Trump : "I will doxx Epstein Client list if I'm elected"

[unknown]

But you can't name any of these people?

How many Epstein clients are included in "everybody they could"? Is the number zero?

@nikcers is vigorously trying to defend pedophiles and the people who protect them...

 

[nikcers]

But you can't name any of these people?

How many Epstein clients are included in "everybody they could"? Is the number zero?

Everyone who is suspected of a crime is investigated. Thats how law enforcement works. We don't recognize a monarchy or autocratic system where anybody wouldnt be investigated for a crime who is suspected of a crime.

If you suspect someone is committing a crime call the FBI.

 

[nikcers]

@nikcers is vigorously trying to defend pedophiles and the people who protect them...

There are real political issues like the age of consent laws and child marriages that are legal in some states that don't protect children. Why are you protecting those states?

 

[Invisible Man]

Everyone who is suspected of a crime is investigated. Thats how law enforcement works. We don't recognize a monarchy or autocratic system where anybody wouldnt be investigated for a crime who is suspected of a crime.

If you suspect someone is committing a crime call the FBI.

You are really dancing around this. You said that they (which I understood to mean the US Justice Department--but please correct me if you meant someone else) had gone after some high profile clients of Epstein.

Can you corroborate that claim? Do you actually know of any such clients that they went after at all? Can you give any names?

Or was that claim just something you made up, and you don't actually know anything at all about any Epstein clients who have been prosecuted by the US Justice Department?

 

[ClaytonB]

To recap. In post 154 I said something that was accurate.
In post 155 you quoted what I said in post 154, and then started your reply with the word "No," followed by saying a bunch of things that in no way contradicted anything I had said. And now you say that your whole point all along was simply to agree with me.

I'm not sure why you started your reply in 155 with, "No."

Perhaps, "Whoosh," refers to the sound your own words make while going over your own head.

To recap the recap:

In post 154, you said: "Implying" something for them means nothing at all.

To which I replied in Post 155: "No. They've been plenty explicit. Trump explicitly asked why we are even still talking about Epstein at all..."

My "No" is a reply to your false claim that their "implying" is meaningless. It is most certainly not meaningless, it is laden with meaning. The meaning, in this case, is "Let's stop talking about Epstein" because of the IMPLIED claim that Epstein had NO CLIENTS. They do not EXPLICITLY say that Epstein had no clients so that they can play the kind of weaponized ambiguity game you are playing in this very thread, running defense for the Establishment propagandists who are running defense for Epstein, that is, for Epstein's clients, whoever they are, which information the FBI certainly has -- the metonymous "Client List" -- but refuses to disclose. Which is what this conflagration is about. The DC Establishment has been covering this story up for nearly 8 years and really closer to 18 years if you start from Epstein's original charges, where he was convicted of committing sex crimes involving minors. One of the core engines driving MAGA is the fury of the American public at the open secret that DC are a hive of pedophiles and pederasts, among other crimes, and they all cover for each other. Instead of delivering the promised "Storm", Trump has instead betrayed MAGA at the 11th hour, and all we get is "Why are we still talking about Epstein?"

 

[nikcers]

You are really dancing around this. You said that they (which I understood to mean the US Justice Department--but please correct me if you meant someone else) had gone after some high profile clients of Epstein.

Can you corroborate that claim? Do you actually know of any such clients that they went after at all? Can you give any names?

Or was that claim just something you made up, and you don't actually know anything at all about any Epstein clients who have been prosecuted by the US Justice Department?

Yes I know the justice department investigates people over suspected crimes.

There is no evidence that they are shielding anybody.

Only people suspecting that they are shielding people.

Which is really only a myth. I love myths but I also dont consider them to be anything but entertaining.

 

[ClaytonB]

 

[nikcers]

The people investigate the government. We have self government in our country.

The myth of the state ruling our country is perpetuated by people who dont understand our system and low IQ individuals that can't hold two opposing ideas in their heads at the same time.

 

[ClaytonB]

We have a little thing called innocent until proven guilty.

But only for said CIA officials and people like them. For plebs like me, that rule does not apply... I am held guilty until proven innocent, if not de jure, then de facto which is a distinction without a difference in this area.

 

[nikcers]

But only for said CIA officials and people like them. For plebs like me, that rule does not apply... I am held guilty until proven innocent, if not de jure, then de facto which is a distinction without a difference in this area.

There is no them. Our system of laws is we the people.

 

[ClaytonB]

ow IQ individuals that can't hold two opposing ideas in their heads at the same time.

Ah yes, the bot is a proponent of "quantum logic" where the very same proposition can be BOTH true AND false at the same time and in the same sense... but only if you have a high enough IQ!!!

 

[nikcers]

Ah yes, the bot is a proponent of "quantum logic" where the very same proposition can be BOTH true AND false at the same time and in the same sense... but only if you have a high enough IQ!!!

The cat is both dead and alive until you open the box.

 

[Invisible Man]

Yes I know the justice department investigates people over suspected crimes.

There is no evidence that they are shielding anybody.

Only people suspecting that they are shielding people.

Which is really only a myth. I love myths but I also dont consider them to be anything but entertaining.

What are the names of some of the Epstein clients the Justice Department has gone after?

 

[ClaytonB]

There is no them. Our system of laws is we the people.

Wisdom so deep it must be meme'd:

 

[nikcers]

Wisdom so deep it must be meme'd:

Thats how we identify. Thats why we even put it on the money it says out of many, one.

E pluribus unum

 

[ClaytonB]

The cat is both dead and alive until you open the box.

More wisdom so deep it can only be meme'd:

 

[nikcers]

What are the names of some of the Epstein clients the Justice Department has gone after?

File a freedom of information request.

We have all kinds of public information available that is requested. Im not sure what they can legally release but im sure you can get some kind of response.

 

[Invisible Man]

File a freedom of information request.

OK. So the number of Epstein clients that the US Justice Department has gone after that you are actually aware of is zero.

So why did you assert they had gone after high profile Epstein clients, as if you actually knew that to be the case, when in reality, you are not aware of any?

 

[nikcers]

OK. So the number of Epstein clients that the US Justice Department has gone after that you are actually aware of is zero.

So why did you assert they had gone after high profile Epstein clients, as if you actually knew that to be the case, when in reality, you are not aware of any?

Why do you assert that they wouldnt go after people suspected of a crime?

I have lots of evidence that we do have law enforcement. This is where people get caught and go to prison.

The Larry Nassar Case: What Happened and How the Fallout Is Spreading (Published 2018)

The string of events in American gymnastics that ended in a Michigan courtroom began nearly two years ago. Here’s a look at the scandal as it continues to unfold.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Invisible Man]

Why do you assert that they wouldnt go after people suspected of a crime?

I have lots of evidence that we do have law enforcement. This is where people get caught and go to prison.

The Larry Nassar Case: What Happened and How the Fallout Is Spreading (Published 2018)

The string of events in American gymnastics that ended in a Michigan courtroom began nearly two years ago. Here’s a look at the scandal as it continues to unfold.

www.nytimes.com

Please provide the quote of me making the assertion that you say I made.

And I wasn't referring to a generic claim about the existence of law enforcement. You asserted that the US Justice Department had gone after high profile Epstein clients. You even included that detail that these clients were "high profile."

You just pulled that claim out of thin air. You had no knowledge of anything at all to corroborate that claim. Maybe you misremembered the civil suit against Prince Andrew and thought that it was a criminal prosecution. If so, just say so. At least that would be an explanation instead of playing word games.