14 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Haha.. 'You cannot be serious'? 

That is so outrageously false that i dont even know where to begin with a reply, so i wont bother

Just a friendly reminder that you haven't answered my question, buddy.

20 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Haha.. 'You cannot be serious'? 

That is so outrageously false that i dont even know where to begin with a reply, so i wont bother

 

Thank the Lord.

10 minutes ago, candide said:

Suure, Why didn't you care about innocent people when MAGAs were touting the Epstein file and asking for the Dems to release it? 🤣

You are confused. I have never given much of a rat's about the Epstein files. 

 

And again, had there been anything of substance against Trump, the Biden administration would have prosecuted him. or at the very least, leaked it. 

24 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

Haha.. 'You cannot be serious'? 

That is so outrageously false that i dont even know where to begin with a reply, so i wont bother

Now give you head a really good wobble.......or, preferably, do us all a favour and just stop posting utter drivel.

 

🧑‍💼 

Kash Patel

 (FBI Director, former DOJ official)

“…the list was being kept secret because of who’s on that list.”

– Insisting a client list must exist and be released publicly  .

👩‍⚖️ 

Pam Bondi

 (U.S. Attorney General)

“It’s sitting on my desk right now to review. That’s been a directive by President Trump. I’m reviewing that.”

– When asked on Fox News about releasing Epstein’s client list  .

“We are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts.”

– Committing to DOJ filing for public release  .

🎙️ 

Dan Bongino

 (Deputy FBI Director, former host)

While he threatened to resign in protest, his comments stressed that Bondi should release the files after public expectations went unmet  .

🧑‍💻 

J.D. Vance

 (Senator, former Trump campaign advisor)

“In October 2024, J.D. Vance said ‘we need to release the Epstein list.’”

– A clear public demand 

12 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Anyone else reading these utterly lame diversions and thinking "are they actually thinking that this drivel is even remotely believable??"😆

Is it your position that the Biden administration had dirt on Trump and did not leak it? 

18 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

Paramount didn't learn that at all, since they didn't go to court. Had they done so, according to most legal analysts they would almost certainly have won the case, since editing interviews is completely normal practice, for all kinds of perfectly legitimate reasons.

 

Paramount settled because they knew they would lose.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3w4n8778q2o

 

It's completely normal practice to cut and edit an interview to make one candidate look good? Are you joking?

 

That's why the settled then, because it's "normal" practice.

 

Lol.

 

 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

You are confused. I have never given much of a rat's about the Epstein files. 

 

And again, had there been anything of substance against Trump, the Biden administration would have prosecuted him. or at the very least, leaked it. 

 

NO...because there's no ends of Dems who would end up in the same boat......neither 'side' wants this can of worms opening.

Just now, Cameroni said:

 

Paramount settled because they knew they would lose.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3w4n8778q2o

 

It's completely normal practice to cut and edit an interview to make one candidate look good? Are you joking?

 

That's why the settled then, because it's "normal" practice.

 

Lol.

 

 

They would not have lost, but they would have been exposed as the partisan hacks they are. 

6 hours ago, JensenZ said:

LOL. Trump has handlers?

Unfortunately, that guy is free flying on the wings of stupidity. The crash landing awaits!

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Is it your position that the Biden administration had dirt on Trump and did not leak it? 

Is it your position that whatever they haven't released should be released (of course while protecting the innocents you care so much about!)?

1 minute ago, Will B Good said:

 

NO...because there's no ends of Dems who would end up in the same boat......neither 'side' wants this can of worms opening.

They could have leaked it without anyone but Trump being named. Trump like young women, but he does not have a history of banging young girls. There is a big difference. 

 

There are probably thousands of names on the list, and it is likely only a small percentage of them did anything illegal. 

 

 

4 minutes ago, BLMFem said:

Is it your position that whatever they haven't released should be released (of course while protecting the innocents you care so much about!)?

Answer my question and I'll answer yours.

 

Again: Is it your position that the Biden administration had dirt on Trump and did not leak it? 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

They could have leaked it without anyone but Trump being named. Trump like young women, but he does not have a history of banging young girls. There is a big difference. 

 

There are probably thousands of names on the list, and it is likely only a small percentage of them did anything illegal. 

 

 

 

No way on God's Earth would they get away with selectively leaking stuff like that.

Just now, Yellowtail said:

Answer my question and I'll answer yours.

 

Again: Is it your position that the Biden administration had dirt on Trump and did not leak it? 

Age before beauty.

1 minute ago, Will B Good said:

 

No way on God's Earth would they get away with selectively leaking stuff like that.

Surly you jest. 

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

They made comments without studying the file. When the file was studied, lo and behold! Epstein did not blackmail anyone. There was no client list.

 

Any other case this would be case closed, but because it involves sex with young girls  some people can't get enough of it. It's pathetic.

Who is "They made comments"?

Which file?

How do you know that "There was no client list"?

11 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Paramount settled because they knew they would lose.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3w4n8778q2o

 

It's completely normal practice to cut and edit an interview to make one candidate look good? Are you joking?

 

That's why the settled then, because it's "normal" practice.

 

Lol.

 

So you're shifting your argument now. You previously said that Paramount  learned that going to court with Trump can be very expensive, but now you're admitting that they settled out of court. 

 

Anyway, please provide some evidence that Paramount settled because they knew they were going to lose.

 

Also, please give us the evidence (I'm sure you have some) that the interview was edited "to make one candidate look good."

 

If on the other hand, you don't have that evidence, then your claims are baseless and without merit.

@Yellowtail and @Cameroni Why are you both ignoring the video testimony of the woman who stated that she was sexually abused and raped at 13, alongside a 12 year old?

That's hardly "text on a talk board".

I didn't imagine that you might be this morally reprehensible for when it came to genuinely serious matters.

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

They made comments without studying the file. When the file was studied, lo and behold! Epstein did not blackmail anyone. There was no client list.

 

Any other case this would be case closed, but because it involves sex with young girls  some people can't get enough of it. It's pathetic.

Who is "They made comments"?

Which file?

How do you know that "There was no client list"?

1 minute ago, SMIAI said:

@Yellowtail and @Cameroni Why are you both ignoring the video testimony of the woman who stated that she was sexually abused and raped at 13, alongside a 12 year old?

That's hardly "text on a talk board".

I didn't imagine that you might be this morally reprehensible for when it came to genuinely serious matters.

The woman that made the statement and then dropped the case you mean? 

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

The woman that made the statement and then dropped the case you mean? 

 

She and her family faced multiple death threats and her testimony was voluntarily withdrawn....(or she was given a shed load of money.....or both).

23 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

She and her family faced multiple death threats and her testimony was voluntarily withdrawn....(or she was given a shed load of money.....or both).

Or she was threatened with a counter suit. 

So hard to believe that your man is a pervert..... I'm sure many women go through that kind of pain when they find out.

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Or she was threatened with a counter suit. 

 

 

Possibly.....as she probably had no 'hard' evidence, only....dates...locations....who knows?.....it would come down to he said/she said...and she would get hammered in court I imagine.

She might also be able to describe his organ accurately.....

2 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

Possibly.....as she probably had no 'hard' evidence, only....dates...locations....who knows?.....it would come down to he said/she said...and she would get hammered in court I imagine.

 

According to this Newsweek article, the suit was filed three times. One time dismissed by the judge and two times withdrawn.

 

The third time a witness (jane Doe) was included.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-katie-johnson-allegations-sexual-assault-case-dismissed-1921051

Just now, CallumWK said:

 

According to this Newsweek article, the suit was filed three times. One time dismissed by the judge and two times withdrawn.

 

The third time a witness (jane Doe) was included.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-katie-johnson-allegations-sexual-assault-case-dismissed-1921051

 

I read Tiffany Doe's affidavit......if true...OMG!!!

6 minutes ago, SMIAI said:

She might also be able to describe his organ accurately.....

 

Got to be pretty biggly....possibly one of the biggliest in the World?

8 hours ago, JensenZ said:

LOL. Trump has handlers?

https://greeknewsondemand.com/2025/04/06/who-is-trumps-jewish-handler-howard-lutnick-who-demands-israel-loyalty-test-from-new-hires-in-trump-admin-whos-connected-to-epstein/

7 hours ago, CallumWK said:

That must be fake news, because not so long ago a Cambodian member of this forum, claimed I did know nothing about US law because a judge could not dismiss a case.

No, you are just showing your stupidity again. But Americans know what I am talking about, troll LOL.

 

But here is your chance to recoup your dignity. Show me the Federal Rule that permits a Court to dismiss a case sua sponte before issue is joined.