Trump and Epstein were great buddies

[chr0naut]

He hasn't been convicted of a crime in this case, and the one he was found guilty of was issued by a kangaroo court.

He hasn't even been tried in regard to Epstein, but he has been convicted of one count of sexual assault, one count of defamation, 34 counts of business fraud and two impeachments. Plus, the Trump Organization, of which he is sole director, has 17 convictions. And there have been lots of accusations against him that have gone to court.

Personal and business legal affairs of Donald Trump

The Cases Against Trump - from Feb 28, 2021 to Aug 2, 2023

But we know he said he would release the Epstein files, then, when he had the power to do so, he said that Epstein stuff was a hoax, then he said he was right behind getting the Epstein stuff investigated, while at the same time he is trying everything he can to stop the existing Epstein disclosure petition from getting approved.

Face it, he has to be lying about at least one of them. Why?

Could it be that Epstein had some compromizing evidence that Trump is a pedo, or gay, or a gay pedo, so Trump had Epstien killed before Epstien could release the facts in a court of law under national scrutiny. And now Trump who also knows who was on the client list (because they were all in it together) and is using that information to blackmail the other clients, while he tries to completely whitewash himself with false narratives, but, if the list actually really comes out, the whole thing crumbles and falls and they all go to jail?

Due to neuroplasticity, our brains, recieveing the same stimulus over and over, actually become modified and locked into very specific responses.

As Lewis Carrol put it "What I tell thee three times is true".

- Russia, Russia, Russia!

- Its all a hoax, its all a hoax, its all a hoax!

- Stop the steal, stop the steal, stop the steal!

- Lock her up, lock her up, lock her up!

- It's unprecedented, its unprecedented, its unprecedented.

- You know I'm right, you know I'm right, you know I'm right!

- They are sending the worst, the worst, they are sending the worst.

- No one else in history has... No one ever has... No one else in history has...

- Beautiful tariffs, beautiful tariffs, beautiful tariffs!

Are you seeing the pattern yet?

[SomeStupidName]

He hasn't even been tried in regard to Epstein, but he has been convicted of one count of sexual assault, one count of defamation, 34 counts of business fraud and two impeachments. Plus, the Trump Organization, of which he is sole director, has 17 convictions. And there have been lots of accusations against him that have gone to court.

Personal and business legal affairs of Donald Trump

The Cases Against Trump - from Feb 28, 2021 to Aug 2, 2023

But we know he said he would release the Epstein files, then, when he had the power to do so, he said that Epstein stuff was a hoax, then he said he was right behind getting the Epstein stuff investigated, while at the same time he is trying everything he can to stop the existing Epstein disclosure petition from getting approved.

Face it, he has to be lying about at least one of them. Why?

Could it be that Epstein had some compromizing evidence that Trump is a pedo, so Trump had him killed before Epstien could release the facts in a court of law under national scrutiny. And now Trump who also knows who was on the client list (because they were all in it together) and is using that information to blackmail the other clients, while he tries to completely whitewash himself with false narratives, but, if the list actually really comes out, the whole thing crumbles and falls and they all go to jail?

Due to neuroplasticity, our brains, recieveing the same stimulus over and over, actually become modified and locked into very specific responses.

As Lewis Carrol put it "What I tell thee three times is true".

- Russia, Russia, Russia!

- Its all a hoax, its all a hoax, its all a hoax!

- Stop the steal, stop the steal, stop the steal!

- Lock her up, lock her up, lock her up!

- It's unprecedented, its unprecedented, its unprecedented.

- You know I'm right, you know I'm right, you know I'm right!

- They are sending the worst, the worst, they are sending the worst.

- No one else in history has... No one ever has... No one else in history has...

- Beautiful tariffs, beautiful tariffs, beautiful tariffs!

Are you seeing the pattern yet?

I look for actual data not wild speculation.

[KrustyKrab]

Virginia Giuffre is mentioned unredacted 34 times in the Epstein estate files and her testimony rose to prominence during Ghislaine Maxwell's trial, which was after Epstein's death.

However, Virginia Giuffre's story (with the now famous Prince Andrew photo) was first publicized in March 2011 by 'The Mail on Sunday', and the Epstein e-mail is also dated 2011. But to assume that they are talking about one and the same person does not necessarily follow.

If Virginia Giuffre's name was 'out there in the public domain' prior to the specific e-mail, and hadn't been redacted in other Epstein e-mails, are you sure that hers was the redacted name?

For instance, although the person with the pseudonym 'Katie Johnson/Jane Doe' did not come forward until April 2016, she allegedly was known to Epstein and Maxwell (and Trump) since she was raped in 1994, and would not be unlikely to be a topic that they may have spoken about in e-mail discussing crimes comitted and culpability.

If the name was redacted, it could have been because it was the real name of the person with the pseudonym 'Katie Johnson/Jane Doe' - or it could have been some other victim (known to the redactors but whose name is otherwise legally supressed), entirely.

The assumption that the redacted victim was Virginia Giuffre doesn't fit all the facts.

Her name was public from that very text for years, dems released the same text but redacted her name to make it appear more ominous.   Everyone already knew exactly who that was. 

That’s what I take from what I’ve read.  This has been topic since the new release of files.  Redacting it just made them look ridiculous, that’s the word on the street.

[WallFlowerActive]

I guess Stacey Plaskett (D) was great buddies with Epstein too…

Report: Jeffrey Epstein Texted with House Democrat While She Questioned Ex-Trump Lawyer
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/...mp-lawyer/

Thousands of pages of emails, texts, and other documents from Epstein’s estate were released last Wednesday by the House Oversight Committee, uncovering shocking communication between the convicted predator and Del. Stacey Plaskett (D) of the U.S. Virgin Islands as she prepared to question Michael Cohen, Trump’s ex-lawyer-turned-critic. 

“Great outfit,” he texted again, as he watched the hearing around 10:00 a.m. “You look great,” he added 20 minutes later.

[chr0naut]

Her name was public from that very text for years, dems released the same text but redacted her name to make it appear more ominous.   Everyone already knew exactly who that was. 

That’s what I take from what I’ve read.  This has been topic since the new release of files.  Redacting it just made them look ridiculous, that’s the word on the street.

"The word on the street"?

You are so "tuned-in"!

LOL.

[WallFlowerActive]

Another buddy?

Larry Summers steps back from public roles after House release of Epstein correspondenceFormer Harvard president says he's 'deeply ashamed' of continued communication with disgraced financier

https://www.foxnews.com/us/larry-summers...espondence

[chr0naut]

I look for actual data not wild speculation.

Really?

Trump said he would release Epstein's files, Then when he could, he didn't, and instead said that Epstein stuff was all a hoax.

Now that some more of the files (that he said were a hoax) have been released, he is suddenly 'all for transparency', again (but continued to try and block the Epstein disclosure petition).

Those are facts.

[UltraBudgie]

Her name was public from that very text for years, dems released the same text but redacted her name to make it appear more ominous.   Everyone already knew exactly who that was. 

That’s what I take from what I’ve read.  This has been topic since the new release of files.  Redacting it just made them look ridiculous, that’s the word on the street.

"The word on the street"?

You are so "tuned-in"!

LOL.

This isn't speculation, here is the unredacted doc:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ghrzbI-...sp=sharing

It's #031326. That link is directly into the Google Drive dump of documents released by the house, here:

https://oversight.house.gov/release/over...documents/

[WallFlowerActive]

Really?

Trump said he would release Epstein's files,

The likes of Wolff and are Stacey Plaskett (D) were actually working with Epstein to get dirt on Trump, and the best the dems could come up with was a Russian dossier full of lies and fake allegations of golden showers?

[chr0naut]

This isn't speculation, here is the unredacted doc:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ghrzbI-...sp=sharing

It's #031326. That link is directly into the Google Drive dump of documents released by the house, here:

https://oversight.house.gov/release/over...documents/

[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...031326.jpg]

I did a quick search for "HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031326" through that entire oversight commitee text dump, and it was not found.

Perhaps my search-fu is weak?

Also, if they have only released a redacted version, could it not be possible that the allegedly unredacted document may have been edited by third parties?

Please note how in the allegedly unredacted document:
- the name "virginia" is misspelled as "virignia".
- how the inter-letter spacing (kerning) within the word "virignia" is closer together than the inter-letter spacings in the rest of the text.
- and that the blank spaces before and after the word "virignia" are inconsistent with the conventions used in the rest of the text.