JerryM

Thank you. Now that we know that, we can move on to something else.

Got it. It said the woman sued Epstein estate and won a settlement. It doesn't say there was a ever a case against Trump.

It only claims she bit his penis. 1983-85. There would be no federal charge and maybe not a NY state charge by the Biden's tenure.

From the above link. Leon Black : 1. stated Epstein told her to give Black a massage while Black was naked. Cuomo stated another female gave Black a massage and he made her perform oral sex. Epstein made jokes about Black's penis size. * 2. . stated Black raped her numerous tunes and sex trafficked her (including at Epstein's). Black threatened to destroy her life and stated he had connections with the police. A woman who is likely the above sued Leon Black under the NY State assault victims 1 year waiver of statute of limitations. (Adult Survivors Act) Black said that he never met her. Among the other things not mentioned by the plaintiff is that she has been plaintiff in 35 other lawsuits and a criminal arrest record. Case was dismissed and Black countersued the law firm. * In the lawsuit it is claimed Leon Black is 6ft 4in and about 300 pounds. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/11/28/business/leon-black-jeffrey-epstein-rape-accusation

REDUX https://aseannow.com/topic/1384979-trumpdoj-desperately-block-epstein-files-release/page/3/

AI Gemini to the above exact query: The question of who was "covering up" the Epstein files has been a major flashpoint in recent politics, particularly following the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act in late 2025. During the four years of the Biden administration (2021–2025), the Department of Justice (DOJ) was led by Attorney General Merrick Garland. Critics and some political figures have characterized the DOJ's handling of the files during this period as a "cover-up," while the Department maintained it was following standard legal protocols for sensitive investigations. The Arguments Regarding the Biden DOJ (2021–2025) The Allegation of Withholding: Critics, including prominent members of the current Trump administration and representatives like Thomas Massie and Ro Khanna, argued that the Biden DOJ intentionally sat on a "client list" or incriminating evidence to protect powerful individuals. They pointed to the lack of new indictments following the 2021 conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell as evidence of a lack of will to prosecute co-conspirators. The DOJ's Defense: Under Attorney General Garland, the DOJ and FBI maintained that they had conducted an exhaustive review and found no "master client list." They stated that much of the material was subject to court-ordered sealing to protect the privacy of over 1,000 victims. In July 2025, an FBI memo reiterated that there was no credible evidence of a blackmail ring or a list of uncharged third parties that met the threshold for prosecution.

Stick with boosting saw palmetto. And one of my favorite senators from NY or anywhere was Daniel Patrick Moynihan. And while he himself says he did not originate the saying, he is largely attributed with : “You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.”

And Democratic Senator from NY state January 3, 2001 – January 21, 2009

Story in today's USA Today not Raw Story Americans, not other countries, paid Trump's tariffs in 2025 Updated Feb. 16, 2026 American consumers and companies paid nearly 90% of the cost of President Donald Trump’s tariffs through late 2025, according to a new report from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. On the campaign trail in September 2024, promoting tariffs, Trump told supporters, “It’s not going to be a cost to you, it’s going to be a cost to another country.” Trump repeated the claim in a Jan. 30 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, writing, “The data shows that the burden, or ‘incidence,’ of the tariffs has fallen overwhelmingly on foreign producers and middlemen, including large corporations that are not from the U.S.” The New York Fed study, published Feb. 12, suggests otherwise. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2026/02/15/americans-paid-trump-tariffs-2025-inflation/88692687007/

It seems at times the main reason to have friends on AN is so you you make make a convincing argument by prefacing": I have a friend who ...

Colangelo is a red herring compared to this via Gemini AG: In the wake of the Manhattan District Attorney’s prosecution of Donald Trump, several legal scholars and commentators—including those who are historically critical of Trump or identify as left-leaning—expressed significant skepticism regarding the legal framework of the case. While many legal experts defended the trial as a straightforward application of the law, the "dubious" labels often centered on the "novel" and "convoluted" nature of the charges. Key Criticisms from Non-Conservative Experts The "Unclear Second Crime": Elie Honig, a CNN senior legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, was notably critical of the prosecution’s "unprecedented" use of state law to prosecute a federal election issue. He argued that the specific "object crime" (the second crime Trump was allegedly concealing) remained a moving target for much of the trial, which he suggested raised due process concerns.

Still a state not federal charge. I remember: District Attorney Bragg Announces Matthew Colangelo as New Senior Counsel “I am honored to reunite with District Attorney Bragg, my former colleague and a deeply experienced prosecutor committed to public safety in his hometown,” said Matthew Colangelo. In his time at the New York State Office of the Attorney General, (Colangelo) was Chief Counsel for Federal Initiatives, leading more than eighty lawsuits challenging federal agency action on constitutional and statutory grounds. https://manhattanda.org/district-attorney-bragg-announces-matthew-colangelo-as-new-senior-counsel/ _____________________________ For starters, a source who knows Colangelo tells me that, although he had previously worked in DOJ’s civil rights division during the Obama administration, he never intended to stay at the Biden Justice Department for the long haul, as evidenced by the fact that, when he took the job in Washington after years in the New York Attorney General’s Office, his family stayed behind in New York. https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/matthew-colangelo-alvin-bragg-conspiracy-biden-rcna156534

The 34 varieties bookkeeping charges was a state not federal case. About the only federal charges as you mention above would require some inter-state involvement and a victim under age 18 for which there would be no statute of limitations.

Go to Mr. DIY or BigC etc. and buy your own string. Then any monk you meet on their morning rounds can give you the blessing.

I remember reading this NY Times article -- via Gemini AI: Gemini said A report by The New York Times (published in early 2024 and echoed in post-election retrospectives) detailed a significant miscalculation within Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice regarding Donald Trump’s political future. According to these reports, the DOJ’s slow pace in initiating investigations into the former president was partly rooted in a belief that he was a fading political figure. Key Findings from the NYT Report: The "Fading Figure" Theory: Senior officials within the DOJ, and reportedly Attorney General Merrick Garland himself, initially viewed Trump as a "spent political force" after the January 6 Capitol riot. They believed he would naturally retreat from the spotlight, which contributed to a cautious, methodical approach that avoided early, direct investigations into Trump himself. The 2024 Surprise: The DOJ was reportedly caught off guard by the speed and intensity with which Trump consolidated GOP support and reclaimed his status as the presumptive nominee. By the time Special Counsel Jack Smith was appointed in late 2022, the political calendar was already colliding with the legal one.

Pg 5 this topic: (JerryM) To me this is the most significant outcome so far on the Epstein files: Trump has (figuratively) sworn on a stack of bibles that he NEVER flew on Epstein's jet. The flight logs go to show that Trump has no problem making a false statement and, maybe in his various litigations, that should be stipulated. AI Gemini on the Trump v WSJ/Murdoch suit: Current Status (February 2026) As of early 2026, the lawsuit is still winding through federal court in Florida. While the Epstein estate produced the physical book to Congress, Trump’s team continues to argue that the specific entry attributed to him was planted or forged long ago. NB Given the above remark, Trump saying he never wrote the Epstein birthday bok entry may be questioned just because he has shown including this one that he has no problem what is proven true. ______________________________________ https://aseannow.com/topic/1384979-trumpdoj-desperately-block-epstein-files-release/page/3/

From the FBI doc linked: TRUMP was one of the very first people to call when people found out that they were investigating EPSTEIN. NB So he was one of the very first but not the only. BTW Remarks by President Trump Before Marine One Departure Issued on: July 12, 2019 Q Two questions, please. With regard to Jeffrey Epstein, did you have any suspicions that he was molesting young women, underaged women? THE PRESIDENT: No, I had no idea. I had no idea. I haven’t spoken to him in many, many years. But I had — I didn’t have no idea. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-marine-one-departure-52/

So ask them.

The topic heading and the first sentence OP: Trump Complained About Epstein. Looks like he was the first one to do so. So it makes one wonder how he could be guilty of anything if he was the one complaining about it. From the linked above FBI document: TRUMP called the PBPD to tell him "thank goodness you're stopping him". TRUMP was one of the very first people to call when people found out that they were investigating EPSTEIN. So the query: "Why would then-citizen Trump blow the whistle on Epstein if he had any real association with him?" is wrong. Trump did not blow the whistle on Epstein. The 2 questions you asked do not relate to the topic heading.

Thank you. Your timeline re: the linked document is wrong.

Trump's exact words to the Palm Beach Police Pg 3: "thank goodness you' re stopping him, everyone has known he's been doing this https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/26904744-reiter-2019-fbi-interview/

NB This great Say What? moment by Solicitor General Sauer at 05 NOV 2025 Supreme Court oral tariff arguments: The most ludicrous aspect of Sauer’s Supreme Court argument was his claim that federal revenue from Trump’s tariffs was “incidental.” Sauer claimed Trump was just exercising his constitutional power to manage foreign policy, not raising federal revenue. According to Sauer, “These are regulatory tariffs, they are not revenue-raising tariffs. The fact that they raise revenue is only incidental.” (my italics/bold) The problem with Sauer’s claim is that the president and his advisors have repeatedly cited increased federal revenue as one of the reasons for imposing tariffs. https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/5599776-trump-tariffs-supreme-court/

Well to give you a serious answer, I posted this 20 JAN 26: To me this is the most significant outcome so far on the Epstein files: Trump has (figuratively) sworn on a stack of bibles that he NEVER flew on Epstein's jet. The flight logs go to show that Trump has no problem making a false statement and, maybe in his various litigations, that should be stipulated. Trump flew on Epstein jet eight times in the '90s, according to prosecutor email

I don't know. Next time I meet a goat, I'll ask.

At least in Florida, unless the goat kept a DNA sample or was underage, not much if anything criminal.