Good, release every name.

"Democrats have begun naming associates of Jeffrey Epstein whose identities were redacted in official files.

Leon Botstein a former president of Bard College in New York, resigned from his remaining academic posts on Wednesday after Jamie Raskin, a Democrat and senior member of the House judiciary committee, wrote a letter to the university linking him to several emails in the tranche of documents relating to the Epstein investigation.

It included an email from May 2014 that was attributed to Mr. Botstein, in which the author asked Epstein whether a young woman was "for me, or are you keeping her for yourself"."

Telegraph: NAMES

Dimond1968 said:

---

Likely why Trump flipped. Seems that was the start right there.

---

Also Trump is mentioned more in the Epstein files than Jesus is in the Bible. So there's that too.

GMaster0 said:

---

Dimond1968 said:

---

Likely why Trump flipped. Seems that was the start right there.

---

Also Trump is mentioned more in the Epstein files than Jesus is in the Bible. So there's that too.

---

Well, Trump has publicly portrayed himself as Jesus-esque, so no surprise there.

Sooooo anyone mind giving a sentence or two synopsis of this thread if they have been here since the beginning? Just opened it for the first time myself.

TIA

Eliminatus said:

---

Sooooo anyone mind giving a sentence or two synopsis of this thread if they have been here since the beginning? Just opened it for the first time myself.

TIA

---

Thread begins with the Trump administration's July 2025 conclusion that Jeffrey Epstein died by suicide and that investigators found no incriminating client list warranting further prosecutions.

The thread quickly became a highly polarized political argument over whether the government was being transparent or covering up information about Epstein's powerful associates, with participants debating the credibility of the DOJ, the handling of evidence, and whether both Republican and Democratic administrations had failed to deliver accountability.

As the discussion grew, the central issue shifted from Epstein's death to the Trump administration's changing statements about the files, the extent of redactions and withheld records, and whether the public would ever see a full accounting. There is no consensus or definitive resolution in the threadjust an increasingly acrimonious debate over transparency, political hypocrisy, and accountability for potentially implicated people across both parties.

Ah. That is pretty much exactly what I was thinking it would be. Thanks for that.

Welcome. Sorry it took me so long to type up.

Eliminatus said:

---

Sooooo anyone mind giving a sentence or two synopsis of this thread if they have been here since the beginning? Just opened it for the first time myself.

TIA

---

assorted facts and innuendo around what was essentially a Mossad honeypot operation.

Queso1 said:

---

Biggest cover up since the Montreal Screwjob!

I just wanted to say that. But yes, it's a perversion of justice against the American people. We are used to it. What hurt the most is the guy I elected to address the issue is the coverup artist.

---

From the outsider to drain the swamp to the now politician redefining the swamp.

Good, make them talk.

"The attorney general of New Mexico on Wednesday filed a federal civil lawsuit against the co-executors of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's estate, seeking to prevent the two men -- Epstein's former lawyer and accountant -- from profiting after Epstein's death "from the illegal activity that they enabled and furthered," according to the court filing.

"Through this action, the State seeks to hold these individuals accountable to the fullest extent possible and to ensure that Epstein's assets are distributed to the survivors of his horrific crimes," New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez wrote in the complaint."

ABC: SUIT

This mess would have disappeared long ago if Trump had simply honored his campaign promise of full transparency.

"Democrats are pummeling every Republican senator in a competitive race who initially opposed legislation to release federal records on Epstein, a onetime friend of President Donald Trump who killed himself in jail in 2019 after being charged with sex trafficking.

They are also targeting House Republicans in Texas, Pennsylvania, Iowa and Virginia. Some of the ads accuse Republicans of taking campaign contributions from wealthy donors who worked or socialized with Epstein."

WAPO: EPSTEIN

Counterpoint: he OWNS the libs, so the people who were once apoplectic about the files being released, now, don't give a ***** Strange, curious even.

lol. Neither party has the moral high ground here.

Sid Farkas said:

---

lol. Neither party has the moral high ground here.

---

Neither party deserves to exist.

You do realize that the executive branch csnt just violate the jurisdiction and rulings of judges in the judicial branch without risking prosecution or impeachment themselves?

FWTXAg said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

lol. Neither party has the moral high ground here.

---

Neither party deserves to exist.

---

And anyone involved with this, regardless of party affiliation, deserves to be dragged through the dirt, including their name and reputation.

Billys Cesspool Enjoyer said:

---

FWTXAg said:

---

Sid Farkas said:

---

lol. Neither party has the moral high ground here.

---

Neither party deserves to exist.

---

And anyone involved with this, regardless of party affiliation, deserves to be dragged through the dirt, including their name and reputation.

---

Bill gates, Alan Derachowitz and the rest of them have quietly come to terms with CIA and Mossad. All good.

The rest of who?

DOJ continues to sit on its hands while obstructing state and foreign investigations into Epstein's cronies. What does it see in the evidence that it is so desperate to conceal here at home and abroad?

"The Justice Department has brought no charges in relation to the millions of documents it has released from federal investigations into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but other law enforcement agencies in the United States and abroad have used the material to launch probes into potential crimes and individuals within their own jurisdictions.

The Washington Post reported last month that the Justice Department had not granted requests by Polish, Norwegian, British or Latvian law enforcement agencies for evidence, information and testimony for their investigations.

Officials in New Mexico, where Epstein maintained a ranch, have sued the Justice Department, alleging that it blocked the state from accessing unredacted records. The Justice Department argued in court filings last week that providing such records would hinder law enforcement operations."

MSN: OBSTRUCTION

Biden, Obama, Democrat congress cretins, the propaganda arm of the Democrats (MSM), and the deep state has had more than 18 years to hang Epstein around Trumps neck.

As of today nothing but innuendo. LOL. Dream on misfits.

I don't have anything to add other than I appreciate you citing the source on your links. Much better form.

setsmachine said:

---

Just curious, does anyone here truly believe the original claim of the Justice Dept that there is no list of clients that need to be prosecuted? Like, you actually deep down trust them when they say that? Not whether you think it's important enough to discuss or how prominent of an issue you think it should be, just do you actually believe it.

That would be mind blowing for anyone on either side of the aisle to truly believe that. This is a coverup that spans both parties across a couple decades

---

It's the "why" question that keeps rising to the top.

Why not be transparent? Why did two administrations opt to keep so much evidence close hold? Why is Trump's DOJ so determined to block all state and foreign enquiries? Why do bipartisan members of Congress apparently see enough that they repeatedly demand an open investigation? Why are so many now indifferent to pursuing justice despite vociferously supporting full transparency during the last campaign? Why?

New congressional reports tying Trump to Epstein via a rape competition and 11 survivor interviews. Whitehouse says no biggie and denies allegations.

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/trump-an-active-participant-in-epsteins-abuse-cover-up-report-40594161/

"The report's authors cited evidence to the contrary, including:

-interviews conducted by committee staff
-11 survivor accounts
-FBI records
-documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, including unredacted passages not available to the public news reports from the 2000s through the present day

The report also cites new whistleblower testimony that supports researchers' findings that investigative documents that could implicate Trump were intentionally and illegally redacted or never made public.

"The evidence, much of it still hiding behind redactions in DOJ vaults, shows that Trump lied about kicking Epstein out of his Mar-a-Lago club and strongly suggests that Epstein introduced Trump to his wife Melania," the report's authors write. "The evidence demonstrates that Trump has lied about the nature and extent of his relationship with Epstein dozens of times incriminating behavior for someone who supposedly has nothing to hide.""

GMaster0 said:

---

New congressional reports tying Trump to Epstein via a rape competition and 11 survivor interviews. Whitehouse says no biggie and denies allegations.

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/trump-an-active-participant-in-epsteins-abuse-cover-up-report-40594161/

"The report's authors cited evidence to the contrary, including:

-interviews conducted by committee staff
-11 survivor accounts
-FBI records
-documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, including unredacted passages not available to the public news reports from the 2000s through the present day

The report also cites new whistleblower testimony that supports researchers' findings that investigative documents that could implicate Trump were intentionally and illegally redacted or never made public.

"The evidence, much of it still hiding behind redactions in DOJ vaults, shows that Trump lied about kicking Epstein out of his Mar-a-Lago club and strongly suggests that Epstein introduced Trump to his wife Melania," the report's authors write. "The evidence demonstrates that Trump has lied about the nature and extent of his relationship with Epstein dozens of times incriminating behavior for someone who supposedly has nothing to hide.""

---

If you must believe Jamie Raskin and the Democrats report then believe them.

Curious how long this 'information' was available 16 years ago?

Gullible people are gullible. Carry on with the delusions.

74OA said:

---

setsmachine said:

---

Just curious, does anyone here truly believe the original claim of the Justice Dept that there is no list of clients that need to be prosecuted? Like, you actually deep down trust them when they say that? Not whether you think it's important enough to discuss or how prominent of an issue you think it should be, just do you actually believe it.

That would be mind blowing for anyone on either side of the aisle to truly believe that. This is a coverup that spans both parties across a couple decades

---

It's the "why" question that keeps rising to the top.

Why not be transparent? Why did two administrations opt to keep so much evidence close hold? Why is Trump's DOJ so determined to block all state and foreign enquiries? Why do bipartisan members of Congress apparently see enough that they repeatedly demand an open investigation? Why are so many now indifferent to pursuing justice despite vociferously supporting full transparency during the last campaign? Why?

---

It was nothing more than demanding something they hoped would damage Trump. Nothing more, nothing less. They did not "see enough" of anything other than opportunity to fundraise on Orange Man Bad.

The grand conspiracy **** remains pretty entertaining. Though it must be pointed out that I see it continues to be more about Mossad and less about any justice for victims.

And the DOJ has not "blocked all state and foreign inquiries". And people are not indifferent. Logical people have reasonably concluded there is simply no there there beyond what has already been released, which includes literally millions upon millions of files released by the Trump DOJ.

So do you believe the original claim of the Justice Dept that there is no list of clients that need to be prosecuted?

that claim is no different than the biden admin saying that they didnt force anyone to take the experimental shots. Whether theres an actual list or not is irrelevant. they have all the information they need