Sure you are.agsfan said:
Willing to bet they're both guilty
There was a reason Trump brought this up back in 2016 while Hillary Clinton and the Democrat-controlled media in this nation avoided the topic like the plague.
Jeffrey Epstein Arrested For Sex Trafficking of Minors
515,836 Views |
2408 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by LoudestWHOOP!
There was a reason Trump brought this up back in 2016 while Hillary Clinton and the Democrat-controlled media in this nation avoided the topic like the plague.
Regarding the Acosta statement on possible weaknesses in the caseNosmo said:
Acosta said the defense had already hinted that the case could fall apart as some of the victims had talked about money compensation with Epstein's lawyers.
Regardless of the 53 pages the feds had, it didn't sound like their team was confident they would win. Mueller had 400+ pages of crappola.
It sounded really screwy that the feds deal (victim compensation) only had the weekend to contact the victims, because the negotiation was agreed to like Friday(?), and it would expire Monday (with the plea).
Acosta said this was a complicated situation. He also said that the testimony back then was much more difficult (embarrassing) on victims.
Maybe this "slam dunk" case wasn't as solid as the media is claiming. I've investigated 100's of industrial accidents and equipment failures, and hindsight is rarely the reality of the actual situation at the time of the incident. I used to tell people that you always find something the last place you look, but you may have had to look in 20 places.
I'm just not buying the conspiracy stuff yet. Maybe some mistakes on the part of Florida and fed, that let Epstein's legal team put one over on them. Acosta seemed too open with replies and claimed public records have been available for inspection, yet media don't seem interested.
Don't know what to think about Florida.
agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Funny how Epstein appears to be the bad guy here but the libs just want to talk about Acosta.
agsfan said:
No she didn't
agsfan said:
Willing to bet they're both guilty
Yes I am. $500 to ASPCA. You bet they are both guilty. If they are both guilty I will pay $500 to ASPCA if neither guilty you pay. aginllakeway will tell you I pay my bets.
Lol, how do you know?agsfan said:
No she didn't
CNN is an enemy of the state and should be treated as such.
agsfan said:
Willing to bet they're both guilty
He's/She's misinformedBenFiasco14 said:Lol, how do you know?agsfan said:
No she didn't
Fits the pattern. The illegalities of the Clintons were projected onto Trump by their lackeys at Fusion GPS.captkirk said:agsfan said:
No she didn't
The scary thought is that it came very close to working.
biobioprof said:Regarding the Acosta statement on possible weaknesses in the caseNosmo said:
Acosta said the defense had already hinted that the case could fall apart as some of the victims had talked about money compensation with Epstein's lawyers.
Regardless of the 53 pages the feds had, it didn't sound like their team was confident they would win. Mueller had 400+ pages of crappola.
It sounded really screwy that the feds deal (victim compensation) only had the weekend to contact the victims, because the negotiation was agreed to like Friday(?), and it would expire Monday (with the plea).
Acosta said this was a complicated situation. He also said that the testimony back then was much more difficult (embarrassing) on victims.
Maybe this "slam dunk" case wasn't as solid as the media is claiming. I've investigated 100's of industrial accidents and equipment failures, and hindsight is rarely the reality of the actual situation at the time of the incident. I used to tell people that you always find something the last place you look, but you may have had to look in 20 places.
I'm just not buying the conspiracy stuff yet. Maybe some mistakes on the part of Florida and fed, that let Epstein's legal team put one over on them. Acosta seemed too open with replies and claimed public records have been available for inspection, yet media don't seem interested.
Don't know what to think about Florida.
Of that I have no doubtQuote:
I'm confused
So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
I think way more people than Clinton were involved. They were protecting lots of powerful people. Clinton was just one.
Also Asha is smoking hot.
Also Asha is smoking hot.
Playing devil's advocate here, but circumstances of an investigation can change as decision time approaches. The legal profession has so many laws involved that simply being right doesn't mean you will win. Guilt and innocence get screwed up all the time because of mistakes in the courtroom.biobioprof said:Regarding the Acosta statement on possible weaknesses in the casebutNosmo said:
Acosta said the defense had already hinted that the case could fall apart as some of the victims had talked about money compensation with Epstein's lawyers.
Regardless of the 53 pages the feds had, it didn't sound like their team was confident they would win. Mueller had 400+ pages of crappola.
It sounded really screwy that the feds deal (victim compensation) only had the weekend to contact the victims, because the negotiation was agreed to like Friday(?), and it would expire Monday (with the plea).
Acosta said this was a complicated situation. He also said that the testimony back then was much more difficult (embarrassing) on victims.
Maybe this "slam dunk" case wasn't as solid as the media is claiming. I've investigated 100's of industrial accidents and equipment failures, and hindsight is rarely the reality of the actual situation at the time of the incident. I used to tell people that you always find something the last place you look, but you may have had to look in 20 places.
I'm just not buying the conspiracy stuff yet. Maybe some mistakes on the part of Florida and fed, that let Epstein's legal team put one over on them. Acosta seemed too open with replies and claimed public records have been available for inspection, yet media don't seem interested.
Don't know what to think about Florida.
Right now it appears the state of Florida and the feds weren't on the same page, and Epstein's team took advantage of it.
Competing government agencies and authority flexing muscles and end up in a cluster****.
Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
backintexas2013 said:
I think way more people than Clinton were involved. They were protecting lots of powerful people. Clinton was just one.
Also Asha is smoking hot.
What if the people above you said that the grade change had to do with national security? I bet you change it
Apples meet oranges. In the subjective world of prosecutorial discretion, trials, evidence, CI relationships, etc., The higher ups tell you he is an informant and we are not going to prosecute him - leave it to Florida. You do what you are told. Deals get made for scumbags all the time in the justice system and it isn't black and white. I'm shocked you are not aware of thisbiobioprof said:Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
Maybe, but it's still at least partly mine.backintexas2013 said:
What if the people above you said that the grade change had to do with national security? I bet you change it
Trying to imagine a natsec grade change situation for anything I teach is amusing.
eta: this applies to captkirk's CI scenario as well.
He claimed the deal was cut before he was involved. Did you listen to his press conference?Sasappis said:captkirk said:Apples meet oranges. In the subjective world of prosecutorial discretion, trials, evidence, CI relationships, etc., The higher ups tell you he is an informant and we are not going to prosecute him - leave it to Florida. You do what you are told. Deals get made for scumbags all the time in the justice system and it isn't black and white. I'm shocked you are not aware of thisbiobioprof said:Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
Deals don't get made without bringing the local US attorney into the loop. He is not some low level paper pusher. He was a Senate confirmed presidential appointee.
Was he lying about that?
And the libs are still after Acosta. Lol
Perhaps his superiors told him to?Sasappis said:captkirk said:He claimed the deal was cut before he was involved. Did you listen to his press conference?Sasappis said:captkirk said:Apples meet oranges. In the subjective world of prosecutorial discretion, trials, evidence, CI relationships, etc., The higher ups tell you he is an informant and we are not going to prosecute him - leave it to Florida. You do what you are told. Deals get made for scumbags all the time in the justice system and it isn't black and white. I'm shocked you are not aware of thisbiobioprof said:Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
Deals don't get made without bringing the local US attorney into the loop. He is not some low level paper pusher. He was a Senate confirmed presidential appointee.
Was he lying about that?
Then the deal was made by his subordinates and he accepted it and approved it.
Its been reported that Mueller interjected on Epstein's behalf because he was an informant
Considering the potential involvement of Messrs. Mueller and Comey in this matter, an assumption that bureaucratic norms were avoided when it came to Epstein is entirely plausible.Sasappis said:captkirk said:Apples meet oranges. In the subjective world of prosecutorial discretion, trials, evidence, CI relationships, etc., The higher ups tell you he is an informant and we are not going to prosecute him - leave it to Florida. You do what you are told. Deals get made for scumbags all the time in the justice system and it isn't black and white. I'm shocked you are not aware of thisbiobioprof said:Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
Deals don't get made without bringing the local US attorney into the loop. He is not some low level paper pusher. He was a Senate confirmed presidential appointee.
He may have cut a deal at someone's behest but to act like he is not complicit and liable for the deal shows a disconnect from reality.
Damn near documented by the fact the FBI declared him an informantStlkofta said:Considering the potential involvement of Messrs. Mueller and Comey in this matter, an assumption that bureaucratic norms were avoided when it came to Epstein is entirely plausible.Sasappis said:captkirk said:Apples meet oranges. In the subjective world of prosecutorial discretion, trials, evidence, CI relationships, etc., The higher ups tell you he is an informant and we are not going to prosecute him - leave it to Florida. You do what you are told. Deals get made for scumbags all the time in the justice system and it isn't black and white. I'm shocked you are not aware of thisbiobioprof said:Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
Deals don't get made without bringing the local US attorney into the loop. He is not some low level paper pusher. He was a Senate confirmed presidential appointee.
He may have cut a deal at someone's behest but to act like he is not complicit and liable for the deal shows a disconnect from reality.
As mentioned and suggested earlier I have no doubt that Epstein was operating his orgy island as a way to not only reward people with sex but to make sure those same friends could never ever cross the deep state. He was simply the house madam of the deep state's blackmail machine.
One giant honey pot to control as many powerful people as possible.
One giant honey pot to control as many powerful people as possible.
Considering that, it appears we have a line of questioning for Mr. Mueller that would be even more uncomfortable than those concerning the dramatic license taken in his report.captkirk said:Damn near documented by the fact the FBI declared him an informantStlkofta said:Considering the potential involvement of Messrs. Mueller and Comey in this matter, an assumption that bureaucratic norms were avoided when it came to Epstein is entirely plausible.Sasappis said:captkirk said:Apples meet oranges. In the subjective world of prosecutorial discretion, trials, evidence, CI relationships, etc., The higher ups tell you he is an informant and we are not going to prosecute him - leave it to Florida. You do what you are told. Deals get made for scumbags all the time in the justice system and it isn't black and white. I'm shocked you are not aware of thisbiobioprof said:Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
Deals don't get made without bringing the local US attorney into the loop. He is not some low level paper pusher. He was a Senate confirmed presidential appointee.
He may have cut a deal at someone's behest but to act like he is not complicit and liable for the deal shows a disconnect from reality.
Do we have a Republican on that committee who will go there?
I may have missed something but if this refers to him providing information to the FBI, it's not clear to me that it's not just this, which IMO is not at all like being a CIA or FBI cointel asset running a honey trapcaptkirk said:Damn near documented by the fact the FBI declared him an informantStlkofta said:Considering the potential involvement of Messrs. Mueller and Comey in this matter, an assumption that bureaucratic norms were avoided when it came to Epstein is entirely plausible.Sasappis said:captkirk said:Apples meet oranges. In the subjective world of prosecutorial discretion, trials, evidence, CI relationships, etc., The higher ups tell you he is an informant and we are not going to prosecute him - leave it to Florida. You do what you are told. Deals get made for scumbags all the time in the justice system and it isn't black and white. I'm shocked you are not aware of thisbiobioprof said:Others (e.g. Mukasey) from above may have things to explain, but let me explain it this way:captkirk said:Why do you believe it was Acosta's deal? Don't be naive. This went way over his headbiobioprof said:So, if Clinton was one of the unindicted coconspirators, and Acosta's deal covered him ... is it OK to talk about Acosta's role in that?andyv94 said:agsfan said:
Trump does no wrong, my bad.
He's always truthful and straightforward about his sexual escapades.
That is why I 100% believe him when he says he didn't rape a 13 year old at an Epstein party.
This isn't about Trump!! As much as you liberals want to make this about Trump or Acosta. This is about a sick pervert and also about Bill Clinton and his 26 trips in the Lolita express to certain islands.
But yeah, keep pushing the Trump BS
Something I hadn't thought about before, but around this time weren't Bill C and HW already BFFs over their relief work?
If some student in my class is caught cheating and someone way above me wants a grade change to make an F* disappear from their transcript, I can do the grade change or tell the people above me to do what they want without my signature. In the former case, I think it would be my grade change. In the latter, not. YMMV.
Deals don't get made without bringing the local US attorney into the loop. He is not some low level paper pusher. He was a Senate confirmed presidential appointee.
He may have cut a deal at someone's behest but to act like he is not complicit and liable for the deal shows a disconnect from reality.
backintexas2013 said:agsfan said:
Willing to bet they're both guilty
Yes I am. $500 to ASPCA. You bet they are both guilty. If they are both guilty I will pay $500 to ASPCA if neither guilty you pay. aginllakeway will tell you I pay my bets.
Yep!
I'd like some of that action as well. On your side of it.
agsfan said:
Willing to bet they're both guilty
What are we betting?
That's a good point. I was under the impression that "intelligence asset" was something other than being a cooperating witness in the Bear Stearns litigation.
In any event, It's wild that we are spending so much effort armchair quarterbacking a 10 yr old plea deal from 2 administrations ago.
In any event, It's wild that we are spending so much effort armchair quarterbacking a 10 yr old plea deal from 2 administrations ago.
James Patterson's book on Jeffrey Epstein was published in October 2016:
The author has some knowledge regarding Trump and Epstein. You can see Patterson explaining Trump's relationship with Epstein to Dana Perino here:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/49325/watch-best-selling-author-reveals-why-trump-kicked-ryan-saavedra?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=071019-news&utm_campaign=position3
Perino: President Trump said earlier that he had a falling-out with Epstein about 15 years ago. Do you know what that was about?
Patterson: Well, I know that there were some complaints about Epstein at Mar-a-Lago and also I spoke to the head of the spa there. I said 'did you ever meet Epstein?' She said, 'oh yes... he was inappropriate with some of the younger women there.' She said she went to Trump and he threw him out of the club.
A New York Post article notes that court records from 2011 also mention Epstein's ban from Mar-a-Lago:
https://nypost.com/2019/07/09/trump-barred-jeffrey-epstein-from-mar-a-lago-over-sex-assault-court-docs/
Combine the above with the fact that it is Trump who associates Clinton with Epstein during the 2016 campaign. It certainly doesn't look like Trump is the one who has anything to fear from the raging party the Clintonistas were throwing on Pedo Island.
So placing a bet that Trump is as guilty as Clinton would prove about as fruitful as Mr. Nadler's impeachment efforts.
The author has some knowledge regarding Trump and Epstein. You can see Patterson explaining Trump's relationship with Epstein to Dana Perino here:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/49325/watch-best-selling-author-reveals-why-trump-kicked-ryan-saavedra?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=071019-news&utm_campaign=position3
Perino: President Trump said earlier that he had a falling-out with Epstein about 15 years ago. Do you know what that was about?
Patterson: Well, I know that there were some complaints about Epstein at Mar-a-Lago and also I spoke to the head of the spa there. I said 'did you ever meet Epstein?' She said, 'oh yes... he was inappropriate with some of the younger women there.' She said she went to Trump and he threw him out of the club.
A New York Post article notes that court records from 2011 also mention Epstein's ban from Mar-a-Lago:
https://nypost.com/2019/07/09/trump-barred-jeffrey-epstein-from-mar-a-lago-over-sex-assault-court-docs/
Combine the above with the fact that it is Trump who associates Clinton with Epstein during the 2016 campaign. It certainly doesn't look like Trump is the one who has anything to fear from the raging party the Clintonistas were throwing on Pedo Island.
So placing a bet that Trump is as guilty as Clinton would prove about as fruitful as Mr. Nadler's impeachment efforts.
Featured Stories
See All
SEC Round-Up: Dawgs facing possible playoff elimination this week
by Olin Buchanan
33:59
7h ago
897
Pick 'Em & Rip 'Em sponsored by PrizePicks: Week 12
by Matthew Dawson
14:58
8h ago
966
Assessing Earley's first signing class at the helm of Texas A&M baseball
by Ryan Brauninger
Tom Kazansky 2012
Number of football tickets A&M provided to t.u.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
95