Epstein John Doe List New Year's Suprise

originally posted by: GrandmaX
I bet Trump is on that list, this will also disqualify Trump to run for 2024.

Here he is partying with Epstein.

You are so hellbent on your demonization of this guy...

It's kind of adorable, actually.

originally posted by: GrandmaX
I bet Trump is on that list, this will also disqualify Trump to run for 2024.

Here he is partying with Epstein.

Is Epstein one of those ALIENS that's living among humans, as described by a Pentagon whistleblower? He has at least 100 teeth!

originally posted by: GrandmaX
I bet Trump is on that list, this will also disqualify Trump to run for 2024.

No. Having your picture taken with Epstein will not disqualify anyone from running for POTUS. That's wishful thinking on your part. You don't understand the law very much, do you?

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: IndieA

My guess is that, because these people have never been charged with anything in relation to the case, that none of them has done anything wrong.

And I'd also guess that the only reason that the names were suppressed was to protect the innocent from people who would make baseless and false allegations against them - like Gateway Pundit are implying that they will do.

It's a big nothingburger, again.

From a security standpoint, I would think that any association with Epstein would be an automatic disqualifier from sensitive positions, as the chance of blackmail existing increases just by association.

Has it not occurred to you that some of the people on this list were witnesses for the prosecution?

In my mind that wouldn't change anything from a security standpoint. I think that anyone with a known association with a blackmail ring, should probably be indefinitely barred from holding any sensitive government positions.

Well, if you exclude all those crusaders that prosecute the law from being able to attain government office, that would probably upset the balance of bad guys who can get in.

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: WeMustCare
a reply to: IndieA

I think Kamala Harris asked the judge to keep her name sealed, using "fear of violence" as her reasoning.

I think that you just made that up.

As you see in the article, A prominent female asked the judge to keep her name sealed due to fear of violent actions being taken against her.

My guess was Kamala Harris because before this morning, the photo of her posing with Jeffrey Epstein had been deeply buried for a long time.

Are you suggesting that Kamala Harris was called to the trial?

This wasn't a Hoover style hit list of anyone who might be politically impugned and blackmailed. It was of people who were involved with the trial.

a reply to: GrandmaX

if you can find the girl who claims Trump porked her, and show Trump was there the day she says it happened, you might have a winner. Just being next to Epstein isn't a crime as far as I know. But screwing children is. that small child Trump is eyeing up seems to have some mighty mature titties. I wonder how she was able to make herself look like an adult. BTW, how old is she in that picture, and who is she?

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: IndieA
My guess is that, because these people have never been charged with anything in relation to the case, that none of them has done anything wrong.

And I'd also guess that the only reason that the names were suppressed was to protect the innocent from people who would make baseless and false allegations against them - like Gateway Pundit are implying that they will do.

It's a big nothingburger, again.

From a security standpoint, I would think that any association with Epstein would be an automatic disqualifier from sensitive positions, as the chance of blackmail existing increases just by association.

Has it not occurred to you that some of the people on this list were witnesses for the prosecution?

So you think Epstein was the target of an On-going investigation ?

It was a trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, for her enabling and abetting of Geoffrey Epstein's crimes. So, yes.

Epstein provided a very valuable service to the Powerful , Epstein was also way to dangerous to be left alive if he was ever compromised.

The moment he was compromised he was a Dead man and he knew it.

I'm sure the FBI knew full well who Epstein was and what he did , Though they let him stay in business ...

Epstein was convicted of procuring a child for prostitution back in 2008, he served 13 months but was released on a plea deal. So, the FBI were aware of him, but their hands were tied as they required evidence of new crimes to re-arrest him.

American society is full of convicted sexual abusers who have served their time and are back out in the community.

Quick Facts - Sexual Abuse Offenders (.pdf)

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: IndieA

My guess is that, because these people have never been charged with anything in relation to the case, that none of them has done anything wrong.

And I'd also guess that the only reason that the names were suppressed was to protect the innocent from people who would make baseless and false allegations against them - like Gateway Pundit are implying that they will do.

It's a big nothingburger, again.

From a security standpoint, I would think that any association with Epstein would be an automatic disqualifier from sensitive positions, as the chance of blackmail existing increases just by association.

Has it not occurred to you that some of the people on this list were witnesses for the prosecution?

In my mind that wouldn't change anything from a security standpoint. I think that anyone with a known association with a blackmail ring, should probably be indefinitely barred from holding any sensitive government positions.

Well, if you exclude all those crusaders that prosecute the law from being able to attain government office, that would probably upset the balance of bad guys who can get in.

I wouldn't consider someone who prosecuted a blackmail ring as someone who is associated with such a ring.

If a prosecutor had an affiliation or association with a blackmail ring that they were prosecuting, I would hope that such an association would be considered a conflict of interest and they would not be allowed to prosecute such a case.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Well .. this should be fun.
What the heck took so long!
Is it a list that can be trusted?
Or has it been enhanced and/or scrubbed etc etc.

blind defense of MOSAD on your part


Its evidence in a court of law.. was you dismissing it. You trying to excuse human trafficking / pedophilia and blackmail.


Disgusting..

a reply to: purplemer

DUMB

My questions are valid.

What the heck took so long!
Is it a list that can be trusted?
Or has it been enhanced and/or scrubbed etc etc.

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: IndieA

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: IndieA

My guess is that, because these people have never been charged with anything in relation to the case, that none of them has done anything wrong.

And I'd also guess that the only reason that the names were suppressed was to protect the innocent from people who would make baseless and false allegations against them - like Gateway Pundit are implying that they will do.

It's a big nothingburger, again.

From a security standpoint, I would think that any association with Epstein would be an automatic disqualifier from sensitive positions, as the chance of blackmail existing increases just by association.

Has it not occurred to you that some of the people on this list were witnesses for the prosecution?

In my mind that wouldn't change anything from a security standpoint. I think that anyone with a known association with a blackmail ring, should probably be indefinitely barred from holding any sensitive government positions.

Well, if you exclude all those crusaders that prosecute the law from being able to attain government office, that would probably upset the balance of bad guys who can get in.

I wouldn't consider someone who prosecuted a blackmail ring as someone who is associated with such a ring.

How would someone recover evidence of sufficient validity to counter protestations of innocence? Undercover police are frequently involved with criminal organizations specifically for that reason.

And what of the victims? Aren't they involved? Some of them complicitly, because they are being blackmailed.

If a prosecutor had an affiliation or association with a blackmail ring that they were prosecuting, I would hope that such an association would be considered a conflict of interest and they would not be allowed to prosecute such a case.

Then any sort of conspiratorial crime would be forever safe from prosecution.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
a reply to: purplemer

DUMB

My questions are valid.

What the heck took so long!
Is it a list that can be trusted?
Or has it been enhanced and/or scrubbed etc etc.

The purpose of a court of law is to determine if a crime has been committed and to prosecute the offenders.

If this list was a list of offenders, why suppress it in the first place (unless there were other cases already sub-judice)? I mean, once you have just one conviction, surely the offenders cases would then fall like dominoes?

Clearly this was name suppression to protect the innocent from people who might want to vilify just anyone even remotely associated. People do that - they form lynch mobs without sufficient evidence - and they also tend to do bad things.

a reply to: chr0naut

Well, if Epstein was running a blackmail ring, his clients are arguably victims, and I would think more so if that ring was of foreign origin. This line of reasoning could explain the lack of the blackmail material being released or even acknowledged.

a reply to: network dude

I would wager Trump will be on that list.

Here is the footage showing Trump laughing and pointing as they appear to discuss young females dancing at a party. It's a November 1992 tape in the NBC archives showing Donald Trump partying with Jeffrey Epstein.

www.nbcnews.com...

At one point in the video, Trump is seen grabbing a female toward him and patting her behind.

originally posted by: GrandmaX
a reply to: network dude

I would wager Trump will be on that list.

Here is the footage showing Trump laughing and pointing as they appear to discuss young females dancing at a party. It's a November 1992 tape in the NBC archives showing Donald Trump partying with Jeffrey Epstein.

www.nbcnews.com...

At one point in the video, Trump is seen grabbing a female toward him and patting her behind.

originally posted by: GrandmaX
a reply to: network dude

I would wager Trump will be on that list.

Here is the footage showing Trump laughing and pointing as they appear to discuss young females dancing at a party. It's a November 1992 tape in the NBC archives showing Donald Trump partying with Jeffrey Epstein.

www.nbcnews.com...

At one point in the video, Trump is seen grabbing a female toward him and patting her behind.

It is unlikely that Trump was involved with the case, and therefore I would doubt that he is on a list prepared for the case by either defense or prosecution.

However Donald Trump has had sexual relations with someone 24 years his junior. That is not in dispute.

a reply to: chr0naut

If this list was a list of offenders, why suppress it in the first place (unless there were other cases already sub-judice)? I mean, once you have just one conviction, surely the offenders cases would then fall like dominoes? Clearly this was name suppression to protect the innocent from people who might want to vilify just anyone even remotely associated

talking about people that have been on the island tens of times.. Cmon...

However Donald Trump has had sexual relations with someone 24 years his junior. That is not in dispute.

that dont make him a pedo like the crowd you are defending..

Sick

a reply to: IndieA

Well, if Epstein was running a blackmail ring, his clients are arguably victims, and I would think more so if that ring was of foreign origin

Dig he was a MOSAD agent....


Disgusting....

a reply to: purplemer

I'm not defending anyone.

That last post was me trying to make sense of the situation from a bit of a devil's advocate stance. Basically, how a government that protects it's officers might be viewing things, which may explain how they have been handling it.

Victims can still be guilty of separate crimes, just as criminals can be victims.

I'm raising the question:
If a person is illegally entrapped into commiting a crime, and evidence of that crime is collected illegally, does that evidence become fruit from the poison tree?

a reply to: IndieA

Sorry i misread you..