedure. How many times has Ro Khana taken to the House floor to push for the release of the Epstein files once the investigation was complete in the last year? Two years? I have a sneaking suspicion the answer is pretty close to zero. As in zero fucks given. 

You can take your “both sides” BS back to your house of worship in the CR. There should be only one side you care about when it comes to child predators. Instead you’re trying scoreboard BS because you don’t actually give a fuck about it other than a way for “Yay team” to advance itself politically. 

 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted
Quote

The memo made it clear that they will not be releasing any more documents or pursuing cases against Epstein’s friends. It declared that there was no client list, no jailhouse murder, and no international blackmail ring. 

This is all true, but to the QAnon base, it’s akin to the pope tweeting, “We’ve reviewed the files and Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. Thank you for your attention in this matter.” 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

There are two possibilities:

 

1. The information is so damning for all in involved that no one wants to produce the details of the investigation.

2. The investigation produced nothing outside of the need to jail Epstein and Maxwell ( which is also what Trump is saying once you dig past the hoax nonsense). That outcome is preferable to believing that our elites, power brokers and celebs aren’t debauched assholes sexually abusing minors. 

It is difficult to believe that the DOJ’s investigation has produced nothing of consequence 6 years after Epstein was arrested. You might be able to pull the “its standard procedure to not reveal any information during an investigation” in year one, two or three. 6 years later, 5 and a half years to Trump’s second inauguration, and nothing? Zilch? Nada?

It is no stretch at all to assume the Biden Administration and any department under it was capable of fucking anything up btw.

Yes, I can see “performative BS” has stuck in your craw. So much so that you’re not even trying to deny the Dems are using it. Making no issue of this at all, or even trying to counter it in anyway while the Trump campaign at least loudly hinted about pursuing it, is the Dems failure. Making a stink about it now that it’s politically expedient to stage a vote in Congress that they knew they were going to lose is the definition of performative. Showing any hint of caring about this before the recent vote might have assuaged such accusations, but the Dems gave no fucks about it, and now are trying to hide behind DOJ procedure. How many times has Ro Khana taken to the House floor to push for the release of the Epstein files once the investigation was complete in the last year? Two years? I have a sneaking suspicion the answer is pretty close to zero. As in zero fucks given. 

You can take your “both sides” BS back to your house of worship in the CR. There should be only one side you care about when it comes to child predators. Instead you’re trying scoreboard BS because you don’t actually give a fuck about it other than a way for “Yay team” to advance itself politically. 

 

The most likely scenario is that the "file" contains names of people who Epstein associated with and/or who flew with him and/or visited the island, but nothing to establish that they had sex with minors. He liked having rich and powerful friends, it's not like he only associated with pedophiles. So yeah, if there isn't enough evidence to support prosecutions, the result would be that nothing is said about it because the investigation files are generally not public unless they lead to prosecutions. And LOL that any of this is about "child predators." It was always performative to score political points by promising that if you elect him he'd expose a bunch of leftist pedophiles. He's now saying those files never existed and his political enemies created a hoax. It's fucking laughable. I think he should be held to account for that lie and if it leads to insinuations that he's in fact the pedophile, so be it, that's the game he set up. It's again clear that you believe the dems covered up a pedophile ring because that's the narrative you were told to believe. You are the exact type of gullible mark that won them the election. Congratulations.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

There are two possibilities:

 

1. The information is so damning for all in involved that no one wants to produce the details of the investigation.

2. The investigation produced nothing outside of the need to jail Epstein and Maxwell ( which is also what Trump is saying once you dig past the hoax nonsense). That outcome is preferable to believing that our elites, power brokers and celebs aren’t debauched assholes sexually abusing minors. 

It is difficult to believe that the DOJ’s investigation has produced nothing of consequence 6 years after Epstein was arrested. You might be able to pull the “its standard procedure to not reveal any information during an investigation” in year one, two or three. 6 years later, 5 and a half years to Trump’s second inauguration, and nothing? Zilch? Nada?

It is no stretch at all to assume the Biden Administration and any department under it was capable of fucking anything up btw.

Yes, I can see “performative BS” has stuck in your craw. So much so that you’re not even trying to deny the Dems are using it. Making no issue of this at all, or even trying to counter it in anyway while the Trump campaign at least loudly hinted about pursuing it, is the Dems failure. Making a stink about it now that it’s politically expedient to stage a vote in Congress that they knew they were going to lose is the definition of performative. Showing any hint of caring about this before the recent vote might have assuaged such accusations, but the Dems gave no fucks about it, and now are trying to hide behind DOJ procedure. How many times has Ro Khana taken to the House floor to push for the release of the Epstein files once the investigation was complete in the last year? Two years? I have a sneaking suspicion the answer is pretty close to zero. As in zero fucks given. 

You can take your “both sides” BS back to your house of worship in the CR. There should be only one side you care about when it comes to child predators. Instead you’re trying scoreboard BS because you don’t actually give a fuck about it other than a way for “Yay team” to advance itself politically. 

 

 

For the record, we have a 24-page thread about shaming pedophiles, yet I don't recall you ever posting in that one. Hell, this thread is 3 years old, and your first post here wasn't until Sunday. So, based on your lack of posting history about the topic, it seems that you didn't start giving a shit until very recently, for whatever reason.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, 'stache said:

The most likely scenario is that the "file" contains names of people who Epstein associated with and/or who flew with him and/or visited the island, but nothing to establish that they had sex with minors. He liked having rich and powerful friends, it's not like he only associated with pedophiles. So yeah, if there isn't enough evidence to support prosecutions, the result would be that nothing is said about it because the investigation files are generally not public unless they lead to prosecutions. And LOL that any of this is about "child predators." It was always performative to score political points by promising that if you elect him he'd expose a bunch of leftist pedophiles. He's now saying those files never existed and his political enemies created a hoax. It's fucking laughable. I think he should be held to account for that lie and if it leads to insinuations that he's in fact the pedophile, so be it, that's the game he set up. It's again clear that you believe the dems covered up a pedophile ring because that's the narrative you were told to believe. You are the exact type of gullible mark that won them the election. Congratulations.

Yay team. Don’t forget your devotional at 7pm. 

40 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

For the record, we have a 24-page thread about shaming pedophiles, yet I don't recall you ever posting in that one. Hell, this thread is 3 years old, and your first post here wasn't until Sunday. So, based on your lack of posting history about the topic, it seems that you didn't start giving a shit until very recently, for whatever reason.

Don’t go outside without a helmet. 

  • Fuck You 1
Posted

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/18/trump-epstein-fbi-durbin.html

image.thumb.png.37862d59eafa3eeb37439ed1804cba53.png

 

“Who made the decision to reassign hundreds of New York Field Office personnel to this March review of Epstein-related records?” Durbin asked in his letters.

“Why were personnel told to flag records in which President Trump was mentioned?” he asked.

An FBI spokesperson told CNBC in an email, “The FBI has no comment,” when asked about Durbin’s letters.

...

Durbin said his office had learned that after that, the “FBI was pressured to put approximately 1,000 personnel in its Information Management Division … on 24-hour shifts to review approximately 100,000 Epstein-related records in order to produce more documents that could then be released on an arbitrarily short deadline.”

“This effort, which reportedly took place from March 14 through the end of March, was haphazardly supplemented by hundreds of FBI New York Field Office personnel, many of whom lacked the expertise to identify statutorily-protected information regarding child victims and child witnesses or properly handle FOIA requests,” the letter said.

“My office was told that these personnel were instructed to ‘flag’ any records in which President Trump was mentioned.”

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
8 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

Don’t go outside without a helmet. 

We also have a thread in the CR that was started in 2019, which has grown to 89 pages, where folks on the very first page talk about not giving a shit whose "team" gets caught up in the Epstein scandal so long as guilty parties are punished. Your personal lack of give-a-shit there, too, is also noted.

Your aggressively defensive indignation, including personal insults such as the one quoted above, didn't get going until one of those "teams" actually began actively blocking the public release of information. And then, you suddenly decide to come out and start attacking the "team" that wants the files to see daylight.

I hope you can see how your claim to be on the "team" of justice and transparency rings oh-so-fucking-hollow.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Drool 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

There are two possibilities:

 

1. The information is so damning for all in involved that no one wants to produce the details of the investigation.

2. The investigation produced nothing outside of the need to jail Epstein and Maxwell ( which is also what Trump is saying once you dig past the hoax nonsense). That outcome is preferable to believing that our elites, power brokers and celebs aren’t debauched assholes sexually abusing minors. 

 

You have zero knowledge about how criminal investigations work.

Posted
4 minutes ago, bolverk said:

We also have a thread in the CR that was started in 2019, which has grown to 89 pages, where folks on the very first page talk about not giving a shit whose "team" gets caught up in the Epstein scandal so long as guilty parties are punished. Your personal lack of give-a-shit there, too, is also noted.

Your aggressively defensive indignation, including personal insults such as the one quoted above, didn't get going until one of those "teams" actually began actively blocking the public release of information. And then, you suddenly decide to come out and start attacking the "team" that wants the files to see daylight.

I hope you can see how your claim to be on the "team" of justice and transparency rings oh-so-fucking-hollow.

The personal insults start when the barking seals exit the CR and shit on everything they touch. They see only one thing. 
 

Your remarkably stupid supposition that one does not care about a subject just because one does not participate in a Surly thread about it received well earned scorn. 
 

The fact that you think that was a real gotcha is sad. 

Posted

As I read it, the birthday card was part of an entire album of cards and birthday wishes.  Did I catch that correctly? Let's see the whole album. And who is the custodian of said book at this time?  

 

Posted

No one should care that the current admin told everyone they would release all of the Epstein files and now they say there are no Epstein files and the president is crashing out trying to get everyone to shut up and stop talking about it because of Dems - Galaxy brain

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

Oh, I'd love to see the whole book.  Maybe some other creep wrote him a birthday haiku:

"Raw-dogging young girls

That thing we both love to do

Happy birthday, you!"

Signed, Dennis Hastert

(P.S., young boys are better)

  • Haha 3
Posted (edited)

There is zero chance, 0.0000000% chance he did not abuse a minor. His reactions are clear proof. He is acting like a 15 year old that got caught red handed. Deflect, blame, minimize. This shit is so fascinating/insane. The focus for a large swath of 'merica for years has been this issue along with a substantial portion ofnthe campaign/messaging (dems are pedos). Now there is clear evidence something is going on and their response is , "why didnt the crypt keeper release it!"

If you dont understand the fact that it cant come from that side, I dont know what to tell you. This is the greatest self own in history. All galaxy level and the regarded dems let it happen. It is obvious by Jeffries comments this week. There is some serious 4d chess vibes in this deal and it was served up on a platter by this reactionary leader we have. 

 

Edited by HOOKEM4
ousux
Posted

Oh, and on the "release the Epstein files" as a whole picture, here's the facts and problems.

1) a NORMAL administration doesn't just "release investigative files."  The documents, interviews, etc., were part of a criminal investigation.  First, you don't release them while the investigation is ongoing (which is why there were several years when they were never going to be released).  Then, even when the criminal investigation is over, they don't release documents that--while they may be embarrassing, or may even provide evidence that someone did something illegal--do NOT rise to the level of supporting an indictment.  Not that I'm interested in morally cutting anyone any slack, but let's say there is a detailed log of everyone who ever flew on a plane with Jeffrey Epstein.  That alone is NOT proof that every one of those people screwed underage girls, trafficked them, etc.  Seriously, it's not a good idea to hang around a creep like Epstein at all, and I question your judgment if you do, but maybe y'all were just flying to go see a football game.  He wasn't boning young girls 24/7, so merely having evidence that "person X spent time with Epstein" isn't going to support criminal charges, and the government isn't going to release it just to give the public fodder to say "oh yeah?  Joe Schmoe was on Epstein's plane!  KIDDIE DIDDLER!"

2) SO....in normal world, IF (big if, by the way) a full and thorough criminal investigation was conducted and everyone who merited being charged with a crime was indeed charged, then you'd know about the relevant evidence as it was introduced in their prosecution, and you would never know about the other evidence and documents that were NOT used in the prosecution.  That's not sinister or secretive, it's how it works in ANY criminal matter.  Could be a drug dealing prosecution, they aren't going to publish the names of every person in Danny Drug Dealer's phone contacts (FFS, he has the number of a great chinese delivery joint in there, because Danny digs him some kung pao).

3) but this isn't normal world.  We had an administration and functionally all of its mouthpieces and functionaries a) actually campaign on "release the files!" and then b) when they took power, they made big shows of "here, I have a big white binder with a totally salacious list that the previous guys didn't want you to ever see - and I'm gonna show it to you!"  That is outside of all of the norms and procedures and safeguards discussed in items 1 and 2 above.

4) so, here we are.  Abnormal dipshits promised to reveal ALL THE STUFF.....that they now don't want to reveal.  Maybe that's because there's no "there" there.  Maybe it's because if they reveal it, their guy is going to look really, really bad (along with some other people).  Maybe that's because someone grasped items 1 and 2 above, and realized that while there may be a lot of evidence of people who spent time with Epstein, that evidence doesn't rise to the level of supporting any criminal charges of kiddie diddling.  But it would sure get tongues wagging.  Or maybe it's some combination of all of those things.

What it boils down to is that the admin and its flunkies promised they'd do something, without ANY fucking idea what was actually there and how shit works.  And now, they are stuck by their own stupidity.

As to kiddie diddling, I sure as shit don't have any "team."  If there's a video of Bill Clinton screwing a 14 year old, prosecute the fuck out of him, I don't care.  If there's the same for Trump, do the same.  What I suspect is that there's a lot of stuff that's smoke, and would make a lot of powerful people look bad, but the evidence doesn't rise to the level of fire. And now, the idiot dog caught the car, and it turns out the car contains some stuff that will make the dog look bad too.  So, what to do?  Fuck 'em, they set a standard they can't now follow, and they're getting pilloried for it.  Serves 'em right.

Oh, and was there likely, at some point or another, evidence to support greater charges/other prosecutions, but prosecutors engaged in a cover-up to protect some powerful people?  I would be 100% unsurprised by that, in fact I would probably bet on it.

  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...