Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Recently Flagged Comments

Recently flagged comments from all news stories on this site. Users must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you want to retrieve a comment of yours that was recently deleted, visit your user page and click the Moderation link.

@#4 ... if there isnt dirt on Trump it's because the files were scrubbed. ...

Were they scrubbed?

The FBI Redacted Trump's Name in the Epstein Files (August 2025)
www.bloomberg.com

... What happened next kicked off a new phase in the Epstein saga. As I reported in the March 28th edition of FOIA Files, Patel directed FBI special agents from the New York and Washington field offices to join the bureau's FOIA employees at its sprawling Central Records Complex in Winchester, Virginia and another building a few miles away.

They were instructed to search for and review every single Epstein-related document and determine what could be released. That included a mountain of material accumulated by the FBI over nearly two decades, including grand jury testimony, prosecutors' case files, as well as tens of thousands of pages of the bureau's own investigative files on Epstein. It was a herculean task that involved as many as 1,000 FBI agents and other personnel pulling all-nighters while poring through more than 100,000 documents, according to a July letter from Senator Dick Durbin to Bondi. ...




#137 | Posted by BellRinger

Maybe it's this:

Research shows that in typically nonwhite voting districts, especially those composed predominantly of Black residents, the average wait time to vote in person is significantly longer than in typically white voting districts.

One notable study using smartphone geolocation data from the 2016 presidential election found that voters in entirely Black neighborhoods waited 29% longer on average to cast their ballots and were 74% more likely to experience wait times exceeding 30 minutes compared to voters in entirely white neighborhoods. This racial disparity in wait times persisted even after controlling for differences in population density, poverty, and geographic location within the same states and counties. The mechanisms for the disparity appear complex and include factors beyond voter congestion or intentional partisan actions, pointing toward systemic resource allocation and administrative challenges at polling places in minority communities.[1][2][3]

More recent data from the 2024 elections indicated that Black, White, Hispanic, and Asian in-person voters reported more similar wait times, suggesting some improvements in mitigating these disparities may be occurring; nonetheless, longstanding disparities have been documented over multiple election cycles in previous years.[4]

So the average in-person voting wait times have historically been longer in predominantly nonwhite districts than in white districts, reflecting persistent racial disparities in election administration and resource distribution at polling sites. These issues have drawn attention for their potential to disenfranchise minority voters by creating additional barriers to voting.[2][3][5][1][4]

[1](www.chicagobooth.edu)
[2](www.anderson.ucla.edu)
[3](www.nber.org)
[4](www.pewresearch.org)
[5](www.brennancenter.org)
[6](www.scientificamerican.com)
[7](direct.mit.edu)
[8](usafacts.org)
[9](calmatters.org)
[10](cawp.rutgers.edu)

www.cnn.com

House Democrat exchanged texts with Epstein during 2019 congressional hearing.: CNN headline.

Release the emails, all of them.

From another article but pertinent: "The public perception of this case is that it's about politics," Judge Jeffrey Brown, a Trump appointee, wrote in his decision, which was joined by Judge David Guaderrama, an Obama appointee. "To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 Map. But it was much more than just politics."

The impetus for Texas' new maps was a letter from Harmeet Dhillon, the assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice, that argued, erroneously, that the state's "coalition" districts those with majority-minority populations where that majority consists of more than one minority group were unconstitutional following a decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Petteway v. Galveston County.

"Any mention of majority White Democrat districts"which DOJ presumably would have also targeted if its aims were partisan rather than racial"was conspicuously absent," Brown wrote.

Redistricting was added to the special legislative session called by Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, two days after Dhillon sent her letter.

"In other words, the Governor explicitly directed the Legislature to redistrict based on race," Brown wrote. "In press appearances, the Governor plainly and expressly disavowed any partisan objective and instead repeatedly stated that his goal was to eliminate coalition districts and create new majority-Hispanic districts."

Brown's decision eviscerates Dhillon's letter as containing "so many factual, legal, and typographical errors" that it is "challenging to unpack." The main problem is that the letter completely misinterprets the Petteway decision by arguing that its finding that the Voting Rights Act cannot require the drawing of coalition districts means that coalition districts are therefore unconstitutional.

"Petteway's holding that [Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act] does not require [coalition] districts' has no bearing on the permissibility of such districts as a matter of legislative choice or discretion,'" Brown wrote, quoting from other legal precedents.

Brown goes on to point out that Dhillon's explanations for which districts were unconstitutional coalition districts included multiple factual inaccuracies, including the background about how the district lines were initially drawn. He also notes what is missing from her letter.

www.huffpost.com

Mike Johnson can't have it both ways...

Earlier this year, Trump's own DOJ announced that when it came to the Epstein files, that there was no there there. That is that there was no evidence that would lead the DOJ to open investigations into any previously un-indicted individuals.

But this morning, prior to the vote on releasing the Epstein files, Johnson condemned the Democrats and the Biden administration for not taking up this issue when they had their chance.

If what Trump's DOJ said was true, then it was also true four year ago.

As I've said all along, it was Trump and the MAGA crowd who made Jeffery Epstein an issue during the 2024 campaign and if you look into it, you can see how this all went back to the birth of MAGA during the 2016 campaign when they attacked Hillary and the Democrats over all sorts of stories about pedophilia, remember 'Pizzagate'. I think that during Trump's first term, despite Epstein's indictments and eventual 'suicide', the pedophilia issue sort of died down. However, when Trump was lanuching his 2024 campaign, in order to stir up the MAGA base and it's still deep seated, smoldering conspriacy theories over pedophilia, he made this pormise to release the Epstein files, along with the files on JFK, Martin Luther King Jr, UFO's, etc. Anyway, I think Trump just assumed that while these issues would make for good sound bites to toss around during his stump speeches, that once he was back in office, it would all go the way it had gone during his first time around, that is that the whole pedophilia issue would be forgotten as he implemented what was his really on his mind, that is 'Project 2025'.

And as far as I can find, it appears that the only mention of pedophilia in 'Project 2025' was with respect to using it to undermine LGBTQ Rights.

OCU

@#2 ... Obviously, DOGE should have gotten rid of that pesky deep state abomination. ...

Funny you should mention that.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) s currently being dismembered, with a planned death.

To wit ...

Musk Wants to Delete the CFPB to Enrich Himself. It Gives a Green Light to All Corporate Scammers. (February 13, 2025)
rooseveltinstitute.org

... In the name of "government efficiency," Elon Musk has marked the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) for "deletion," though there is significant pushback to the outlandish idea that a special government contractor could zero out an agency funded by Congress.

Acting CFPB director Russell Vought -- a Project 2025 coauthor who has vowed to put federal workers "in trauma" -- has ordered the agency to halt all of its work.

And several Musk loyalists have reportedly infiltrated the agency's computer systems and sent out blanket termination emails to dozens of employees. What they're searching for is unclear, but it likely has nothing to do with efficiency. The CFPB has an exemplary track record as a steward of public resources.

Its 2025 budget of $823 million is a fraction of the $20.7 billion it has returned to the American people since its founding by cracking down on corporate fraud and abuse and enforcing consumer protection laws.

It's useful to think about this latest attack through the lens of Musk's personal financial interests. He is reportedly working with Visa to launch his own digital payment system, "X Money," which would subject his platform to the CFPB's regulatory oversight.

Not coincidentally, Musk's attempts to destroy the agency come just a few months after it finalized a rule expanding its supervisory authority to include digital payments apps, including these platforms' handling of consumer data and potential role in attempts to defraud older adults.

That Musk sees the elimination of an anti-scam agency as central to his project should alarm everyone. ...


@#61 ... A 2020 Justice Department report into the case found "poor judgment" was made in giving Epstein a sweetheart deal at the time."...

Ya think.

Yet Pres Trump appointed Mr Acosta to his Cabinet.

As a reward?

Alexander Acosta
en.wikipedia.org

... In 2007"2008, as U.S. attorney, Acosta approved a plea deal that allowed child-trafficking ring-leader Jeffrey Epstein to plead guilty to a single state charge of solicitation, in exchange for a federal non-prosecution agreement.[2]

After Epstein's arrest in July 2019 on sex trafficking charges, Acosta faced renewed and harsher criticism for his role in the 2008 non-prosecution agreement, as well as criticism and calls for his resignation as Secretary of Labor; he resigned on July 19 and was replaced by Eugene Scalia.

Since March of 2025, Acosta has been a member of the board of directors of Newsmax and serves as its Audit Committee chair.[3] ...



Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy