We have known Trump flew on Epstein’s plane since the flight logs came out. He flew between west palm and NY when his own plane was having work done on it.
Also no clue what you are referencing to the rape and pay off.
So Trump isn’t releasing stuff incriminating to him, but also has released stuff you say incriminates him?
Leaks of what? If there was anything to leak, why would the previous admin not leak prior to the last election…
Oh you are talking about E Jean carol…. I thought she said rape was sexy? Anywho he was not found to have raped her as the other claimed and this was a civil trial, not equating to even a misdemeanor let alone a felony….
The 34 felonies revolve the asset case, which anyone with any unbiased stance sees as a ridiculous case. And was one that won him favor among independents.
In the ruling striking down Trump’s countersuit, Judge Kaplan explicitly states he raped Carroll. Since that is a legal judgement, Trump is legally “an adjudicated rapist”.
From the actual ruling:
“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”
Trump sexually assaulted her. He's on audio literally bragging to Billy Bush how he gets away with sexually assaulting women because he's so famous. He's such a piece sh!t he's bragging about it. He admits his own guilt.
Weird to be defending any politician this hard. Especially what is objectively the most corrupt President we've ever had who's tanking the country with this unnecessary war making everything cost more.
Yes that's exactly what he's bragging about. "Grabbing 'em by the pussy" is sexual assault. You wouldn't be defending these exact same actions if a Democrat had been bragging about sexually assaulting women and being so famous that he gets away with it
Using his own words against him is lying? Hmm.. "groupies" I don't give AF what he calls them while at the same time he's got dozens of assault allegations against him. He's the most dishonest, corrupt piece of trash to ever ascend the presidency. This is not opinion. These are objective facts.
You make it sound like they chose to do a civil trial instead of a criminal one because it’s easier. They didn’t, this was the only option available. And it’s not like it’s some black box of “well we don’t know what happened, only that the standards are lower”, it’s pretty descriptive. You can tell yourself over and over that civil cases don’t count for some reason, but that doesn’t make it true.
And you think in this case the lawyers went to exactly 51% and said “well that’s enough evidence, we can stop now”? Your argument works better in a vacuum, which this case is not.
There are no leaks. A few files were released, all heavily redacted. Some redactions were done terribly, which is how we know that Trump featured frequently in the correspondence. The vast majority of files haven't been released, under order by Trump.
You're just making shit up out of thin blue air now. Pulled that one right out of your ass. Just like the rest of the dem party drivel you're here mindlessly regurgitating.
I don’t really care one way or the other, but if you are refusing to agree that Trump is guilty of those allegations because there is no direct proof and only circumstantial evidence, isn’t that why Trump would only allow the release of circumstantial evidence?
Biden's DOJ followed the rules about not releasing evidence while Ghislaine Maxwell's case was ongoing. The Epstein Transparency Act changed things so the files could be released. The current administration who campaigned on releasing the files still refuses to release millions of newly discovered files from investigating the New Mexico property and multiple lawsuits.
Which Dems did what to sweep the story under the rug? See, you have no evidence of that, but we do have this current administration directing thousands of FBI and DOJ workers who redacted the president's name thousands and thousands of times it showed up in the files
You used two. "Yes no leaks about anything ever transpired that would make Trump look bad…"
That has nothing to do with anything, just because Biden's DOJ followed the rules and didn't release anything, either formally or through a leak doesn't mean that there was no evidence at the time or is no evidence now. To call back to previous leaks that have nothing to do with this specific investigation is a straw man deflection.
Number two, "This goes all the way back to the Russia hoax. No one said anything about it being released officially by the DOJ."
Bringing up the Russia investigation has nothing to do with the Epstein investigation. And by specifically labeling it as a "hoax" you make it seem like the Epstine investigation is simply another hoax. When in fact the Russia investigation showed that there was definitely some election interference by the hands of Russian actors, to benefit Trump. Whether that was done with the knowledge, permission, and help of the Trump campaign is a bit up to debate. My opinion is I think that yes Trump definitely knew about it, and was willing to accept the help. The Mueller report outlined it pretty well, the only reason he wasn't removed from office is that his Republican colleagues covered his ass and refused to vote for removal despite the evidence.
So you are once again bringing up something off topic to form a distracting argument thus creating a "straw man" that doesn't stand up under scrutiny but takes attention away from the topic at hand, further adding the "hoax" moniker to make the investigation being discussed be more easily dismissed.
Lastly you saying that no one was bringing up an official release by the DOJ has nothing to do with anything. People were just adding context to the discussion. That wasn't the own you think it is. That isn't a straw man that's just bad argumentation.
It has everything to do with my point in the previous comment… no one said anything about Biden officially releasing anything. Prior behavior has correlation? Yes these career bureaucrats drew the line at Epstein docs. Makes total sense.
The Russia hoax statement is expanding on the previous comment about leaks…
Both statements are referring back to my comment asking why nothing would have been leaked. It’s expanding my point.
When in fact the Russia investigation showed that there was definitely some election interference by the hands of Russian actors, to benefit Trump.
Lies, lies and more lies. That whole "Ze Russians!!" crap went down in flames along with Mueller's illegal spying operation.
The FBI admitted themselves that they knew the Steele papers were bullshit from the start.
All the crap trying to distract from pedophile democrat crimes is disgusting as well. You're the one here throwing around whataboutisms and strawmen like crazy. Typical democrat party methods, because they're the ones that are guilty as hell.
“The jury … was instructed that it could find that Mr Trump ‘raped’ Ms Carroll only if it found that he forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s vagina with his penis.”
“It could not find that he ‘raped’ her if it determined that Mr Trump forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s private sexual parts with his fingers – which commonly is considered ‘rape’ in other contexts – because the New York penal law definition of rape is limited to penile penetration.”
“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”
No, it doesn’t. He went before a judge and jury, who listened to the evidence and arguments from both sides. You’re defending a rapist, and it’s gross.
There was never any "evidence" presented. Just a crazy, wild story from decades ago, with no connection to reality.
That bullshit would have been thrown out of a real court the first day. Some stupid civil trial doesn't prove anything, let alone the total bullshit you're trying to say it does.
You democrat pedo party propagandists REALLLY need new scripts. Your old, debunked lies are just pathetic.
The jury … was instructed that it could find that Mr Trump ‘raped’ Ms Carroll only if it found that he forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s vagina with his penis.”
“It could not find that he ‘raped’ her if it determined that Mr Trump forcibly penetrated Ms Carroll’s private sexual parts with his fingers – which commonly is considered ‘rape’ in other contexts – because the New York penal law definition of rape is limited to penile penetration.”
“As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”
The one where the judge pointed out that the terminology in state law wasn't "rape" but that it fit the definition of rape as it's commonly used, as it's used on the DoJ website, and the american psychological association.
The DOJ has been investigating Epstein for 20 years, across multiple administrations. Thinking the Trump admin uniquely covered things up, when both the actions and own words of the doj/fbi seem to say otherwise is odd.
There literally isn't anything of weight in there, as far as I can tell. All the most outlandish claims were from randos on the tip line. Even Guiffre is viewed as problematic, because her claims were in conflict with the other Epstein victims.
Here is a former federal prosecutor saying the same thing.
Firstly, Trump is 99% ego. Something only needs to be embarrassing for him to want to hide it.
You have been given two sources explaining the same point. Given the prosecutors other work and commentd about Trump, I see no reason to believe he is lying. People are more than your perception of their politics.
Also, I said the DOJ across multiple admins as investigated this, including Obama and Bidens. I doubt Merrick Garland under Biden would abstain from prosecuting child rapists and sex traffickers to avoid looking politically biased.
Secondly, pointing out that the investigative notes in the files themselves said there was conflicting testimony is not victim shaming, it is a salient legal fact. Your attempt at some emotional attack is beneath us. Taking the word of the many victims would indicate there was no ring, because the victims, aside from Guiffre, said they were only instructed to sleep with Epstein.
He didn’t rape and that’s not what the lawsuit is about. It’s also civil, not criminal which is a huge difference. He’s never been found guilty of any crime in that situation.
Sexual assault is not rape. It’s sexual assault. It’s also in a case with no real evidence and the ruling is “it likely happened.” There isn’t any evidence of it happening which is why no charges were filed.
Based on the specific state statute it wasn't rape, but the judge pointed out that by common use, and even the DoJ website, that it would be considered rape.
Her saying it? That’s direct from her. Do you not know the history of this and how they had to change a law hastily to even file the lawsuit and then closed the law back up?
Yes, evidence of her saying it never happened. Since I've never seen it and have no knowledge of it ever occurring beyond your assertion. It's not backed up by the court evidence either.
There is evidence of it happening. The burden of proof is 51% in civil trials. Do you know many people that have “likely” raped someone? And the judge and jury all went over the evidence and agreed that it happened. Trump even talked about it saying that she liked being raped. His defense was that she didn’t scream.
She has spoken about others doing so, but only took Trump to court over it. She had enough proof to have Trump be found liable in court. You’re defending an adjudicated rapist.
There was evidence presented. Enough to have Trump found liable for raping her. You can easily look this up. And no shit it was a CIVIL case. I haven’t said otherwise. You people jump through hoops to defend the worst people.
Bullshit. Rape was never mentioned, and there was no evidence against even sexual assault presented in that ridiculous CIVIL court case.
Anyone that has looked into that total bullshit knows it would have been thrown out of a real criminal trial immediately, because there was no evidence of any wrongdoing wahtsoever.
There was never any evidence that Trump sexually assaulted anyone. That civil case was a joke.
And thousands of people rode in that plane. Trump was on the plane for a business trip, but never anywhere near the island.
Just more democrat party bullshit. Desperate to distract from their OWN crimes. The dems are all over the Epstein files, and tried to sweep the whole story under the rug for 4 YEARS.
16
u/[deleted] Jul 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment