| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ 13:13 - Feb 9 with 7129 views | ElderGrizzly |
Massie, who is behind the Epstein Transparency Act, has threatened the DoJ he will read out the unredacted names of all those communicating with Epstein in the files.
He has ‘privilege’ due to how Congress works (a bit how Parliament is here)
Also Maxwell is in a hearing soon, but is likely to ‘plead the 5th’ to all questions. [Post edited 9 Feb 13:13]
|  | | |  |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:27 - Feb 9 with 3748 views | Samuelowen88 |
Can the DOJ not just say names are redacted due to potential criminal investigations?
Thats the sort of thing you'd see over here? Names can't be revealed as could affect potential jury etc? |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:30 - Feb 9 with 3718 views | DanTheMan |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:27 - Feb 9 by Samuelowen88 |
Can the DOJ not just say names are redacted due to potential criminal investigations?
Thats the sort of thing you'd see over here? Names can't be revealed as could affect potential jury etc? |
Might be wrong, but I think they've come out and said that aren't expecting to prosecute anyone else. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:35 - Feb 9 with 3647 views | J2BLUE |
Balls of steal. What a legend. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:36 - Feb 9 with 3616 views | Bent_double |
Didn't someone else threaten that a few months ago, Marjorie Taylor something? Then she met with Trump and backed down - not heard anything from her since. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:36 - Feb 9 with 3612 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:30 - Feb 9 by DanTheMan |
Might be wrong, but I think they've come out and said that aren't expecting to prosecute anyone else. |
Seems, according to FBI, we have misjudged Epstein.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wire |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:41 - Feb 9 with 3552 views | DanTheMan |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:36 - Feb 9 by Bent_double |
Didn't someone else threaten that a few months ago, Marjorie Taylor something? Then she met with Trump and backed down - not heard anything from her since. |
She's basically resigned over this whole thing. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:44 - Feb 9 with 3505 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:36 - Feb 9 by Bent_double |
Didn't someone else threaten that a few months ago, Marjorie Taylor something? Then she met with Trump and backed down - not heard anything from her since. |
MTG is still gunning for Trump over this . Very vocal. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:46 - Feb 9 with 3475 views | jonny1964 |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:36 - Feb 9 by Bent_double |
Didn't someone else threaten that a few months ago, Marjorie Taylor something? Then she met with Trump and backed down - not heard anything from her since. |
Massie won't.
Marjorie Taylor Greene. Used to be a trump fanatic but has seen some reason lately.... |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:48 - Feb 9 with 3437 views | Samuelowen88 |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:30 - Feb 9 by DanTheMan |
Might be wrong, but I think they've come out and said that aren't expecting to prosecute anyone else. |
Ah ok,
I guess another argument, is that a lot of what is in the files is hearsay (not the 2001 pop group) as opposed to hard evidence? (pictures aside) But email's don't prove anything, so hard to get evidence together ? | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:49 - Feb 9 with 3411 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:46 - Feb 9 by jonny1964 |
Massie won't.
Marjorie Taylor Greene. Used to be a trump fanatic but has seen some reason lately.... |
She's still a MAGA swivel eyed loon but as a purist believes Trump has betrayed the movement over the Epsien files. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:49 - Feb 9 with 3413 views | baxterbasics |
Hope he doesn't get himself 'accidentally' ICEd in an unfortunate cross fire incident! |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:52 - Feb 9 with 3367 views | baxterbasics |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:49 - Feb 9 by GlasgowBlue |
She's still a MAGA swivel eyed loon but as a purist believes Trump has betrayed the movement over the Epsien files. |
For Trump MAGA is just a device, a means to an end. MTG is a true believe. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:09 - Feb 9 with 3244 views | nrb1985 |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:30 - Feb 9 by DanTheMan |
Might be wrong, but I think they've come out and said that aren't expecting to prosecute anyone else. |
Problem is (and let's assume for now the US govt isn't entirely corrupt) - what are you going to charge anybody with?
There's no suggestion, from what I've seen, anybody slept with under age girls other than Epstein and Maxwell was the procurer and complicit.
All the other like Musk, Gates and Lutnick come out of this looking appalling and will forever be known as the Paedo's friend - but that's not illegal it's just highly embarrassing and disgusting. Unless you can prove they knew the women, you assume they slept with, were trafficked.
Andrew and Mandelson on the other hand do appear to be guilty of sharing highly sensitive information and working against their own country - which you'd hope carries a custodial sentence if proven. | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:12 - Feb 9 with 3204 views | Guthrum |
I suspect it was more the case he was always happy to get the powerful and influential tied up in what he was doing - as a form of insurance in case he found himself in trouble. Less a facilitator or organiser of a service for pedophiles, more along the lines of entrapment for future blackmail and/or cover. Similarly with the financial ties (Mandelson and Sarah Ferguson). That's why he kept what seems to have been very careful and voluminous documentation.
It's a somewhat different emphasis, but in no way absolves those who were taking advantage of what seem to have been fairly obviously (from various comments) underage girls in Epstein's control. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:13 - Feb 9 with 3193 views | StokieBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:09 - Feb 9 by nrb1985 |
Problem is (and let's assume for now the US govt isn't entirely corrupt) - what are you going to charge anybody with?
There's no suggestion, from what I've seen, anybody slept with under age girls other than Epstein and Maxwell was the procurer and complicit.
All the other like Musk, Gates and Lutnick come out of this looking appalling and will forever be known as the Paedo's friend - but that's not illegal it's just highly embarrassing and disgusting. Unless you can prove they knew the women, you assume they slept with, were trafficked.
Andrew and Mandelson on the other hand do appear to be guilty of sharing highly sensitive information and working against their own country - which you'd hope carries a custodial sentence if proven. |
In which case, why are any of the names of people communicating with Epstein redacted?
SB |  | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:14 - Feb 9 with 3192 views | Guthrum |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:49 - Feb 9 by GlasgowBlue |
She's still a MAGA swivel eyed loon but as a purist believes Trump has betrayed the movement over the Epsien files. |
And also his involvement in overseas military action, combined with failing to effectively tackle the cost of living crisis. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:18 - Feb 9 with 3108 views | nrb1985 |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:13 - Feb 9 by StokieBlue |
In which case, why are any of the names of people communicating with Epstein redacted?
SB |
I assume because they're people the administration wants to protect, either for their own safety, or more likely, to avoid complete embarrassment to people who are either associated with or part of Trump's inner circle.
Even in the redacted stuff I've seen it looks truly awful, disgusting and misogynistic - but not criminal.
Maybe the criminal stuff is in the other 3 million files they haven't yet released? | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 14:43 - Feb 9 with 2964 views | CrayonKing |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:35 - Feb 9 by J2BLUE |
Balls of steal. What a legend. |
Just hope he doesn't stand near any open windows any time soon! |  | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:33 - Feb 9 with 2681 views | Eireannach_gorm |
Abuse survivors are increasing the pressure on the (in)Justice Department to open up more details in the files and senators and representatives will be able to view the unredacted files in a secure room at the Justice Department starting the same day Maxwell is set to testify.
https://www.bbc.com/news/artic
The problem is the Justice Department have decided that they only have sufficient evidence to charge two people, Epstein ( who is conveniently deceased ) and Maxwell ( who is not going to say anything )
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/n |  | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:37 - Feb 9 with 2674 views | ElderGrizzly |
And here we have it.
Maxwell will speak, but only if Trump pardons her. And guess who will be squeaky clean in those answers…
| | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:38 - Feb 9 with 2668 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 13:30 - Feb 9 by DanTheMan |
Might be wrong, but I think they've come out and said that aren't expecting to prosecute anyone else. |
They’ve said exactly that | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:55 - Feb 9 with 2543 views | J2BLUE |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:37 - Feb 9 by ElderGrizzly |
And here we have it.
Maxwell will speak, but only if Trump pardons her. And guess who will be squeaky clean in those answers…
|
There should be a monumental public pushback if that happens. The utter audacity. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:57 - Feb 9 with 2535 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:55 - Feb 9 by J2BLUE |
There should be a monumental public pushback if that happens. The utter audacity. |
Was always going to happen when they sent Blanche to interview her and she miraculously got a transfer to a minimum security prison a few days later.
Blanche was Trump’s personal attorney before he appointed him as Deputy AG.
It’s that obvious and in the open, but just goes unchallenged. | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:58 - Feb 9 with 2523 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:37 - Feb 9 by ElderGrizzly |
And here we have it.
Maxwell will speak, but only if Trump pardons her. And guess who will be squeaky clean in those answers…
|
You know far more about this than me, so in the thousands of mentions of Clinton and Trump is there any real evidence that they engaged in sexual acts with minors?
I don't mean the phone in allegations which were dismissed as unreliable but hard evidence the way there is against Epstein?
From what little I have read, the only person who has been reliably accused of being a paedophile is Epstein. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:24 - Feb 9 with 2395 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:58 - Feb 9 by GlasgowBlue |
You know far more about this than me, so in the thousands of mentions of Clinton and Trump is there any real evidence that they engaged in sexual acts with minors?
I don't mean the phone in allegations which were dismissed as unreliable but hard evidence the way there is against Epstein?
From what little I have read, the only person who has been reliably accused of being a paedophile is Epstein. |
Plenty of emails between Epstein and many redacted names discussing Trump and who he ‘wanted’ or had ‘ordered’
One of the reasons Massie is threatening to name them under privilege.
Clinton, as had been discussed before, has publicly said release everything and let him clear his name. Trump has done everything to shut it down.
Again, Trump mentioned 38,000 times in those released so far. 50% still to come which are being hidden by the DoJ [Post edited 9 Feb 17:28]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
