The Epstein File

[jon-nyc]

[jon-nyc]

The entire 119 page grand jury testimony was redacted.

[jon-nyc]

Redaction complete.

[Mik]

It will all be a big nothingburger in the end and no charges will be filed.

[jon-nyc]

No charges will be filed but there will be reputational damage. Like what happened to Larry Summers.

[Mik]

And Coldplay Woman.

But still, this has been a tempest in a teapot all along.

[jon-nyc]

[jon-nyc]

Well, well.

[jon-nyc]

Im shocked.

[jon-nyc]

I suppose they view anything that could embarrass Trump and his team as falling under the ‘national security’ exception in the law.

[89th]

My surprised face.

[Horace]

Nobody knows about that passage in the files now.

[AndyD]

[jon-nyc]

[jon-nyc]

[jon-nyc]

[jon-nyc]

Hats off to Bondi and staff. In just a few months they were able to track down all these leads and prove them to be false, as hard as that is for any claim that person X did thing Y. Damn they’re good. Can’t imagine the amount of manpower they must have dedicated to the task.

[Horace]

@jon-nyc just curious, have you ever seen anybody other than yourself make the claim that the Biden DOJ would not have gone after Trump if there were actionable evidence against him in those files? I’ve never seen that claim anywhere else, but you’re generally not one to go out on limbs. So I guess you may have seen it somewhere.

[jon-nyc]

Actionable evidence of crimes? Of course they would have.

[Horace]

@jon-nyc said in The Epstein File:

Actionable evidence of crimes? Of course they would have.

I wouldn't presume to paraphrase you in a way you'd accept as not a strawman, but somewhere between "actionable evidence of crimes" and "sufficient evidence that a non-trivial investigation could plausibly lead to actionable evidence of crimes", is a line over which you've claimed the Biden admin would not have crossed. And those who think otherwise have become accustomed to government corruption due to Trump.

But I know that's a straw man.