• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Jeffrey Epstein Commits Suicide at Manhattan Jail

Page 74 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
mikeymikec said:
I guess they've finished redacting Donald's name from the Epstein files:
www.bbc.co.uk

Trump calls on House Republicans to vote to release Epstein files

"We have nothing to hide," the US president writes - a reversal after previously resisting publishing the documents.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Pretty sure the play is to say that because the DOJ has open (sham) investigations into people in the files they can’t be released now.

He’s pulling a ‘tax return’ where he will say ‘I would LOVE to release them all right now but I just can’t, darn!’
 
fskimospy said:
Pretty sure the play is to say that because the DOJ has open (sham) investigations into people in the files they can’t be released now.

He’s pulling a ‘tax return’ where he will say ‘I would LOVE to release them all right now but I just can’t, darn!’
Click to expand...
Then why bother with the redactions, though that could have been another delaying tactic.

With the tax returns, he stuck to the same old line because there wasn't enough (I'm being charitable here) pushback from his own side. I think the changing narrative with regard to the Epstein files is because his own side aren't satisfied with the current line he's feeding them.

Also, the DOJ excuse you suggested has Pam Bondi's eventual firing written all over it, because his supporters weren't happy with what they believed was her involvement a long time ago.
 
mikeymikec said:
Then why bother with the redactions, though that could have been another delaying tactic.

With the tax returns, he stuck to the same old line because there wasn't enough (I'm being charitable here) pushback from his own side. I think the changing narrative with regard to the Epstein files is because his own side aren't satisfied with the current line he's feeding them.

Also, the DOJ excuse you suggested has Pam Bondi's eventual firing written all over it, because his supporters weren't happy with what they believed was her involvement a long time ago.
Click to expand...
I have no idea if it will work or not (I hope not) but I'm pretty confident that's the play he's going with.

I get it - he doesn't want to release them because they nearly certainly implicate/incriminate him. Releasing redacted files might work but it has a strong chance of being both too much (so he's implicated) and too little (because people will question the redactions, piece things together, etc.). Saying you can't release any of it due to open investigations is transparent bullshit - he ordered the investigations! - but has the 'virtue' of being one simple answer.
 
Brainonska511 said:
Once again, the White House was directly involved in helping the sexual abusers:
https://bsky.app/profile/jeisinger.bsky.social%2Fpost%2F3m5vnsgvj5c26
Click to expand...

It's a bit weird though, isn't it?

1) Conservative politicians tend to only help those who help them.
2) There are *tonnes* of conservatives who were in varying positions of power when - even during this administration - they've still been arrested for sex crimes.

I can't conceive of a particularly convincing explanation why Andrew Tate would get preferential treatment over those others. Admittedly I don't know much about him other than he's a sex trafficking rapist who's a part of the "manosphere". Did he worship Donald much before the GQP got him out of his Romanian bind?

While I think we can all agree that the GQP cares little for the notion that defending sex offenders isn't a good look, surely there would be an argument for saving tonnes of virtual conservative nobodies who won't draw that much attention compared to say Andrew Tate, Ghislaine Maxwell, etc.? Saving the big fish surely has to have a tangible goal in mind, otherwise if it doesn't at all matter which fish they save, then why not save them all? The only counterargument I can think to that is, what's the point in being a conservative if you don't have elevated status over other people, even fellow conservatives.
 
"Trump calls on House Republicans to vote to release Epstein files" is a total bullshit headline. Trump doesn't need Congressional approval to release the Epstein files. He can, legally, order them released at any time. The headline should have read, "Trump's months long of stalling the release of the Epstein files continues."
 
IronWing said:
"Trump calls on House Republicans to vote to release Epstein files" is a total bullshit headline. Trump doesn't need Congressional approval to release the Epstein files. He can, legally, order them released at any time. The headline should have read, "Trump's months long of stalling the release of the Epstein files continues."
Click to expand...
He is for sure hoping the Senate will sit on it.
 
mikeymikec said:
It's a bit weird though, isn't it?

1) Conservative politicians tend to only help those who help them.
2) There are *tonnes* of conservatives who were in varying positions of power when - even during this administration - they've still been arrested for sex crimes.

I can't conceive of a particularly convincing explanation why Andrew Tate would get preferential treatment over those others. Admittedly I don't know much about him other than he's a sex trafficking rapist who's a part of the "manosphere". Did he worship Donald much before the GQP got him out of his Romanian bind?

While I think we can all agree that the GQP cares little for the notion that defending sex offenders isn't a good look, surely there would be an argument for saving tonnes of virtual conservative nobodies who won't draw that much attention compared to say Andrew Tate, Ghislaine Maxwell, etc.? Saving the big fish surely has to have a tangible goal in mind, otherwise if it doesn't at all matter which fish they save, then why not save them all? The only counterargument I can think to that is, what's the point in being a conservative if you don't have elevated status over other people, even fellow conservatives.
Click to expand...
It just falls into their general hierarchy for society, in that private violence against people with less power should be okay and is not a matter for the government, just like it used to be. The Grand Old Pedoparty.
 
IronWing said:
"Trump calls on House Republicans to vote to release Epstein files" is a total bullshit headline. Trump doesn't need Congressional approval to release the Epstein files. He can, legally, order them released at any time. The headline should have read, "Trump's months long of stalling the release of the Epstein files continues."
Click to expand...
He's just moving goal posts. If the House votes, then maybe he's hoping the noise dies down when it's waiting on a Senate vote, because the "Johnson is blocking the vote" cudgel will be gone. It's been his MO forever - push today's problems into tomorrow by stalling for time.
 
Brainonska511 said:
He's just moving goal posts. If the House votes, then maybe he's hoping the noise dies down when it's waiting on a Senate vote, because the "Johnson is blocking the vote" cudgel will be gone. It's been his MO forever - push today's problems into tomorrow by stalling for time.
Click to expand...

Everything is about getting through the next 15 minutes for him no matter what.

Though it is also clear his political power is waining between this, the Senate increasingly rejecting/not voting on his appointees, and some R states retreating or reconsidering doing new maps out of self preservation.
 
mikeymikec said:
It's a bit weird though, isn't it?

1) Conservative politicians tend to only help those who help them.
2) There are *tonnes* of conservatives who were in varying positions of power when - even during this administration - they've still been arrested for sex crimes.

I can't conceive of a particularly convincing explanation why Andrew Tate would get preferential treatment over those others. Admittedly I don't know much about him other than he's a sex trafficking rapist who's a part of the "manosphere". Did he worship Donald much before the GQP got him out of his Romanian bind?

While I think we can all agree that the GQP cares little for the notion that defending sex offenders isn't a good look, surely there would be an argument for saving tonnes of virtual conservative nobodies who won't draw that much attention compared to say Andrew Tate, Ghislaine Maxwell, etc.? Saving the big fish surely has to have a tangible goal in mind, otherwise if it doesn't at all matter which fish they save, then why not save them all? The only counterargument I can think to that is, what's the point in being a conservative if you don't have elevated status over other people, even fellow conservatives.
Click to expand...

The right-wing club consists of billionaires paying millionaires to convince joe sixpack to vote against his own self interest.

Tate has a large following and has been effective in pushing far right propaganda.
 
Lets not forget he ran a cam service as well ... actually that side of him is very Epsteinish when you think about it... Maybe he is running on kompromat too?
 
It’s pretty obvious what’s going to happen. Congress will vote to release the files however because there is an “ongoing” investigation, “certain” files won’t be released. Trump and republicans get cover for voting to release the files while any potential damaging files don’t actually get released. MAGA will now have a new talking point and the matter will be forgotten.
 
Amused said:
The right-wing club consists of billionaires paying millionaires to convince joe sixpack to vote against his own self interest.

Tate has a large following and has been effective in pushing far right propaganda.
Click to expand...
This has been the lifeline of Republicans for at least 40 years.

Dems need to focus on the rich vs the average person and how it effects affordability.

We have many Democratic socialist programs that people love but Republicans have convinced socialism is bad which isn't the same thing as Democratic socialism.

Trump had the federal government purchase stakes in 7 public corporations. That is the most socialist thing by either party because of the main tenet of socialism.

An economic system where the means of production (factories, major industries, resources) are owned collectively, either by the state, by workers, or by society as a whole.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Want to bet Trump supporters will be fooled by this House vote and absolve Republicans from blocking release of the files and not take into account...

The Senate holding it up with amendments.
Trump vetoing.
The FBI combing through the files months earlier for Trump's name for possible redactions.
Forgetting Trump tried to strongarm Republicans into not voting for the discharge petition.
Forgetting Trump could have legally released them without taking a vote.
Using the sham investigation of only Democrats as an excuse for DOJ not to release even if Trump signs a release bill.
Trump calling Epstein a pervert, yet he got Ghislane Maxwell transferred to na easy hotel like prison with special perks.

Stupidity, ignorance and ideology will remain front and center. Republicans don't care about child trafficking. Look how many of them have been arrested/convicted for child abuse or porn.

House vote is 427-1 to release. Next it goes to the Senate. The 1 vote not to release is that asshole Clay Higgens
 
Last edited:
KMFJD said:
www.rawstory.com

Megyn Kelly suggests Epstein wasn't an 'actual pedophile' if victims went through puberty

Conservative host Megyn Kelly suggested that she did not initially believe Jeffrey Epstein was an "actual pedophile" because he reportedly victimized girls aged 15 and older.Kelly spoke to journalist Batya Ungar-Sargon about Epstein on Wednesday after Democrats released emails suggesting...
www.rawstory.com www.rawstory.com

most definitely some are trying that angle
Click to expand...
14 year old Eloise has to school Megyn Kelly on being a pedophile. This is what MAGA and their ilk has dragged the country try down to. I guess it is woke to say there is no distinction between an 8 year old and a 15 year old. Of course Trump supporters will excuse this.
 
Many have probably seen, but I didn't see it here yet: the Senate has already voted and passed the bill.

From Politico: "The Senate acted by unanimous consent, which requires signoff from every senator but does not require them to take a roll call vote."

As @ivwshane noted, they will likely use the 'ongoing investigations' excuse to continue to keep the information from coming out.

I can hear Trump now. "I signed the bill, but there are ongoing investigations (that I ordered). Nothing I can do!"
 
So... We trust the guys who are implicated in the files to release the files unmolested?

Seriously?

Those bitches are busy turning those files into whatever they want them to be. There is no oversight. No vetting.

What comes out will simply be whatever trump wants them to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top