Castro? Ke?

[BeTheGoddess]

Of course it's all just pure speculation...internet gossip... I mentioned merry Ol Engaland because of their involvement in Russia, Russia, Russia intelligence apparatus 

It's long been speculated that everybody spies on everybody else; it's the only way for a country's intelligence agency to be plugged into the world...

or that's the SEEEYEAH's excuse...

Of course the UK wants to support certain factions in Russia...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Duke..._of_Russia

They all want to re-install their empires.

[putnam6]

They had better not swing and miss on a DJT again...

https://x.com/JayinWashington/status/196...6264355114

 
Nick Sortor
@nicksortor
·
2h

 WOW! NBC News just asked an entire panel of Epstein victims if they ever “saw or heard Donald Trump doing anything inappropriate in relation to Epstein” VICTIMS: “No… no.”
 

[UltraBudgie]

They had better not swing and miss on a DJT again...

https://x.com/JayinWashington/status/196...6264355114

it is a bit weird that that video clip you posted cut off immediately after one person said 'no'. what was their complete answer, and what did the rest of the panel say? were they saying 'no question about it'? do you have the unedited testimony? that x account is biased. notice how they answered without hesitation, were they coached or intimidated? who are these people, anyway? what day of the week is it? what is reality, anyway? this makes no sense.

(lol see how this stuff goes?)

[putnam6]

it is a bit weird that that video clip you posted cut off immediately after one person said 'no'. what was their complete answer, and what did the rest of the panel say? were they saying 'no question about it'? do you have the unedited testimony? that x account is biased. notice how they answered without hesitation, were they coached or intimidated? who are these people, anyway? what day of the week is it? what is reality, anyway? this makes no sense.

(lol see how this stuff goes?)

Yeah, man  check it yourself FFS. 

Thats all we do is piss on each other's sources and piss on each other's opinions. 

I know nothing for a fact. I just post what I come across for discussion purposes, but I'll listen to the whole video, and if the source changed it, I'll be glad to point that out too

Here's the damn link to the whole flipping video that took me all of 45 seconds to look up and post

go to 21:40 in the video for confirmation unless NBC News is in on it too

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/epstein-su...20Together

[UltraBudgie]

Yeah, man  check it yourself FFS. 

Thats all we do is piss on each other's sources and piss on each other's opinions. 

I know nothing for a fact I just post what I come across for discussion purposes, but I'll listen to the whole video, and if the source changed it, I'll be glad to point that out too

Here's the damn link to the whole flipping video that took me all of 45 seconds to look up and post

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/epstein-su...20Together

sorry didn't mean to peeve you i was being sarcastic about how nothing will ever stop the left from insisting that this is trump coverup

[putnam6]

Fair enough it's hard to tell these days...

If we can't agree on basic facts 

We aren't Denying Ignorance here, we are wallowing in it. 

FWIW, the reason they cut it off is that they said they never heard of Bill Clinton doing anything illegal either. 

That the source cut that off, which was BS too

The more I read, the more it seems OMB thought he could get everything released, but that's not how NDA's work #1, so now he is stuck. 

If the judicial system breaks the precedent of NDAs, oh vey, class action suits will be history, as most end with NDAs. Without NDA protections, corporations will  bludgeon the public with endless lawfare, draining small firms fighting for the public good

The left will never believe Trump wasnt neck deep into the whole mess, Barack himself could tell them, and they wouldn't believe it.

He could be running interference for someone he knows personally, who knows maybe Dershowitz, so Trump gets free legal advice.  


 

 
The question of who can force the Department of Justice (DOJ) to void non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in the Jeffrey Epstein cases involves complex legal and jurisdictional considerations. Based on the available information and general legal principles, here’s a concise analysis:

• No Direct Authority to Force DOJ to Void NDAs: No single entity or individual has clear, unilateral authority to force the DOJ to void NDAs related to the Epstein cases. NDAs are typically private contracts between parties (e.g., Epstein’s estate, victims, or others involved), and the DOJ is not necessarily a party to these agreements. However, certain entities or processes could influence or challenge the enforceability of these NDAs under specific circumstances.
  
• Congressional Oversight: Congress, particularly through committees like the House Oversight Committee, has been actively seeking transparency in the Epstein case, including issuing subpoenas for related files. While Congress can pressure the DOJ to release documents or provide transparency, it lacks direct authority to void private NDAs. Legislative efforts, such as the bipartisan bill proposed by Reps. Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna, aim to compel the DOJ to release unclassified Epstein files, but these efforts do not explicitly target NDAs. A discharge petition to force a vote on this bill is underway, but it requires significant congressional support and presidential approval to become law.
  
• Federal Courts: Courts have the authority to rule on the enforceability of NDAs, particularly if they are deemed to cover illegal activities or violate public policy. For example, NDAs that conceal criminal conduct (e.g., sex trafficking) may be void as a matter of public policy. However, federal judges have recently denied DOJ requests to unseal grand jury materials related to Epstein, citing legal restrictions on grand jury secrecy. A court could theoretically invalidate NDAs if a case is brought before it, but this would require a specific legal challenge, likely initiated by victims or other parties, not the DOJ itself.
  
• DOJ’s Role and Limitations: The DOJ, under Attorney General Pam Bondi, has released some Epstein-related files and is under congressional pressure to disclose more. However, the DOJ’s ability to void NDAs is limited unless it is a party to the agreements or a court orders their invalidation. The DOJ could choose not to enforce NDAs it controls (e.g., in plea deals), but private NDAs between Epstein’s estate and victims are outside its direct control.
  
• Victims and Advocacy Groups: Epstein’s victims have publicly urged Congress to pass legislation compelling the release of all unclassified Epstein records, which could indirectly challenge NDAs by increasing transparency. Victims could also file lawsuits to challenge NDAs, arguing that they were signed under duress or cover illegal acts, but this would depend on individual cases and judicial rulings.
  
• Legislative Reforms: Recent laws, like the Speak Out Act (2022) and California’s anti-NDA legislation, restrict the enforceability of NDAs in sexual misconduct cases, particularly when signed before incidents are reported. Such laws could provide a legal basis to challenge Epstein-related NDAs, but their application would require court action.
  
• Practical Challenges: Many Epstein-related NDAs were likely part of civil settlements, and voiding them would involve complex litigation, potentially requiring consent from both parties (e.g., victims and Epstein’s estate). Additionally, the DOJ has stated that it is redacting victim identities in released files to protect privacy, which complicates public disclosure of NDA-bound information.
  

Conclusion
No single entity can directly force the DOJ to void NDAs in the Epstein cases. Congress can exert pressure through subpoenas or legislation, courts can rule NDAs unenforceable in specific cases, and victims can challenge NDAs through lawsuits. However, the process is not straightforward and depends on legal challenges, judicial rulings, or legislative changes. The ongoing congressional push for transparency, supported by both Democrats and some Republicans, suggests that continued pressure may lead to further disclosures, but voiding NDAs would likely require court intervention or new federal legislation specifically addressing their enforceability.

[BeTheGoddess]

When my sister got married the rabbi was in uniform and the fukr looked like Castro. Like I know some folk here in Australia  who do the wedding celebrant thing but none have a fake beard, IDF uniform, and...

[putnam6]

https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1963352130204451240

Benny Johnson

@bennyjohnson

19h

This is the most important video on X right now: Attorney for the Epstein victims standing outside of a Florida Courthouse CONFIRMING that Donald Trump was the ONLY high-profile figure who HELPED him prosecute Epstein: "The only thing I can say about President Trump is that he is the only person who picked up the phone and said 'lets talk, I'll give you as much time as you want, I'll tell you what you need to know.' Trump was very helpful in the information he gave and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever but had good information that checked out and that helped us." This video is nearly a decade old. The story has NOT changed. Trump is the only high-profile individual who directly assisted in putting Epstein behind bars. Today, the attorney Bradley Edwards once again CONFIRMED Trump's assistance in prosecuting the Epstein during a press conference in DC. "He helped me. He got on the phone with me. He told me things that were helping our investigation and our investigation wasn't looking into him." Libs do NOT want you to know the truth. So share this.

[BeTheGoddess]

https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1963352130204451240

Benny Johnson

@bennyjohnson

19h

This is the most important video on X right now: Attorney for the Epstein victims standing outside of a Florida Courthouse CONFIRMING that Donald Trump was the ONLY high-profile figure who HELPED him prosecute Epstein: "The only thing I can say about President Trump is that he is the only person who picked up the phone and said 'lets talk, I'll give you as much time as you want, I'll tell you what you need to know.' Trump was very helpful in the information he gave and gave no indication whatsoever that he was involved in anything untoward whatsoever but had good information that checked out and that helped us." This video is nearly a decade old. The story has NOT changed. Trump is the only high-profile individual who directly assisted in putting Epstein behind bars. Today, the attorney Bradley Edwards once again CONFIRMED Trump's assistance in prosecuting the Epstein during a press conference in DC. "He helped me. He got on the phone with me. He told me things that were helping our investigation and our investigation wasn't looking into him." Libs do NOT want you to know the truth. So share this.

Make a thread for that shhhiz. Its uch more important to slap it on the side here.

[putnam6]

Make a thread for that shhhiz. Its uch more important to slap it on the side here.

 I was thinking we have enough Epstein threads....

plus there's nothing added, this is directly from X.com verbatim