Epstein - The Epstein Files Act Is Now Law
- Thread starter fatpiggy
- Start date
Do you think you’re an intelligent person?
It’s fascinating that you use an interview with ~10 people as proof that Donald Trump wasn’t involved with any victims - that’s less than 1% of the >1,000 victims (per the DOJ). You’d be bankrupt if you made financial decisions based on 1% of the available data / information.
You continue to ignore the factual and circumstantial evidence against Trump - eg, how do you defend his letters to Epstein? How do you defend the supersized check for the “sale” of a “depreciated” woman (ie, she is now too old for Epstein)? Do you really think Donald Trump wasn’t at least aware of Epstein’s gross and illegal conduct?
Watching Rogan try to utilize reading comprehension is pretty funny, but he eventually gets to the truth with some help.
probably just a coincidence that Massie is leading the charge to release the Epstein Files...
I think you're 100% right. A sample of 10 really is not a good analysis. But here's the thing, as you said there are 1000 victims, per the DoJ, and so far not one of them has come forward and said "Donald Trump was involved". Not one...no lawsuits, no criminal charges..nothing. Don't you find that strange?
This checks out, as Maga is the party of grooming, pedophilia, and sexual assault. And they protect their own!
It will be interesting to see if they find another way to delay the government from reopening because once they do, they'll have no excuse not to swear in Adelita Grijalva, Arizona's newly elected representative, who will be the deciding vote on releasing the Epstein files. If Johnson the weasel won't do it, I believe a judge can step in.
Gee whiz, I wonder if the company knows its target demographic. 
Trump will sign bill into law. Doesn’t sound like he has anything to hide to me. Democrats walked right into the trap.
That’s not how markets work Chump.Gee whiz, I wonder if the company knows its target demographic.
No doubt he's guilty as sin. Along with a number of other people in the files. Proving things beyond a reasonable doubt will be the issue.
I agree. It will be a huge flop unless there is a list of people who were paying clients.
Being “in the file” with no context will mean nothing.
Again .. didn't they claim there weren't any files?
Funny how you just accept hold face lies from the White House.
Looked it up.
AI Overview:
"Yes, judges denied the government's requests to unseal specific Jeffrey Epstein grand jury files on three separate occasions in August 2025, with U.S. District Judge Richard Berman making the final ruling. The judges' reasons included the government already possessing more comprehensive materials related to the case and that the grand jury materials alone would not meet the high bar for unsealing.
AI Overview:
"Yes, judges denied the government's requests to unseal specific Jeffrey Epstein grand jury files on three separate occasions in August 2025, with U.S. District Judge Richard Berman making the final ruling. The judges' reasons included the government already possessing more comprehensive materials related to the case and that the grand jury materials alone would not meet the high bar for unsealing.
- The requests were from the Department of Justice (DOJ) and concerned grand jury transcripts and exhibits from the Epstein case.
- The rulings came after public pressure to release more information about Epstein's associates.
- The judges argued the DOJ had a much larger trove of documents from the case that it could release instead of the limited grand jury materials.
- These denials were the third and final time federal judges rejected similar motions from the DOJ. "
Yeah, he must not have heard the question or the Biden part at least lol
"They were part of an active investigation until Maxwell's final petition/appeal failed with the court last month." That would've been the correct answer.
No one believes the active investigation shtick. The investigation started in 2005.