Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. The Epstein File

The Epstein File

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
377 Posts 16 Posters 34.8k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Offline
    A Offline
    AndyD
    wrote last edited by
    #365

    And the fact the victims are named in the documents whilst the likely law breakers are not means what to American justice? Not the way British law is conducted.
    It's pressure to back off.

    Anyone that visited E more than once is likely to have known about the girls, according to what the girls themselves say, as young as 14 from what I've heard.
    Epstein was not two faced, he was pretty open... from what I've heard, saying that the ex prince liked girls younger than himself.

    1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nyc
      wrote last edited by jon-nyc
      #366

      In general the victims names are redacted though I understand there are a couple of major fuckups in that regard. And it only takes one.

      They were far more meticulous in keeping out certain powerful names, apparently.

      The whole reason we call them illegal aliens is because they’re subject to our laws.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nyc
        wrote last edited by
        #367

        ‘Inside the house’ - Lol

        The whole reason we call them illegal aliens is because they’re subject to our laws.

        1 Reply Last reply
        • RenaudaR Offline
          RenaudaR Offline
          Renauda
          wrote last edited by Renauda
          #368

          I think Lutnick should resign simply because he tells bald face lies about close allies of the USA.

          His connections to this Epstein affair are a secondary footnote to his demonstrated incompetence as Commerce Sec’ty.

          Elbows up!

          1 Reply Last reply
          • Tom-KT Offline
            Tom-KT Offline
            Tom-K
            wrote last edited by
            #369

            Who is paying Howard Lutnick and how much? (Must be lots.) Why would a middle manager care?

            Flushing the toilet is like practicing the piano; you just cannot go too long without doing it.--Axtremus

            1 Reply Last reply
            • jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nycJ Offline
              jon-nyc
              wrote last edited by jon-nyc
              #370

              Middle manager? He ran Cantor Fitzgerald (when I was in the business the largest treasury dealer) for years.

              The whole reason we call them illegal aliens is because they’re subject to our laws.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • Tom-KT Offline
                Tom-KT Offline
                Tom-K
                wrote last edited by
                #371

                Yea but that was then. Secretary of Commerce is what? So who does he work for? Cantor Fitzgerald--fine, the US government well then fine too. But you can't work for both at the same time.

                Flushing the toilet is like practicing the piano; you just cannot go too long without doing it.--Axtremus

                1 Reply Last reply
                • A Offline
                  A Offline
                  AndyD
                  wrote last edited by
                  #372

                  Bondi is bit of a shite, no?
                  But then, what to expect from Teflon Trump(CF).
                  Nothing sticks, he evades the draft, he evades tax (paid more to a porn star than the tax man over a decade), and now there's his friendship with Epstein.
                  Trump knew, how could he not, of 50 year old Epstein's activities with teenage girls. Given all we know as fact, given Trump"s recorded attitude towards women, his criminal fraud conviction, do you think Trump was likely to partake?

                  I do feel for you folk having such an awful man as leader; especially when he's caused the cost of a bottle of wine in the US to increase by nearly a quarter!
                  You pay tax to King Trump

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • MikM Offline
                    MikM Offline
                    Mik
                    wrote last edited by Mik
                    #373

                    I have no issue with criticizing Trump. I do lots of it myself. But repeating nonsense like he paid Stormy Daniels more than taxes is provably untrue. He banned Epstein from his club prior to his arrest and Epstein socialized with pretty much everyone in higher society. The criminal fraud conviction was a fraud in itself.

                    Don't let your hatred of the man distort your viewpoint. It cheapens your argument.

                    "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • A Offline
                      A Offline
                      AndyD
                      wrote last edited by
                      #374

                      Oh come on Mik, it's recorded he paid Stormy$130k.
                      The NYTimes recorded how much tax he paid over years.

                      It's laughable what he gets away with. The couple claimed $70k and $100k in a year for their hairdressing as business expenses. Tip of iceberg when you read about his business dealings
                      Ultimately you pay towards his fraud.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • MikM Offline
                        MikM Offline
                        Mik
                        wrote last edited by
                        #375

                        The Times cherry picked the years they wanted to. In 2005 he paid $38 million in income taxes. In some years he paid no income tax, but he paid lots in property and other taxes. your assertion is cherry-picked and ludicrous. You are blinded by hate. But then you're not alone in that.

                        "You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell

                        RenaudaR 1 Reply Last reply
                        • HoraceH Offline
                          HoraceH Offline
                          Horace
                          wrote last edited by
                          #376

                          To think that Trump is special amongst wealthy people in legally paying as little in tax as possible, is probably not reality. One can dunk on Trump as being especially egregious for some things, but finding legal ways to reduce taxes isn't one of them.

                          Education is extremely important.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • MikM Mik

                            The Times cherry picked the years they wanted to. In 2005 he paid $38 million in income taxes. In some years he paid no income tax, but he paid lots in property and other taxes. your assertion is cherry-picked and ludicrous. You are blinded by hate. But then you're not alone in that.

                            RenaudaR Offline
                            RenaudaR Offline
                            Renauda
                            wrote last edited by Renauda
                            #377

                            @Mik

                            You are blinded by hate. But then you're not alone in that.

                            Indeed Andy is not alone in that.

                            While Americans can love, like, dislike or hate Trump in various degrees their view is tempered one way or another by the US Constitution and his role in elected office as President. On the other hand those of us, like Andy and I, on the outside of the US who have been collectively and adversely affected by his policies, whose country has been maligned by his bald face lies and threats we all hate or loathe him untempered and in ways peculiar to our individual national identities. We believe him to be a disgrace in every manner. Quite unfit for the responsibility and authority the Constitution gives him to perform his duties of office.

                            Elbows up!

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • Users
                            • Groups