It's fun seeing you finally trot that out. Long overdue. Originally Posted by HDGristleWhat are you talking about? I use it all the time. Most recently regarding Democrats trying to justify their shutting down the federal government.
- lustylad
- 11-15-2025, 01:34 PM
- jayzee43
- 11-15-2025, 06:06 PM
Sorry, jayvee. That's not something I have any control over.The name's jayzee43. Don't get it twisted.
Plus my post was directed at eye, not you. At least eye was more specific. He says Trump is guilty of "the same crimes as Epstein". You won't even tell us what "crimes" you think he is guilty is. Originally Posted by lustylad
- bambino
- 11-15-2025, 06:10 PM
Hey JayVee, what do you say about this?
Jeffrey Epstein disliked Trump so much that he was coaching Democrats to impeach him.
If Epstein had blackmail on Trump he would have used it.
Jeffrey Epstein disliked Trump so much that he was coaching Democrats to impeach him.
If Epstein had blackmail on Trump he would have used it.
- jayzee43
- 11-15-2025, 06:20 PM
Hey JayVee, what do you say about this?The name's jayzee43. Unprovoked rudeness toward other members is expressly against the rules.
Jeffrey Epstein disliked trump so much that he was coaching Democrats to impeach him.
If Epstein had blackmail on trump he would have used it. Originally Posted by bambino
- bambino
- 11-15-2025, 06:42 PM
The name's jayzee43. Unprovoked rudeness toward other members is expressly against the rules. Originally Posted by jayzee43That’s rich coming from you. Don’t get your panties in a bunch. People call me Bambi all the time. I don’t get bent out of shape.
Now answer the question. Epstein hated Trump. He suspected that Trump helped the FBI investigate him, why didn’t he blackmail him?
- bambino
- 11-16-2025, 02:46 PM
BREAKING: A Democratic fundraising group called Dynamic SRG emailed Jeffrey Epstein in May 2013 to pitch then-freshman Congressman Hakeem Jeffries as a rising star and invited Epstein to a DCCC/DSCC fundraising dinner with President Obama.
- lustylad
- 11-16-2025, 10:16 PM
Why is trump fighting so hard to bury the files if he's innocent? Spoiler alert: he's guilty. Originally Posted by jayzee43Oh dear! Looks like your question is moot, jayvee. Trump just said to release 'em all.
US President Donald Trump on Sunday signaled support for the release of classified files linked to Jeffrey Epstein, reversing his earlier position as pressure mounts in Washington over the long-running scandal.
In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said: “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide,” calling the uproar surrounding his former friend’s crimes a “Democrat hoax.”
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/.../125374987.cms
This means you no longer have a phony excuse not to answer MY question.
Are you FINALLY going to tell us exactly WHAT it is you have pronounced Trump to be guilty of?
.
- lustylad
- 11-16-2025, 10:38 PM
Stay stupid, Democrats! 
Democrats Get the Epstein Wars Wrong
They are trivializing themselves just as their party senses a possible return to power.
By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
Nov. 14, 2025 5:14 pm ET
I know nothing beyond what’s in the press, but I somehow doubt Donald Trump was among the needy types who relied on Jeffrey Epstein for access to women they wouldn’t have had access to otherwise. It’s a point we’ll come back to.
Interesting and perhaps surprising advice has been flowing from the Democratic Party’s loyal handicappers after this month’s gubernatorial wins in New Jersey and Virginia. Don’t make impeachment the calling card in next year’s congressional midterms, they say. Consistent overbetting on the unpopularity of Mr. Trump has been the reciprocal of every blown opportunity till now. This includes the 2024 presidential race, which was winnable even amid the Democratic Party’s world-historical malpractices.
Unfortunately this advice conflicts with activists who insisted Democrats show “fight” with the thankless government shutdown that finally ended this week. Now they want more “fight” over Epstein. Never mind that this represents the sorriest possible way of building on recent electoral successes and Mr. Trump’s shrinking approval ratings.
Read carefully in a press somewhat chastened by its previous misreporting and you learn a couple of things. Mr. Trump and Epstein socialized in Palm Beach, but Epstein and his chief accuser, the late Virginia Giuffre, both left clear testimony Mr. Trump never behaved improperly.
In one of three emails leaked by Democrats to create this week’s furor, Epstein says Mr. Trump “knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.” To some of Mr. Trump’s shrillest defenders, this slight hint that Mr. Trump, then a private citizen, might have done more is reason to change the subject to a prior administration’s supposedly “sweetheart” plea deal with Epstein.
They forget its “sweetheart” nature was a description long after the fact by the Miami Herald to slur Mr. Trump. The original plea outcome may have been weak due to a desire to accommodate his victims’ reluctance to testify. But the only “sweetheart” effort came later when the office of the Democratic district attorney of New York County, with the illustrious name of Cyrus Vance Jr., tried to use their nontestimony to reduce Epstein’s sex-offender designation.
Which is exactly the risk Democrats now court. House Republicans answered this week’s selective Democratic release with a deluge of files that tell us nothing new about Mr. Trump but show Democrats like Larry Summers and former Obama White House lawyer Kathryn Ruemmler carrying on with Epstein long after his crimes were known. Down this road lies an obvious risk for the left: Bill Clinton and friends, who were the real power elite Epstein sought to cultivate in his criminal heyday.
To return to Mr. Trump’s history of womanizing: I erred in 2016 in believing his personal baggage would make him a risky nominee. In office, I thought he would be trammeled like no president in history by attacks on his businesses and his history of financial and personal scandals.
Wrong. All this disappeared from the public discourse in favor of a made-up story about Russia. In essence, Democrats immunized him from his own past by accusing him of the one thing of which he could be found innocent. A great enigma of political psychology, the place to look might be the psyche of Rachel Maddow. For reasons Dr. Freud might fathom, she was the left media’s most ardent promoter of the distraction that removed from Mr. Trump the weight of 35 years of tabloidal infamy.
A decade later, it takes Epstein, a certified [forbidden topic], to get Democrats past their discomfort with censoriousness about sex. They and the media are impelled forward by the idea that Mr. Trump resists Epstein disclosure out of personal desperation. In fact, his resistance is the only thing baiting them on and it may not be an accident. He calls it the Epstein “hoax,” a word, it pays to remember, with a specific resonance in Trumpspeak.
Meanwhile, in the wings are the Democrats he and Republicans really fear—the winners of this month’s New Jersey and Virginia races, the popular governors of Pennsylvania, Colorado and Kentucky.
Many GOP-leaning big-money donors, I’m here to tell you, find these folks easier to deal with than Mr. Trump and his acolytes.
What keeps these Democrats from power are the antics of their national party: the Russia folly, the border folly, the trans folly, the Biden incapacity folly. The Epstein distraction bids to be another piece of foolishness that does more to inhibit Democrats’ return to real influence than advance it.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrat...wrong-93c6210a
Democrats Get the Epstein Wars Wrong
They are trivializing themselves just as their party senses a possible return to power.
By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
Nov. 14, 2025 5:14 pm ET
I know nothing beyond what’s in the press, but I somehow doubt Donald Trump was among the needy types who relied on Jeffrey Epstein for access to women they wouldn’t have had access to otherwise. It’s a point we’ll come back to.
Interesting and perhaps surprising advice has been flowing from the Democratic Party’s loyal handicappers after this month’s gubernatorial wins in New Jersey and Virginia. Don’t make impeachment the calling card in next year’s congressional midterms, they say. Consistent overbetting on the unpopularity of Mr. Trump has been the reciprocal of every blown opportunity till now. This includes the 2024 presidential race, which was winnable even amid the Democratic Party’s world-historical malpractices.
Unfortunately this advice conflicts with activists who insisted Democrats show “fight” with the thankless government shutdown that finally ended this week. Now they want more “fight” over Epstein. Never mind that this represents the sorriest possible way of building on recent electoral successes and Mr. Trump’s shrinking approval ratings.
Read carefully in a press somewhat chastened by its previous misreporting and you learn a couple of things. Mr. Trump and Epstein socialized in Palm Beach, but Epstein and his chief accuser, the late Virginia Giuffre, both left clear testimony Mr. Trump never behaved improperly.
In one of three emails leaked by Democrats to create this week’s furor, Epstein says Mr. Trump “knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop.” To some of Mr. Trump’s shrillest defenders, this slight hint that Mr. Trump, then a private citizen, might have done more is reason to change the subject to a prior administration’s supposedly “sweetheart” plea deal with Epstein.
They forget its “sweetheart” nature was a description long after the fact by the Miami Herald to slur Mr. Trump. The original plea outcome may have been weak due to a desire to accommodate his victims’ reluctance to testify. But the only “sweetheart” effort came later when the office of the Democratic district attorney of New York County, with the illustrious name of Cyrus Vance Jr., tried to use their nontestimony to reduce Epstein’s sex-offender designation.
Which is exactly the risk Democrats now court. House Republicans answered this week’s selective Democratic release with a deluge of files that tell us nothing new about Mr. Trump but show Democrats like Larry Summers and former Obama White House lawyer Kathryn Ruemmler carrying on with Epstein long after his crimes were known. Down this road lies an obvious risk for the left: Bill Clinton and friends, who were the real power elite Epstein sought to cultivate in his criminal heyday.
To return to Mr. Trump’s history of womanizing: I erred in 2016 in believing his personal baggage would make him a risky nominee. In office, I thought he would be trammeled like no president in history by attacks on his businesses and his history of financial and personal scandals.
Wrong. All this disappeared from the public discourse in favor of a made-up story about Russia. In essence, Democrats immunized him from his own past by accusing him of the one thing of which he could be found innocent. A great enigma of political psychology, the place to look might be the psyche of Rachel Maddow. For reasons Dr. Freud might fathom, she was the left media’s most ardent promoter of the distraction that removed from Mr. Trump the weight of 35 years of tabloidal infamy.
A decade later, it takes Epstein, a certified [forbidden topic], to get Democrats past their discomfort with censoriousness about sex. They and the media are impelled forward by the idea that Mr. Trump resists Epstein disclosure out of personal desperation. In fact, his resistance is the only thing baiting them on and it may not be an accident. He calls it the Epstein “hoax,” a word, it pays to remember, with a specific resonance in Trumpspeak.
Meanwhile, in the wings are the Democrats he and Republicans really fear—the winners of this month’s New Jersey and Virginia races, the popular governors of Pennsylvania, Colorado and Kentucky.
Many GOP-leaning big-money donors, I’m here to tell you, find these folks easier to deal with than Mr. Trump and his acolytes.
What keeps these Democrats from power are the antics of their national party: the Russia folly, the border folly, the trans folly, the Biden incapacity folly. The Epstein distraction bids to be another piece of foolishness that does more to inhibit Democrats’ return to real influence than advance it.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/democrat...wrong-93c6210a
- eyecu2
- 11-16-2025, 11:14 PM
Sadly, I don't think there's a whole lot left inside the official Epstein files, despite what Michael Wolff says. He suggests there are pictures of trump with young ppl, and they are compromising. However that's hearsay. It's just another distraction from the corruption and grafting of this current administration. I'm sure there are damning bits of information for a lot of people however I don't think they'll ever see the light of day since Trump can still be to these things even if they passed the house and the Senate. They would need a 2/3 majin the Senate to get it passed over his veto.
If he doesn't veto- it will have been a cleansed version and missing details...but still damning for every time his name is in there. There is no good news in any of this for the RedHat folk. Even MTG is running buck wild on the fringe. It will get worse
If he doesn't veto- it will have been a cleansed version and missing details...but still damning for every time his name is in there. There is no good news in any of this for the RedHat folk. Even MTG is running buck wild on the fringe. It will get worse
- lustylad
- 11-16-2025, 11:59 PM
Eye - did you see my post #82 above? Trump just told the DOJ to release it all. That doesn't require legislation, and even if it did, he isn't going to veto a bill that calls for the very thing he just declared himself in favor of!
And no, it won't be "damning every time his name is in there". But keep on thinking that way. As Holman Jenkins just said in post #83:
"The Epstein distraction bids to be another piece of foolishness that does more to inhibit Democrats’ return to real influence than advance it."
And no, it won't be "damning every time his name is in there". But keep on thinking that way. As Holman Jenkins just said in post #83:
"The Epstein distraction bids to be another piece of foolishness that does more to inhibit Democrats’ return to real influence than advance it."
- bambino
- 11-17-2025, 06:17 AM
Eye - did you see my post #82 above? Trump just told the DOJ to release it all. That doesn't require legislation, and even if it did, he isn't going to veto a bill that calls for the very thing he just declared himself in favor of!Not only that, he just told the House Republicans to vote to release it!!! The OP will get a lot more than 218 votes!!!!!!!
And no, it won't be "damning every time his name is in there". But keep on thinking that way. As Holman Jenkins just said in post #83:
"The Epstein distraction bids to be another piece of foolishness that does more to inhibit Democrats’ return to real influence than advance it." Originally Posted by lustylad
https://t.me/realKarliBonne/312809
Another TDS thread being crushed under its own bullshit!!!!!!
BAHAHAHA
- bambino
- 11-17-2025, 07:00 AM
In the 20,000 pages of Jeffrey Epstein documents released it shows Democrat Stacey Plaskett was being personally text by Jeffrey Epstein during an Oversight Hearing while she questioned Trump’s former attorney
He was feeding her what to say
Plaskett took money from Epstein
“Epstein messaged Delegate Stacey Plaskett while she questioned Michael Cohen. She was actively texting with Epstein during a 2019 House Oversight Committee hearing. While Plaskett grilled President Trump's former attorney, Michael Cohen, Epstein appeared to be providing real-time coaching, with time stamps matching her questions and his messages.
Newly released estate texts are part of oversight committee pages. They come from the Oversight Committee, 20,000 pages released from the Epstein files.
They show Epstein sending short notes to Democrat Delegate Stacey Plaskett — Records also show past donations from Epstein. She was actively being coached and paid by Epstein after he was convicted of sexual trafficking.“
He was feeding her what to say
Plaskett took money from Epstein
“Epstein messaged Delegate Stacey Plaskett while she questioned Michael Cohen. She was actively texting with Epstein during a 2019 House Oversight Committee hearing. While Plaskett grilled President Trump's former attorney, Michael Cohen, Epstein appeared to be providing real-time coaching, with time stamps matching her questions and his messages.
Newly released estate texts are part of oversight committee pages. They come from the Oversight Committee, 20,000 pages released from the Epstein files.
They show Epstein sending short notes to Democrat Delegate Stacey Plaskett — Records also show past donations from Epstein. She was actively being coached and paid by Epstein after he was convicted of sexual trafficking.“
- HDGristle
- 11-17-2025, 09:32 AM
It's nice to see you care about the Epstein files again now that Trump has stopped stonewalling
- bambino
- 11-17-2025, 10:11 AM
He wasn’t “stonewalling”, there’s a time and place for everything. You will be proven to be on the wrong side of history yet again.
Trust the plan Gristle. It’s playing out right in front of your eyes.
“Trump makes a U-Turn” and now instructs House Republicans to RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES
I’ve seen Trump over the years “make enemies” with people just to bring certain things to light. Remember Sessions? One has to wonder… was this always the plan?
I think so. You?
https://rumble.com/v71tw30-trump-u-t...ein-files.html
https://t.me/linwoodspeakstruth/71293
BAHAHAHA
Trust the plan Gristle. It’s playing out right in front of your eyes.
“Trump makes a U-Turn” and now instructs House Republicans to RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES
I’ve seen Trump over the years “make enemies” with people just to bring certain things to light. Remember Sessions? One has to wonder… was this always the plan?
I think so. You?
https://rumble.com/v71tw30-trump-u-t...ein-files.html
https://t.me/linwoodspeakstruth/71293
BAHAHAHA
- jayzee43
- 11-17-2025, 10:38 AM
It's nice to see you care about the Epstein files again now that trump has stopped stonewalling Originally Posted by HDGristleThese guys are fucking hilarious. Now that Dear Leader has given the go-ahead, they're all on board again. trump knows the votes are there to release them, so now he has to act like he was always in favor of releasing them. Does that make him a "stupid weakling"? I'm pretty sure it does.
trump's name appears 1,628 times (so far) in the Epstein files. That's many more times than any other name. It's plain as day that he's GUILTY of [redacted] or, at very least, he knew [redacted] was happening for years, and said nothing.
At best, trump is a Jerry Sandusky/Joe Paterno level creep, and I bet it's way worse than that.
https://couriernewsroom.com/news/we-...psteins-estate