The double standard of the Judicial system in Washington DC has been a growing problem ever since Watergate.
The Epstein case is a mess. All of the big names would get together, but only some knew the secret code to get to the back room of illicit activity. Once some of them found out they just stopped going, but didn't try to condemn the others.
So now you have a situation where probably 50% of the names mentioned never actually went in the back room but if the names are released they will be out of context and people will assume they were in the back room.
Originally Posted by farmstud60
I believe that percentage is a hell of a lot higher than 50%. In fact, we only know the name of one famous person, an English royal, who fits in that category.
That's why, regardless of your political beliefs, you should believe the DOJ shouldn't release the info. Is it normal practice to crucify people who aren't going to be charged in a court of law with a wrongdoing? How would board members feel if their names were on a list of clients of a studio or provider? And LE published their identities with no intention of charging them, because it didn't have sufficient evidence to prosecute?
Bill Clinton's reputation stands a better chance of going up in smoke because of this than Trump's. And Clinton doesn't deserve that. It's irrelevant to his performance as president.