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
319 Posts 16 Posters 31.3k 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.
  • jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nyc
    wrote last edited by
    #304

    I can’t point you to an exact quote but people with professional DoJ experience from across the political spectrum (eg right-to-left Andrew McCarthy, Sarah Isgur, and Ken White) generally describe an atmosphere in which a high degree of professionalism prevailed and AGs and AAGs had independent reputations that they strived to maintain often to the frustration of their political bosses. This was true of Garland, and true of Jeff Sessions in Trump’s first term.

    Generally I don’t think these people would expect the burden of proof to fall on those who assumed good faith on behalf of DoJ, rather the opposite.

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

    1 Reply Last reply
    • HoraceH Offline
      HoraceH Offline
      Horace
      wrote last edited by Horace
      #305

      There would obviously be no net reputational damage for a Biden DOJ that investigated a lead to Trump which led to a legit indictment. The opposite is true. They would be heroes. They would be doing exactly what their voters wanted them to do. It is both democratic and legal, and the argument against it, that it would be an ethical violation, seems weak to me, motivated by an attempt to highlight the ethical differences between the two administrations. Those differences exist, but we don't have to make stuff up to substantiate them.

      It is not surprising you don't have any cites for anybody else making that claim. That Biden's DOJ would not have tried very hard to follow leads to Trump in the Epstein files. I don't think anybody else actually is making that claim.

      Imagine how furious the Biden voters would be if they thought the administration they voted for would treat leads to Trump in the Epstein files with kid gloves, because of "ethics". The outrage would be immense. But they don't think they did. Nobody thinks they did, as far as I know, other than you. But I'd be happy to be proven wrong with a cite to something serious that makes the same claim.

      Education is extremely important.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nyc
        wrote last edited by
        #306

        Again if there were leads that pointed to criminal behavior I’m sure they’d have been followed.

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

        HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

          Again if there were leads that pointed to criminal behavior I’m sure they’d have been followed.

          HoraceH Offline
          HoraceH Offline
          Horace
          wrote last edited by
          #307

          @jon-nyc said in The Epstein File:

          Again if there were leads that pointed to criminal behavior I’m sure they’d have been followed.

          I don't think that's an earned "again". You've gone to some lengths to claim that, due to ethics, investigating leads to Trump in the Epstein files would be uncouth for the Biden administration. But I'm happy to hear you say that clearly, and that you agree with the rest of the world that if there was evidence of criminal behavior on Trump's part in the Epstein files, we'd have heard about it while Biden was in office.

          Education is extremely important.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nyc
            wrote last edited by
            #308

            IMG_9580.jpeg

            IMG_9581.jpeg

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

            1 Reply Last reply
            • HoraceH Offline
              HoraceH Offline
              Horace
              wrote last edited by
              #309

              In prior engagements you have gone to some lengths to make the claims I've told you about. In your first screen cap'ed message there, I was assuming you were using a loophole where the evidence was damning right off the bat from the files, barely any investigation required. "Leads" which would require investigations were where you have handwaved a circumstantial case that the Biden admin would find it uncouth to try very hard.

              Education is extremely important.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ Offline
                jon-nycJ Offline
                jon-nyc
                wrote last edited by
                #310

                I think you’ve moved the goal posts. In July in this very thread we were arguing about whether the Garland DoJ would leak incriminating info on Trump. That question seems to have been settled.

                IMG_9585.jpeg

                IMG_9587.jpeg

                IMG_9588.jpeg

                IMG_9589.png

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

                1 Reply Last reply
                • HoraceH Offline
                  HoraceH Offline
                  Horace
                  wrote last edited by Horace
                  #311

                  I could go through the threads where we've engaged in this and find your claims that the DOJ does not expand investigations as an unwritten ethical rule, and that the Biden DOJ would not have gone out of their way to comb through the files for legally incriminating leads to Trump. Yes we also talked about leaks, and you have a stronger case there, though it's still arguable, since we hardly have proof that there is any embarrassing stuff about Trump in those files that would move the needle. We have proof that Trump wanted his name redacted, but no proof that without the redactions, any needle would have been moved.

                  Education is extremely important.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nycJ Offline
                    jon-nyc
                    wrote last edited by jon-nyc
                    #312

                    I don’t think you’d ever find me making such a case. My position has been that all the evidence suggests the garland DoJ operated by the book as far as we know. The ‘book’ is fine with expanding investigations if thats where evidence leads. Famous cases are the result of such expansions, from Anthony Weiner’s laptop to Rob Blagojovich to Arthur Andersen’s conviction in Enron.

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

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • HoraceH Offline
                      HoraceH Offline
                      Horace
                      wrote last edited by
                      #313

                      It'll have to wait for a few days. Merry Christmas!

                      Education is extremely important.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                        A monumental fuck up.

                        jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote last edited by
                        #314

                        said in The Epstein File:

                        A monumental fuck up.

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

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • 89th8 Offline
                          89th8 Offline
                          89th
                          wrote last edited by
                          #315

                          That's hilarious. Someone at the DOJ thought if they just highlighted the text and made the background black, it would be redacted.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • HoraceH Offline
                            HoraceH Offline
                            Horace
                            wrote last edited by
                            #316

                            So the redactions didn't work, we can see everything anyway, and also, the redactions cover up lots of juicy details of Trump's behavior that were only kept secret by the Biden administration due to an abundance of honor and integrity on their part. Something like that.

                            Education is extremely important.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • jon-nycJ Offline
                              jon-nycJ Offline
                              jon-nyc
                              wrote last edited by
                              #317

                              Or maybe nothing like that?

                              I don’t know the scope of the redaction problem but with millions of pages surely not everyone did it wrong.

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

                              HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                              • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                Or maybe nothing like that?

                                I don’t know the scope of the redaction problem but with millions of pages surely not everyone did it wrong.

                                HoraceH Offline
                                HoraceH Offline
                                Horace
                                wrote last edited by
                                #318

                                @jon-nyc said in The Epstein File:

                                Or maybe nothing like that?

                                I don’t know the scope of the redaction problem but with millions of pages surely not everyone did it wrong.

                                Weird, a small subset of the millions of pages isn't how they are talking about it in the giggly twitterverse. At least, not the small subset of the giggly twitterverse we're blessed with here on TNCR.

                                But maybe when you say "nothing like that", you meant the bit about the abundance of honor and integrity in the Biden DOJ which can be assumed to have been leak-proof against any arbitrarily juicy details about Trump and Epstein. I agree that maybe it's probably nothing like that.

                                Education is extremely important.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • HoraceH Horace

                                  Are we all supposed to pretend that a novelty letter from Trump to his one-time friend Jeffrey Epstein is something that will require wagon circling? Trump can plausibly claim to not know about it, maybe an assistant wrote it, maybe Epstein had someone write it to make it look like Trump wrote it. There will be no hard evidence and nothing will come of it. This is pretty stupid. I've reached out to Hanania - and he has apologized, and vowed to stop posting stupid shit. I appreciated it, and forgave him. He's a good kid, if way too racist for my tastes.

                                  taiwan_girlT Offline
                                  taiwan_girlT Offline
                                  taiwan_girl
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #319

                                  @Horace said in The Epstein File:

                                  Are we all supposed to pretend that a novelty letter from Trump to his one-time friend Jeffrey Epstein is something that will require wagon circling? Trump can plausibly claim to not know about it, maybe an assistant wrote it, maybe Epstein had someone write it to make it look like Trump wrote it. There will be no hard evidence and nothing will come of it. This is pretty stupid. I've reached out to Hanania - and he has apologized, and vowed to stop posting stupid shit. I appreciated it, and forgave him. He's a good kid, if way too racist for my tastes.

                                  alt text

                                  Replica of the "allege" birthday card from President Trump to Mr. Epstein on the National Mall today.

                                  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