Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

It’s typically against DOJ policy to release investigative materials that aren’t used to prosecute someone, except in very limited circumstances (e.g an overriding public interest).

And after the defendant is long dead and most of the participants.  That's not a part of the rule, per se, but is as a practical matter.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

I would say this is an overriding public fucking interest

 

Jeff Fisher >> Merrick Garland

It's not though.  

It's more like a curiosity, provoked and tended by a bunch of insane MAGAts into a conspiracy theory that people like you are buying into now.

If there were legit, convictable evidence that Trump committed child sexual abuse, he would have been prosecuted.

There's not.  There's just going to be a bunch of people with various connections to Epstein, and a bunch of really dubious witnesses and accounts and it's just going to be an endless shitstorm of conspiracy theories involving Trump, Clinton, Gates and God knows who else.

  • Like 1
Posted
37 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Ok…so why is it different now?

Not sure if serious.

Are you aware of how Trump treats the Department of Justice, the courts of the United States of America, and the Attorney General, among other institutions?

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

Chris Hayes had a funny sentence a few minutes ago. Something like "Pam Bondi promised to release the Epstein files, then she informed President Trump that he's in the files, then they decided to not release the files."

Gosh, I just can't put this riddle together. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

If there were legit, convictable evidence that Trump committed child sexual abuse, he would have been prosecuted

Begging the question. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Sawbones  - what is the ICD-10 Code for cornea injury from mushroom dick poked in eye?”

Right or left eye? 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The Dog said:

 

Update requested - by pretty much all accounts, "gross old meat" should fit inside the Epstein Files bubble as well.

Edited by Gap03
Posted
13 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Begging the question. 

Well, who's gonna prosecute once this information is let out?

Who's gonna evaluate it?

This whole shitshow is exactly the reason you don't release this kind of material to the general public.

The only thing that makes it palatable for the rationals is that Trump might be implicated.  But probably so will a bunch of otherwise decentish people.

Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, who's gonna prosecute once this information is let out?

Who's gonna evaluate it?

This whole shitshow is exactly the reason you don't release this kind of material to the general public.

The only thing that makes it palatable for the rationals is that Trump might be implicated.  But probably so will a bunch of otherwise decentish people.

"Decentish"?    How the fuck could anyone be on Epstein's island and not figure out young girls were, ahem, there to party?  

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Macanudo said:

"Decentish"?    How the fuck could anyone be on Epstein's island and not figure out young girls were, ahem, there to party?  

I think a lot of people will be implicated far short of riding the Lolita Express or going to pedo island.  But, depending on their political affiliation, will still be smeared with shit from one side or the other.

Some of the people will well and truly deserve being smeared with shit, like Trump.  Others a lot less so.

And, it will all be inconclusive, just a complete barforama.

Posted
13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, who's gonna prosecute once this information is let out?

Who's gonna evaluate it?

This whole shitshow is exactly the reason you don't release this kind of material to the general public.

The only thing that makes it palatable for the rationals is that Trump might be implicated.  But probably so will a bunch of otherwise decentish people.

By definition anyone implicated is not decentish. 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
47 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Not sure if serious.

Are you aware of how Trump treats the Department of Justice, the courts of the United States of America, and the Attorney General, among other institutions?

 

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

Because Donald Trump is President, Pam Bondi runs the DOJ, and everyone who would tell her no that's against the rules has resigned.

I feel like you guys are talking in circles.  Maybe there’s confusion and we just need a reset.

Republicans have stated either they can’t release information, or there’s no information to release. For example, today some Florida judge rejected the release of some information. We all believe this is bullshit. The files are there. They just aren’t releasing it and people are pissed.  

However, some Republicans are pointing out that Biden had several years to release information and didn’t either. Why is it ok for Biden to have sat on it but not Trump? In other words, shouldn’t both be catching hell for sitting on it? 

Wildcat’s answer to this makes no sense. If your rationale is that Biden shouldn’t have released information because people in DoJ wouldn’t allow it, then just because Trump is interfering with the DoJ doesn’t mean he should violate DoJ reasons for not releasing it. My question is, what specifically has changed that is a valid legal reason for releasing the files? Seems like Biden screwed up too. That’s what I’m trying to understand.   

Posted
9 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

 

I feel like you guys are talking in circles.  Maybe there’s confusion and we just need a reset.

Republicans have stated either they can’t release information, or there’s no information to release. For example, today some Florida judge rejected the release of some information. We all believe this is bullshit. The files are there. They just aren’t releasing it and people are pissed.  

However, some Republicans are pointing out that Biden had several years to release information and didn’t either. Why is it ok for Biden to have sat on it but not Trump? In other words, shouldn’t both be catching hell for sitting on it? 

Wildcat’s answer to this makes no sense. If your rationale is that Biden shouldn’t have released information because people in DoJ wouldn’t allow it, then just because Trump is interfering with the DoJ doesn’t mean he should violate DoJ reasons for not releasing it. My question is, what specifically has changed that is a valid legal reason for releasing the files? Seems like Biden screwed up too. That’s what I’m trying to understand.   

its not complicated - they are all on it. them + others in finance, actors, anyone and everyone, assuming it even fucking exists. 

i would think, apart from Twice's legal answer, the Ds hoped the arrest of Jizzlaine would quiet it up. 

The republicans are catching more shit because 1) we are a regarded society who can only think about the now, 2) they fucking ran on it as a platform, and 3) they are in power. 

the sheer stupidity and wait, lets say incompetence of the Republicans in this is mind blowing. I would expect a fucking teenager with no concept of the consequences of their actions to find at least 10 places in this timeline to cover this up somehow. If you want a picture perfect snapshot of the complete disdain of the populace by DC and even more so the GOP - this is it. Too out of touch to bother making ANYTHING of this and fumbling the fucking ball at the goal line. over and over again. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted

i guess, the complication on the coverup for the Rs, is the people in the current cabinet actually cared about the Epstein files and Trump couldn't figure out a way out of it and around all of them

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, staboner said:

its not complicated - they are all on it. them + others in finance, actors, anyone and everyone, assuming it even fucking exists. 

i would think, apart from Twice's legal answer, the Ds hoped the arrest of Jizzlaine would quiet it up. 

The republicans are catching more shit because 1) we are a regarded society who can only think about the now, 2) they fucking ran on it as a platform, and 3) they are in power. 

the sheer stupidity and wait, lets say incompetence of the Republicans in this is mind blowing. I would expect a fucking teenager with no concept of the consequences of their actions to find at least 10 places in this timeline to cover this up somehow. If you want a picture perfect snapshot of the complete disdain of the populace by DC and even more so the GOP - this is it. Too out of touch to bother making ANYTHING of this and fumbling the fucking ball at the goal line. over and over again. 

Ok, that was my read of the situation, and I wasn’t sure whether I’d just read it wrong. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Conspiracy is big business in today's culture. Too many streamers and bloggers have staked their livelihoods to their audience's appetite for conspiracy for it to go away. They helped feed and create this monster and now its their turn to get their face eaten

Posted
8 minutes ago, cmontexas said:

Conspiracy is big business in today's culture. Too many streamers and bloggers have staked their livelihoods to their audience's appetite for conspiracy for it to go away. They helped feed and create this monster and now its their turn to get their face eaten

Follow the money. This is not tin foil hat stuff 

Posted
14 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Biden didn't do it because in the United States of America as it was once known, the government did not release criminal investigation materials except by indicting and trying targets of the investigation.  Full stop.  That's why the judges aren't going to release any grand jury materials.  This is the way we've always done it.

For better or worse, Joseph Robinette Biden followed the rules and norms of the United States of America.  Releasing criminal investigation materials outside the context of a criminal trial was a non-starter for Biden and 44 of his predecessors.

Dotard Jackleg Trump has no respect for the United States of America, its institutions, rules, and norms.  He was always going to do this to curry favor with the QAnon MAGAts, that is, for political advantage, for himself, as usual.  Until he figured out the shit was going to splash on him at least as much as anyone else.

 

Plus….

According to Republicans Biden was incoherent and unfit.

Obviously he would not have known anything about it.

Duh.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's not though.  

It's more like a curiosity, provoked and tended by a bunch of insane MAGAts into a conspiracy theory that people like you are buying into now.

If there were legit, convictable evidence that Trump committed child sexual abuse, he would have been prosecuted.

There's not.  There's just going to be a bunch of people with various connections to Epstein, and a bunch of really dubious witnesses and accounts and it's just going to be an endless shitstorm of conspiracy theories involving Trump, Clinton, Gates and God knows who else.

I'm with you on almost everything posted on this page, save the bolded.

For every person of interest from poor schlub to mildly famous all the way to household name, the standard for the feds isn't "convictable," it's "can't fucking miss." When you see shit cases like the Roger Clemens indictment, you know that the career prosecutors were overruled by politicians. I've been told this by several federal prosecutors and a couple of district judges (caveat on the judges: way back in law school before Obama broke people's brains).

Even at the state level, "convictable" is a subjective term.

Those things said, there could be pretty damning evidence in there. Evidence that might even convince a few Trumpers. But it wouldn't see the light of day under federal prosecutorial protocol if the case wasn't so airtight that no jury in any jurisdiction would find a former president, one of the most famous people in the world, and who has created a cult of personality so strong that he could actually shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose a vote, not guilty.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, softlynow said:

I'm with you on almost everything posted on this page, save the bolded.

For every person of interest from poor schlub to mildly famous all the way to household name, the standard for the feds isn't "convictable," it's "can't fucking miss." When you see shit cases like the Roger Clemens indictment, you know that the career prosecutors were overruled by politicians. I've been told this by several federal prosecutors and a couple of district judges (caveat on the judges: way back in law school before Obama broke people's brains).

Even at the state level, "convictable" is a subjective term.

Those things said, there could be pretty damning evidence in there. Evidence that might even convince a few Trumpers. But it wouldn't see the light of day under federal prosecutorial protocol if the case wasn't so airtight that no jury in any jurisdiction would find a former president, one of the most famous people in the world, and who has created a cult of personality so strong that he could actually shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose a vote, not guilty.

Fair points all.

Whatever one thinks about Garland/Biden, they ultimately indicted and prosecuted a highly political case in the January 6 mess.

They also immediately indicted and prosecuted a somewhat less political case in the Maralago documents case.

Child sexual abuse is not political (well at least not until Qanon got hold of it).  It also tends to be prosecuted by true believer jihadists.  If there had been a convictable case against Donald Trump, and I virtually guarantee some of those jihadists were looking for one, it would have been brought during the Biden Administration.

ETA:  maybe the better way to look at it is the Biden Administration was not going to bring a child sexual abuse case on weak evidence just to fuck with Trump.  Can't say the same about Trump Administration.  If they thought they could bring a chickenshit case against Bill Clinton, they'd do it in a heartbeat.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

Lawyer for victims came on tv and just told congress that Epstein Estate has birthday book and other information in its possession. Easy to subpoena as the lawyers are willing to cooperate. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, CTC2 said:

Lawyer for victims came on tv and just told congress that Epstein Estate has birthday book and other information in its possession. Easy to subpoena as the lawyers are willing to cooperate. 

I haven't read the WSJ article, but if they just said it purported to be from Trump and described it, I don't think there's any falsity or defamation there, let alone of a public figure.

Having Trump say it's fake does not establish falsity or reckless disregard.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I haven't read the WSJ article, but if they just said it purported to be from Trump and described it, I don't think there's any falsity or defamation there, let alone of a public figure.

Having Trump say it's fake does not establish falsity or reckless disregard.

I think the plaintiffs are sending message to not pardon Maxwell. And if you do, we will cut you. We know more than you about this case. Don’t fuck with us. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

 

"Do you realize how much you have to screw up for Dr. King's family to go, 'No no, we choose violence.'"

(As an aside: Getting Josh Johnson to anchor/host TDS is an idea whose time has come. I didn't even know he'd been working for them since 2017; certainly explains why he's been so prolific with his stand-up lately.)

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
2 hours ago, Macanudo said:

"Decentish"?    How the fuck could anyone be on Epstein's island and not figure out young girls were, ahem, there to party?  

If they just wanted some of his money. 

Posted
51 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Fair points all.

Whatever one thinks about Garland/Biden, they ultimately indicted and prosecuted a highly political case in the January 6 mess.

They also immediately indicted and prosecuted a somewhat less political case in the Maralago documents case.

Child sexual abuse is not political (well at least not until Qanon got hold of it).  It also tends to be prosecuted by true believer jihadists.  If there had been a convictable case against Donald Trump, and I virtually guarantee some of those jihadists were looking for one, it would have been brought during the Biden Administration.

ETA:  maybe the better way to look at it is the Biden Administration was not going to bring a child sexual abuse case on weak evidence just to fuck with Trump.  Can't say the same about Trump Administration.  If they thought they could bring a chickenshit case against Bill Clinton, they'd do it in a heartbeat.

Did they change the definition of the word “immediately” and I missed the memo? They spent months begging him to please be a good boy and give them back.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Biden didn't do it because in the United States of America as it was once known, the government did not release criminal investigation materials except by indicting and trying targets of the investigation.  Full stop.  That's why the judges aren't going to release any grand jury materials.  This is the way we've always done it.

For better or worse, Joseph Robinette Biden followed the rules and norms of the United States of America.  Releasing criminal investigation materials outside the context of a criminal trial was a non-starter for Biden and 44 of his predecessors.

Dotard Jackleg Trump has no respect for the United States of America, its institutions, rules, and norms.  He was always going to do this to curry favor with the QAnon MAGAts, that is, for political advantage, for himself, as usual.  Until he figured out the shit was going to splash on him at least as much as anyone else.

 

100% bullshit. The fucking Supreme Court had already given him immunity for all the shit he had done in the past. You say Biden wanted to uphold the integrity of the DOJ and legal at large when everyone knew we were already 95% of the way to a banana republic and I’m absolutely not buying it.
 

There are names in those files his administration and the Democratic Party have as much interest in keeping out of the public’s eyes as Trump has in keeping his name out and that’s why nothing was done.
 

You’re going to go down with the sinking ship your beloved legal system has become. I get it. But it’s ludicrous to the rest of us. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)

Wow. Watch the video, & watch Higgins lie through his teeth about the vote count.

Higgins (drunk-sounding Louisiana drawl): "In the opinion of the chair the No has it".
All: Laughter.
Garcia: "Recorded vote, sir."

Roll call count: 8 AYEs, 2 NOs.

What a piece of shit.

Edited by wood
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 1


×
×
  • Create New...