DOJ: Epstein killed himself, no client list

164,851 Views | 2441 Replies | Last: 2 hrs ago by flown-the-coop
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FobTies • 7:03a, 7/18/25
Quote:
Trump denies these words were his, and threatened to sue the WSJ. But where is the lawsuit?

Dude, its been just over 12 hours since the story was published. Do you really think its fair to criticize him for not having the lawsuit on file yet?


I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 7:08a, 7/18/25
Ok, "will he file a lawsuit". He knew the story was coming, he could have had a 1 paragraph legal letter drafted. Point is whether or not he will actually challenge in court where those DOJ assessments could be made public.

You seem to be an expert on lawsuits. Do you think he will go to court with WSJ?

Reply Quote
1 edit
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:15a, 7/18/25
The public made it about a "client list".
The left made it about Trump.
And now Trump is making it about Trump.

It should have always been about the gov intel ties to Epstein. Of course Comey and Garland arent going to expose that. Sadly, neither is Patel or Bondi because Trump is either compromised or a "drian the swamp" snake oil salesman.


Nov 2022 DOJ/OPR/Acosta Transcript = smoking gun
Reply Quote
1 edit
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FobTies • 7:16a, 7/18/25
I have no way of knowing if he will file a lawsuit. If he does, I don't know how successful it would be given the burden of showing malice by WSJ. If I had to guess, I'd say he does, but that it goes away

If I were advising him, I'd explain the Streisand Effect and tell him to let it go. Then again, if I were advising him and he listened, this story would already be old news! lol

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
1 edit
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 7:19a, 7/18/25
A WSJ retraction or public statement will come if Trump has any legal standing. Otherwise, its (likely) true and Trump is lying to public.

[Edited to avoid being interpreted as "absolutely determinative" on its own]
Reply Quote
1 edit
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FobTies • 7:22a, 7/18/25
FobTies said:
A WSJ retraction or public statement will come if Trump has any legal standing. Otherwise, its true and Trump is lying to public.

Disagree on that 100%.

Not commenting on who is telling the truth and who is lying, just that its folly to try to conclude that based on whether a lawsuit is filed or whether a retraction comes is determinative of truth.


I would not be surprised at all if Trump did write the card. I don't even think its a big deal. Assume every bit of that WSJ story is true. So what?

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:26a, 7/18/25
Staff nuked the other thread. Hopefully this thread can transition from "client list" to Esptien's ties to intel agencies. Something Trump cant brush off as a "left wing hoax".



Bondi still hasnt "gotten back to" the press with any response whatsoever on Epstein's ties to intel. He was a "facilitator/financiar/fixer" for intel agencies, not an actual "agent" or "asset" with a file on record. Alex Acosta used the words "he belonged to intelligence".

My guess is Bondi and the other gov gaslighters will ultimatley confirm Epstein was not an "asset" "agent" or "informant". They will use terms like that in the literal sense, hoping the NPC public will interpret it as he had no ties. What she won't say is that Epstein didnt have any connection or history working with intel, because he clearly did.

Reply Quote
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 7:29a, 7/18/25
Trump lying is the issue. That was the point. He is clearly being defensive and stonewalling. My post was pretty clear about the real issue being Epstein dealing with prior Feds. You just nit picked one sentence about WSJ legal action. That truth would be in the DOJ assement of Ghislaine's records, that would only come out in a legal preceding.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Dirty_Mike&the_boys
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:49a, 7/18/25
“ How you fellas doin? We about to have us a little screw party in this red Prius over here if you wanna join us.”
Reply Quote
will25u
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:18a, 7/18/25
I'm pretty meh on the lawsuit. Doubt it goes anywhere. But he has gotten settlements from other cases, so who knows.

It probably was Trump. But this is such a nothingburger that it should essentially be ignored. The left will cry GOTCHA! but this story is about worthless to the masses.

Why did they not release the image? Are they worried about a hand drawn naked doodle? LOL. The public can DEFINATELY not deal with that. Not to mention it was 20+ years ago.

He didn't sign his normal signature, and it was just "Donald", and all the other writings were typewritten.

Needless to say... again... this is a huge NOTHING. Will not change a thing.

And about Trump not wanting it published... WHO WOULD? If you had the means to try and get something true or not to not be published in a public forum, you would do the same.

Like I said earlier. Just trying to put out crap stories that didn't make the cut Trump 1.0 because of how bad they were.
"We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."

- Abraham Lincoln
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:19a, 7/18/25
Back to the topic and away from some posters attempts to derail.


Bondi saying "We are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts" shows you have irrelevant they are here.

If those were the important documents to show other people that were involved in trafficking minors, then why didn't she move the court back in February when she took office? Why wait until after telling us "they labored to provide the public with maximum information regarding Epstein"?

This is a BS attempt to make people think they are doing something, but will only be shut down by Courts. "We wanted to give you more, but those mean ole judges won't let us." Just wait, it will happen. Meanwhile, the usual suspect "influencers" will tell you how much Trump is doing to get the truth out.

Thankfully, most people are not buying that. They know there is a coverup here. Why? Most likely the intelligence connections.

Unfortunately, this will be old news soon and no one will care. Epstein is over.

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
aginlakeway
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 8:21a, 7/18/25
will25u said:
I'm pretty meh on the lawsuit. Doubt it goes anywhere. But he has gotten settlements from other cases, so who knows.

It probably was Trump. But this is such a nothingburger that it should essentially be ignored. The left will cry GOTCHA! but this story is about worthless to the masses.

Why did they not release the image? Are they worried about a hand drawn naked doodle? LOL. The public can DEFINATELY not deal with that. Not to mention it was 20+ years ago.

He didn't sign his normal signature, and it was just "Donald", and all the other writings were typewritten.

Needless to say... again... this is a huge NOTHING. Will not change a thing.

And about Trump not wanting it published... WHO WOULD? If you had the means to try and get something true or not to not be published in a public forum, you would do the same.

Like I said earlier. Just trying to put out crap stories that didn't make the cut Trump 1.0 because of how bad they were.


So this won't be his downfall ... like some posters were telling us?
Reply Quote
Krombopulos Michael
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FobTies • 8:35a, 7/18/25
Quote:
Hopefully this thread can transition from "client list" to Esptien's ties to intel agencies.

This is the bottom line.


FFS Epstein had a painting of Bill Clinton in a blue dress and no one even denies they were very close friends. Clinton probably paid for his "services" with classified intel, weapons transfers, and USAID funds.....
Reply Quote
Krombopulos Michael
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aginlakeway • 8:35a, 7/18/25
Give it time.....
Reply Quote
AgDev01
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 8:37a, 7/18/25
Im Gipper said:
FobTies said:
A WSJ retraction or public statement will come if Trump has any legal standing. Otherwise, its true and Trump is lying to public.

Disagree on that 100%.

Not commenting on who is telling the truth and who is lying, just that its folly to try to conclude that based on whether a lawsuit is filed or whether a retraction comes is determinative of truth.


I would not be surprised at all if Trump did write the card. I don't even think its a big deal. Assume every bit of that WSJ story is true. So what?


The so what is it rebukes the claim that they hardly knew each other and weren't friends that some have put forth.

How many people do you hand make personalized birthday cards, are photographed dozens of times together, attend parties at each others house, fly on their private jet multiple times, and yet barely know them?

If they were close how much did Trump know of Epstein's predilections? He was quoted in 2002 of saying Epstein likes them on the "younger side". Were Trump comments on Clinton based on first hand knowledge?
Reply Quote
aginlakeway
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 8:38a, 7/18/25
Krombopulos Michael said:
Give it time.....


OK. Let me know when the market will crash and Trump will be doomed.
Reply Quote
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 8:38a, 7/18/25
Im Gipper said:

Unfortunately, this will be old news soon and no one will care. Epstein is over.


You keep saying that, but I dont think this one fade away anytime soon. Not saying anyone will be perp walked, but I could see the DOJ ultimately admitting US/Israel intel had very small benign indirect connections to Epstein, that had nothing to do with child sex trafficking or his death. But only if the press does their job, frames the question correctly, and keeps the pressure. So far its been Mike Benz and couple others relatively small influence and Trucker was kind of a dud last night.
Reply Quote
Juan Lee Pettimore
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:42a, 7/18/25
I am assuming the letter is real, but the reference to "secrets" could be literally anything. It doesn't automatically have to mean "child diddling", good Lord.
Reply Quote
Krombopulos Michael
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aginlakeway • 8:45a, 7/18/25
October 2025


BTW - I am not sure if NYC Times story constitutes the bombshell for the weekend. But combined with the proposed lawsuit and a Presidential order to the AG to release the grand jury testimony might just be it.

Let's wait until Monday to see how this plays out.

Reply Quote
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AgDev01 • 8:46a, 7/18/25
AgDev01 said:
Im Gipper said:
FobTies said:
A WSJ retraction or public statement will come if Trump has any legal standing. Otherwise, its true and Trump is lying to public.

Disagree on that 100%.

Not commenting on who is telling the truth and who is lying, just that its folly to try to conclude that based on whether a lawsuit is filed or whether a retraction comes is determinative of truth.


I would not be surprised at all if Trump did write the card. I don't even think its a big deal. Assume every bit of that WSJ story is true. So what?


The so what is it rebukes the claim that they hardly knew each other and weren't friends that some have put forth.

How many people do you hand make personalized birthday cards, are photographed dozens of times together, attend parties at each others house, fly on their private jet multiple times, and yet barely know them?

If they were close how much did Trump know of Epstein's predilections? He was quoted in 2002 of saying Epstein likes them on the "younger side". Were Trump comments on Clinton based on first hand knowledge?


Its extremely unlikey that Ghislaine manufactured a birthday letter with such a petty message. But its not absolutely determinative Trump is lying.

If Trump doesnt challenge legally, and/or the WSJ doesnt issue a retraction, its likely true. Also, not absolutely determinative.

Trump is lying. But thats not a legal ruling, just my opinion, not absolutely determinative.

Bondi could probably release that DOJ assement of the birthday card, but won't. Just like Garland wouldn't release anything that made Biden look like a liar.
Reply Quote
aginlakeway
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 8:47a, 7/18/25
Krombopulos Michael said:
October 2025


BTW - I am not sure if NYC Times story constitutes the bombshell for the weekend. But combined with the proposed lawsuit and a Presidential order to the AG to release the grand jury testimony might just be it.

Let's wait until Monday to see how this plays out.



I will let you wait.

This won't cause a market crash.

Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 8:49a, 7/18/25
Quote:
BTW - I am not sure if NYC Times story constitutes the bombshell for the weekend. But combined with the proposed lawsuit and a Presidential order to the AG to release the grand jury testimony might just be it.

Let's wait until Monday to see how this plays out.

If you are waiting for the lawsuit or grand jury info to produce a bombshell, you are going to be waiting a lot longer than just Monday!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
FobTies
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Juan Lee Pettimore • 8:49a, 7/18/25
Juan Lee Pettimore said:
I am assuming the letter is real, but the reference to "secrets" could be literally anything. It doesn't automatically have to mean "child diddling", good Lord.

Thats a good point. Trump should have denied that incorrect assumption, not the letter itself.

But of course its tricky, he cant say "well I wrote that letter, but I was referencing other secrets not pedo stuff".

Lose. Lose.
Reply Quote
HTownAg98
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 8:51a, 7/18/25
Krombopulos Michael said:
October 2025


BTW - I am not sure if NYC Times story constitutes the bombshell for the weekend. But combined with the proposed lawsuit and a Presidential order to the AG to release the grand jury testimony might just be it.

Let's wait until Monday to see how this plays out.


Grand Jury testimony will not be coming out.
Reply Quote
Krombopulos Michael
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 8:53a, 7/18/25
So are you in or out on the bet?

Lakeway wants in. I offered it to you first.
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 8:53a, 7/18/25
I posted earlier, you need to specify the terms better.

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Ervin Burrell
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bobbranco • 8:54a, 7/18/25
bobbranco said:
Trump probably thought releasing all the sordid Epstein details would impinge on his agenda. Does anyone think a President in their right mind wants to be remembered as the guy who released information about a blackmailing child rapist and all the other dirty deeds of his cabal of degenerates and spies?

I suspect there are plenty of high profile people named that are innocent on the Epstein ledger. Given that the disgusting and salacious topic, crimes can be spun from the so called evidence into a complete web of lies to only ruin innocent peoples lives. Same as the left did with lawfare.

Trump is correct in this, call Epstein a POS, and let the sick and disgusting topic die. And Maxwell can go to hell.


Wow. We've gone full circle from "release everything and drain the swamp!" to "well akshualllllyyyyy it might rustle some feathers if child rapists were exposed". All at the behest of Dear Leader. Unreal.
Reply Quote
Krombopulos Michael
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HTownAg98 • 8:54a, 7/18/25
I don't expect it to come out today..... The point of the bet was that the story is going to get much more traction over this weekend instead of just fading away.
Reply Quote
No Spin Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 8:54a, 7/18/25
Krombopulos Michael said:
October 2025


BTW - I am not sure if NYC Times story constitutes the bombshell for the weekend. But combined with the proposed lawsuit and a Presidential order to the AG to release the grand jury testimony might just be it.

Let's wait until Monday to see how this plays out.


This is something, I guess, but this doesn't sound like what so many have been demanding be released for over half a decade now.

There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 8:56a, 7/18/25
Krombopulos Michael said:
I don't expect it to come out today..... The point of the bet was that the story is going to get much more traction over this weekend instead of just fading away.

If the proposed wager is "will this get more traction over the weekend" then no bet.

I agree that it will.


I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Krombopulos Michael
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 8:57a, 7/18/25
What do you need clarification on?

1 oz US Mint Eagle

1) is the story getting more traction or less traction over the weekend. Is attention getting worse or better for Trump? We can let other posters determine who wins.

2) Pretty straight forward.... House and Senate flip to Dems in 2026 mid-term
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 9:02a, 7/18/25
1-I agree with you on.

2-Same issue as before. How do we determine if the flip was due to Epstein issues?

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
HTownAg98
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Krombopulos Michael • 9:03a, 7/18/25
#1 might be the dumbest bet anyone can make, just because there's no bright-line way to determine if "a story gets more traction or not."
Reply Quote
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:04a, 7/18/25

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Krombopulos Michael
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 9:04a, 7/18/25
1) playing out in real time.....

Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.