Which can only mean that they will redact every Repub name and probably add in a few Dem names for kicks (I'm thinking AOC and maybe FDR).
#4 | Posted by censored

Before announcing that he would direct Bondi to investigate Epstein's ties to Bill Clinton, he claimed that Democrats had fabricated a slew of sinister allegations inserted into the files that would frame him and other Republicans. To me, that basically implies his own DOJ and FBI engaged in similar behavior, just with Democratic names swapped in. With Trump, it so often comes back to projection: the very things he accuses others of doing are the things he's actually doing himself.

Which is why we know that he never intends to do it.
#6 | Posted by Zed

This is why he's commanding Bondi to open an investigation into Bill Clinton and Democrats' ties to Epstein, which would justify Bondi refusing to release the files pending an ongoing investigation.

The irony being that his own FBI Director, Kash Patel, testified to congress that there's no evidence that anyone other than Epstein abused children, meaning there wouldn't be any more prosecutions and that the case was closed. This also harckens back to his first impeachment, when he held Ukraine's funding hostage in order to convince Zelenski to "simply announce the opening of an investigation into Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, and Burisma." No actual investigation was needed, just the announcement, which he seems to be doing here with Epstein and Clinton.

Trump will find a way to slime his way out of this one.
#8 | Posted by Alexandrite

Quiet, piggy.

If Trump is not in those files grabbing a child by the -----, or a video of him doing something, well, you know, That is a big political gamble Democrats will have lost.
#17 | Posted by boaz

Your entire defense of Trump rests on pretending the only possible standard of guilt is "caught on video abusing a child."

That's not a defense; that's you raising the bar so high that nothing he actually did can ever count.

Trump already confessed to sexual assault in his own words, on tape, in front of the entire country. He bragged about behavior that is literally a crime. Multiple women gave matching accounts. The pattern is clear to everyone except people determined not to see it.

So yes, when someone with that history chooses to socialize with Epstein for years, it's relevant. You don't get to erase Trump's own admissions just because they're politically inconvenient.

If the standard you demand for Trump is "must be filmed assaulting a minor," then of course you'll never find him guilty of anything. But that says more about your threshold than his innocence.

Release the emails, all of them.
#16 | Posted by Petrous

At one point, this was a bipartisan agreement. Now the chickens have come home to roost.

I accept both are bad boys but which ones are stupid enough to mess with minors.
That's the question.
#37 | Posted by BillJohnson

Bad boys?! WTF, Bill? Why are you downplaying sexual assault? You sound like a ------- monster.

She claimed penile penetration, and even the jury didn't buy it.
#43 | Posted by BillJohnson

And just what might be your opinion about that?

Exaggerating much?
#50 | Posted by BillJohnson

"bad boys"

The irony is rife, Bill. Have some self-awareness for once in your life.

#49 | Posted by BillJohnson

By your own "opinion" of what happened, Trump literally described and BRAGGED about what he was found liable of doing. Do you believe him when he says he did these things? Is it believable that Trump grabbed Carol by the ----- without her consent, considering he's admitted to doing exactly that on a routine basis?

Suddenly BJ is out of opinions.

#56 | Posted by A_Friend

BJ is just riffing off his opinions. Facts don't matter to him, he doesn't even consider them. Just blissful chosen ignorance.

#58 | Posted by Corky

It was always Trump's trump card. Even if he has to throw Kash Patel under the bus, considering Patel testified before congress that there was no evidence to warrant further investigations let alone prosecutions related to the Epstein files (i.e., "case closed"), these files will not see the light of day.

Stay focused.
#61 | Posted by BillJohnson

Just asking for your opinion, Bill. What happened to you?

#60 | Posted by BillJohnson

So you're not going to answer the question? It's really simple Bill, do you believe Trump when he said that he routinely commits sexual assault against women? And if so, why is it so hard for you to believe that he wouldn't also do such things to girls under the age of 18?

Do you think he was asking for their IDs before grabbing the -------?

IOW, Bill, your logic simply doesn't compute. Which is clearly why you're ignoring the actual question: Is Trump a serial sexual predator, as he has bragged about, accused of dozens of times, and has been held liable for? Time for you to focus and provide an opinion.

*And if so, why is it so hard for you to believe that he would also do such things to girls under the age of 18?

Even if Trump was exonerated in these files, you would still say that.
#84 | Posted by boaz

Weren't you one of the ones spouting off about how Biden undoubtedly would have released the files had there been anything incriminating against Trump? And the fact that he didn't absolves Trump?

Let's see how consistent you are, considering if there was anything in the files that would exonerate Trump, he would have released the files earlier this year. No Maxwell appeal, no ongoing investigation, just Kash Patel declaring there's no evidence to warrant further prosecutions, which according to Trump is false.

just what he's done on the border has helped America more than the last three Presidents alone.

#85 | Posted by boaz

In what way? Be specific.

93 | Posted by BillJohnson

Wow! Could ever be more disingenuous? JFC the scenario you describe is significantly different from what Trump has admitted to doing. It's quite pathetic you can't/refuse to acknowledge this if only to protect your cult leader.

See Bill, this is why you and your ilk are consistently being called cultists. Your thinking and rationalization displayed here represents exhibit A that you're in a cult.

Swallow it.

Have you read the news?
#95 | Posted by BillJohnson

Link up! Be specific and stop making excuses for sexual predators.

99 | Posted by eberly

Apparently Bill doesn't understand simple social and emotional cues. The girl doesn't want to be penetrated? She won't let you, or she will say no. That's always been my experience. You know how I know she was okay with me making such a move? When she grabs my dick without asking for consent. It's a give and take scenario involving trust. Would be very interested in hearing Bill's thoughts about Trump's perspective on building trust in a physical relationship.

Concerning Trump and lingerie, there was nothing more than finger.
She claimed there was more but she failed to convince the court.
To hell with the court. Right?
#105 | Posted by BillJohnson

Which according to you, and not the courts, is totally okay, right?

Or he pretends not to understand.

#111 | Posted by eberly

He pretends a lot, apparently. LOL

Well....a guys gotta get laid, don't he?
"Before we go out to eat, and return to your apartment for drinks, may I have your prior authorization to begin foreplay?"
#113 | Posted by BillJohnson

Is that your rationalization for Trump's admitted sexual predator behavior? Or are you pretending again?

his Cult Leader.
#116 | Posted by Corky

Maybe he's just pretending, right EBERLY?