3 ms·

Even if Trump cut off ties with Epstein in 2017, he should clearly be held accountable for his past actions. Here's 2 pretty damning emails: --- Epstein to Ma

by culi 1y ago

Even if Trump cut off ties with Epstein in 2017, he should clearly be held accountable for his past actions. Here's 2 pretty damning emails: --- Epstein to Maxwell 2011-04-02 > i want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump... [VICTIM] spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned. police chief. etc. im 75% there --- Epstein to Ruemmler 2018-08-23 > you see, i know how dirty donald is. my guess is that non lawyers ny biz people have no idea. what it means to have your fixer flip

theultdev 1y ago
[flagged]
- pohl 1y ago
  Could you explain how “no confirmed meeting” implies “they never met”?
  - theultdev 1y ago
    You think he snuck out from secret service and had an off-the-book thanksgiving with a pedo? I'm saying there's no direct evidence he did and on face value it's ridiculous. He was meeting the troops and golfing with Tiger Woods and happened to be in the same state Epstein had a house in. Have any evidence otherwise, or just conspiracy theories?
    - pohl 1y ago
      With any other administration I would have granted you that leap in logic, but we already learned, three years ago, from Stephanie Grisham that he held off the books meetings specifically to circumvent record keeping laws. So I think a slightly higher standard of evidence is needed before we dismiss the possibility that he met with the pedo who likely had dirt on him.
      - theultdev 1y ago
        You have the standard of evidence reversed. You need to prove what you're accusing him of, not the other way around.
        pohl 1y ago
        Sounds like you’re assuming that standards for charges/trial should also be used as standards for inquiry/investigation. That is not the case.
        theultdev 1y ago
        By all means investigate away on the thanksgiving email, you will find nothing as nothing exists. Choosing resources to investigate hearsay that is easily disproven is a waste of time though when you have actual evidence of direct correspondence. Noone is falling for this crap anymore btw. The Trump smear stuff doesn't work as everyone cried wolf too many times. Very telling you spend this much energy on a silly email talking about Trump vs people who actually talked and met with Epstein.
        pohl 1y ago
        Are you Donald? How can you be certain that nothing exists?
        theultdev 1y ago
        > Epstein and pohl are down here in Florida Wow that's damning pohl, prove you weren't with him. Even if you provide detailed logs of your whereabouts, that won't be enough because I assume you're lying. Hearsay is a bitch isn't it.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
gruez 1y ago
>Here's 2 pretty damning emails: The most "damning" emails are hearsay from other people?
rayiner 1y ago
What do those emails prove? Do you know who the reduction “[VICTIM]” is referring to? It’s Virginia Guiffre: https://abcnews.go.com/US/virginia-giuffre-trump-jeffrey-epstein/story?id=127468657 https://abcnews.go.com/US/virginia-giuffre-trump-jeffrey-eps.... What did Guiffre testify about Trump?

by culi 1y ago

theultdev 1y ago

[flagged]

pohl 1y ago
Could you explain how “no confirmed meeting” implies “they never met”?
- theultdev 1y ago
  You think he snuck out from secret service and had an off-the-book thanksgiving with a pedo? I'm saying there's no direct evidence he did and on face value it's ridiculous. He was meeting the troops and golfing with Tiger Woods and happened to be in the same state Epstein had a house in. Have any evidence otherwise, or just conspiracy theories?
  - pohl 1y ago
    With any other administration I would have granted you that leap in logic, but we already learned, three years ago, from Stephanie Grisham that he held off the books meetings specifically to circumvent record keeping laws. So I think a slightly higher standard of evidence is needed before we dismiss the possibility that he met with the pedo who likely had dirt on him.
    - theultdev 1y ago
      You have the standard of evidence reversed. You need to prove what you're accusing him of, not the other way around.
      - pohl 1y ago
        Sounds like you’re assuming that standards for charges/trial should also be used as standards for inquiry/investigation. That is not the case.
        theultdev 1y ago
        By all means investigate away on the thanksgiving email, you will find nothing as nothing exists. Choosing resources to investigate hearsay that is easily disproven is a waste of time though when you have actual evidence of direct correspondence. Noone is falling for this crap anymore btw. The Trump smear stuff doesn't work as everyone cried wolf too many times. Very telling you spend this much energy on a silly email talking about Trump vs people who actually talked and met with Epstein.
        pohl 1y ago
        Are you Donald? How can you be certain that nothing exists?
        theultdev 1y ago
        > Epstein and pohl are down here in Florida Wow that's damning pohl, prove you weren't with him. Even if you provide detailed logs of your whereabouts, that won't be enough because I assume you're lying. Hearsay is a bitch isn't it.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

gruez 1y ago

>Here's 2 pretty damning emails: The most "damning" emails are hearsay from other people?

rayiner 1y ago

What do those emails prove? Do you know who the reduction “[VICTIM]” is referring to? It’s Virginia Guiffre: https://abcnews.go.com/US/virginia-giuffre-trump-jeffrey-epstein/story?id=127468657 https://abcnews.go.com/US/virginia-giuffre-trump-jeffrey-eps.... What did Guiffre testify about Trump?