2025 Jeffery Epstein Files

[Historical Strelkov]

"Guys, he didn't actually grab women by their pussies! He just said he did while running Miss Teen USA, and being friends with the world's most prolific sex-trafficker! That's totally different!

Whats wrong with women letting you grab their pussies because you're a star?

lets lean all the way into gilding the lily.

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

You looking for another thread ban?
You do give a good indication on how you and the rest of MAGA is taking this debacle. A quick look across Xhitter shows a quite a bit of of dismay and regret among the ranks. Finally getting to see the real Donald J Trump, Supreme Dirtbag?

You upset that people don't just gobble whatever shit you spew, cunt? That's a real shame.

The cracks are starting to show.

The walls are closing in, folks. This time for realsies. Android Raptor slightly less spergy parlor friend said so.

I am sure Trumps legal team is very good at intimidation.

Remember lads, in the mind of leftoid trash, it is LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE for trump or anyone else aligned with him not to be guilty. These people have complete, unshakable faith in orange man bad. Completely, and utterly brainwashed.

 

[Drip Torch]

@Fishmalk Observer, then just explain this. I want your explanation.
Why did Trump flipflop on the Epstein list? Is this more "saying a thing is not the same as doing the thing"?

 

[Froggy Fresh Sextape]

Completely, and utterly brainwashed.

Damn, did you look into a mirror

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

@Fishmalk Observer, then just explain this. I want your explanation.
Why did Trump flipflop on the Epstein list?

I don't know. And neither do you, that's the point.

Edit

Damn, did you look into a mirror

No, but did you. I'm rubber you are glue etc.
It's like i'm really arguing with my 3 year old nephew. He can do cartwheels, can you do that ?

 

[Drip Torch]

I don't know. And neither do you, that's the point.

The point is American citizens are being kept in the dark by own government. Over alleged pedophiles, Republican and Democrat. The president and his cadre of podcasters is involved in this obfuscation. Something about this isn't right.
This is an absolute shitshow and only shows America as weak from within.

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

Yeah. Trump said to release all the grand jury shit yesterday. You should be ecstatic.

 

[Drip Torch]

Yeah. Trump said to release all the grand jury shit yesterday. You should be ecstatic.

The wheels of government turn slowly. So the public should get them in about 6 months to 8 months, and [REDACTED].

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

The wheels of government turn slowly. So the public should get them in about 6 months to 8 months, and [REDACTED].

Yeah, better than what we got with the mushbrain and cackles. See yah in 6-8 months then.

 

[Drip Torch]

Yeah, better than what we got with the mushbrain and cackles. See yah in 6-8 months then.

Be prepared for disappointment, it could a nothing burger that's been beat to death. Still not a good look to base a campaign strategy around a nothing burger, and have your base rally to it.

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

Be prepared for disappointment.

Indeed. As we all know, Trump will never get elected1 time 2 times 3 times get all the swing state win the popular get hegseth confirmed get jfk jr confirmed deport millions of mexicans defund Usaid defund the DoE get rid of TRO's get 16 million from Paramount.

Toodles

 

[Drip Torch]

Indeed. As we all know, Trump will never get elected1 time 2 times 3 times get all the swing state win the popular get hegseth confirmed get jfk jr confirmed deport millions of mexicans defund Usaid defund the DoE get rid of TRO's get 16 million from Paramount.

Toodles

Too bad fighting inflation, strengthening our infrascture against natural disasters and keeping us out of wars wasn't on that list. Damn shame. No we are given squabbling over alleged pedophiles, billionaires and documents.

 

[Active User]

There's a legal principle I can't remember the name of which basically is that statements someone makes which worsen their own standing are more easily assumed truthful, because there's not really a reason to lie to worsen your own position. This is especially true when people aren't aware that they're worsening their own position that way. Archaeologists have made use of it too, the way we know about most of the elements of something like the Roman Empire which don't jive with modern sensibilities (like that time a 6 year old got raped before being killed because the law didn't really have provisions for execution of a virgin) are because the Romans themselves preserved the record and just didn't see it as bad.

tl;dr, if someone tells you in private straight up that they're a sex pest you probably aren't losing much by believing them and proceeding to no longer associate with them because them lying in such a case really raises more questions than answers

 

[Drip Torch]

There's a legal principle I can't remember the name of which basically is that statements someone makes which worsen their own standing are more easily assumed truthful, because there's not really a reason to lie to worsen your own position. This is especially true when people aren't aware that they're worsening their own position that way. Archaeologists have made use of it too, the way we know about most of the elements of something like the Roman Empire which don't jive with modern sensibilities (like that time a 6 year old got raped before being killed because the law didn't really have provisions for execution of a virgin) are because the Romans themselves preserved the record and just didn't see it as bad.

Statement Against Interest

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

There's a legal principle I can't remember the name of which basically is that statements someone makes which worsen their own standing are more easily assumed truthful, because there's not really a reason to lie to worsen your own position. This is especially true when people aren't aware that they're worsening their own position that way. Archaeologists have made use of it too, the way we know about most of the elements of something like the Roman Empire which don't jive with modern sensibilities (like that time a 6 year old got raped before being killed because the law didn't really have provisions for execution of a virgin) are because the Romans themselves preserved the record and just didn't see it as bad.

tl;dr, if someone tells you in private straight up that they're a sex pest you probably aren't losing much by believing them and proceeding to no longer associate with them because them lying in such a case really raises more questions than answers

That's cool. Still doesn't show it happened.

But I get it man, it would be so much easier to hate orange man bad if this was chyna and you had to prove your innocence instead of having to prove your accusatory claims. God damn, I hate living in a free country

 

[Drip Torch]

Tl;dr, if someone tells you in private straight up that they're a sex pest you probably aren't losing much by believing them and proceeding to no longer associate with them because them lying in such a case really raises more questions than answers

The Billy Bush interview, turns out it wasn't a private interview.
Que "but it was locker room talk!"

 

[Active User]

That's cool. Still doesn't show it happened.

As I mentioned, statements against interest are indeed the types of things that people will use in court to show that something happened. The claim made is that Trump did something he said he did. If you choose to believe he was arbitrarily lying in that conversation despite it being against his own interests, then how would you be able to trust him enough to TRVST THE PLVN? Doesn't exactly seem like a reliable person.

This is, of course, setting aside that you do not need to meet a judiciary standard to dislike somebody, especially not on this website. I don't think the favorite conspiracies of the A&N race, be they loony or reasonable, are going to be proven in courts of law anytime soon. But does that actually matter when it comes to perception?

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

As I mentioned, statements against interest are indeed the types of things that people will use in court to show that something happened. The claim made is that Trump did something he said he did. If you choose to believe he was arbitrarily lying in that conversation despite it being against his own interests, then how would you be able to trust him enough to TRVST THE PLVN? Doesn't exactly seem like a reliable person.

This is, of course, setting aside that you do not need to meet a judiciary standard to dislike somebody, especially not on this website. I don't think the favorite conspiracies of the A&N race, be they loony or reasonable, are going to be proven in courts of law anytime soon. But does that actually matter when it comes to perception?

Are they considered proof? That's a simple y/n question

 

[Active User]

Are they considered proof? That's a simple y/n question

Nothing in the legal world is a simple yes or no question. The answer is going to depend on if you consider testimony as proof or not, since the statement against interest stuff is a hearsay exception. Ultimately testimony is going to make up a large amount of the backing for whatever decision is reached so if forced to oversimplify, I would say yes.

 

[GlupShitto]

Too bad fighting inflation, strengthening our infrascture against natural disasters and keeping us out of wars wasn't on that list. Damn shame. No we are given squabbling over alleged pedophiles, billionaires and documents.

Because of Trump, the country is currently the best it's been since September 10th 2001.