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

[nikcers]

OK, and who's that slutty looking young woman Trump has his arm around?

I think she is gorgeous.

Trump is a lucky man.

 

[Voluntarist]

I was wondering, today, whether Presidential Pardons can include a Non-Disclosure Agreement

 

[Anti Globalist]

DOJ to meet with Ghislaine Maxwell

https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-doj-to-meet-with-ghislaine-maxwell

Loading…

thepostmillennial.com

Bet the DOJ will be coaching her on what to say if she ever testifies to Congress.

 

[acptulsa]

Arrested for threatening harm to everyone on a nonexistent list. Might as well arrest people for threatening Jar-Jar Binks. Gotta find him first!

Those psychos must be scared.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Look who suddenly gives a shit.

https://x.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1947730157264933165

The crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and his enablers shattered countless lives and exposed a vast system of exploitation and violence against women and girls.

Today, I am proud to join as a cosponsor of the Epstein Files Transparency Act — a vital step toward truth and accountability in the face of unspeakable abuse. With this resolution, we declare unequivocally that violence against women will not be ignored.

For years, Epstein’s victims — many of them just children when they were abused — have waited for justice, often in silence and in pain.

They deserve answers. They deserve dignity. And they deserve action from their government.

That is why it is especially shameful that Speaker Johnson has shut down the House of Representatives for the summer to avoid a vote on this resolution.

To block transparency in this manner is not only an abdication of duty — it is a profound insult to the victims who have carried the burden of this trauma for decades.

The American people deserve to know the full extent of who was involved with Epstein and all of them must be held accountable — no matter how powerful.

As we pursue accountability, we must respect the voices and privacy of the survivors to honor their courage, protect their dignity, and ensure that the full truth comes to light.

Justice delayed is justice denied. The American people — and the survivors — deserve better.

 

[TheTexan]

Look who suddenly gives a shit.

I thought she died I guess that was someone else

 

[otherone]

I thought she died I guess that was someone else

Her portfolio says otherwise.

 

[Occam's Banana]

DOJ to meet with Ghislaine Maxwell

Post in thread 'Ghislaine Maxwell files appeal'

Jul 22, 2025

EXPOSED | Feds Secretly Gave Immunity To ALL Epstein’s Clients & Co-Conspirators.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxJIX59ed9Q
{Nate The Lawyer | 22 July 2025}

Ghislaine Maxwell’s appeal to the Supreme Court could overturn her conviction due to Epstein’s controversial immunity deal. Did the U.S. government violate its own promise, putting Maxwell’s prison sentence in jeopardy? Nate breaks down the shocking legal loophole that might allow Maxwell to walk free, highlighting a deep divide among federal courts. Epstein’s infamous 2007 deal immunized Maxwell and...

• Occam's Banana

 

[vita3]

 

[Invisible Man]

EXPOSED | Feds Secretly Gave Immunity To ALL Epstein’s Clients & Co-Conspirators.

If true, this means the feds had a defined set of clients (i.e. a client list) to whom they gave immunity.

 

[Occam's Banana]

If true, this means the feds had a defined set of clients (i.e. a client list) to whom they gave immunity.

Does it, though?

If "blanket immunity" can cover various unspecified crimes possibly committed by a particular defendant, why not also various unspecified possible criminal defendants (where "unspecified" means not only "not explicitly enumerated by the grantors of such immunity", but also "unknown to the grantors of immunity at the time of the grant")?

 

[Invisible Man]

Does it, though?

If "blanket immunity" can cover various unspecified crimes possibly committed by a particular defendant, why not also various unspecified possible criminal defendants (where "unspecified" means not only "not explicitly enumerated by the grantors of such immunity", but also "unknown to the grantors of immunity at the time of the grant")?

What would be the point of giving immunity to unspecified people? What is gotten by the Justice Department in exchange for that?

 

[Occam's Banana]

What would be the point of giving immunity to unspecified people? What is gotten by the Justice Department in exchange for that?

I guess it would depend on how much they valued whatever other information the primary grantee offered them in return (along with whatever other motives they might have for not pursuing matters against the secondary grantees). There could be a number of reasons they might be satisfied with an implicit exchange of winks and nods that leave little or nothing "on paper" (at least, not on any "official" paper).

File under: "Deniability, Plausible"

 

[Occam's Banana]

 

[acptulsa]

 

[ClaytonB]

 

[unknown]

 

[unknown]

 

[unknown]

WTF is going on.

 

[Voluntarist]

Do you remember
His pledge to expose
Sex offenders ...