Leaderboard

Get out of town? They did. It isn't like this was predicted or anything.

TBH what happened was, Trump said that he thought Carney was the better choice, and CBC et al said "TRUMP SAYS CARNEY IS BETTER! WE BELIEVE DONALD J TRUMP! WE TRUST DONALD J TRUMP SO MUCH!!!!!!" and liberal voters all believed that one thing that Trump said. Everything before and since was a lie according to them, but somehow that one thing was true.

That's the dumbest argument I've ever heard. Very popular with the MAGA crowd though. I don't think that's coincidence.

It is such a stupid and dishonest tactic. Leftists: Pass a law, draft policies, and argue to for dudes in girls' spaces Conservatives: WTF, dudes do not belong in girls' spaces, they are jerking off in there, making them uncomfortable, raping them, assaulting them, and we don't want our daughters and wives to have to see some mentally ill dudes wang because he wants to underss in front of them... Leftists: Like, OMG, why don't you want to talk about the budget instead of this crap?

Well, this is the underlying stupidity of your whole thread. You have created some convoluted argument where you are conflating "natural" with right and wrong, human behaviors with animal behaviors, and mixing all that with "god" in general, which you won't specify. As I already pointed out, A LOT of things are "natural," so what does that have to do with how humans behave or should behave? What is "right" or "wrong?" You are conflating moralistic reasoning with instinct.

What if the liberals had an X platform...more believable? Cite those economists when you can. Interested to see how their perspectives differ. No, I didn't vote for all that and the poor and vulnerable have always been on my radar. A liberal minded person can't have empathy or provide charitable donations? Let me save you some time on X or Facebook though. If something doesn't make sense let me know; Industrial carbon pricing systems are Canada’s most important policy lever for cutting carbon pollution and creating a competitive clean economy with low costs for businesses and big incentives for investment in low-carbon projects. These systems are also designed to cost next to nothing for Canadian consumers. The Canadian Climate Institute has done extensive research and modelling quantifying the effects of this policy. This fact sheet outlines how and why industrial carbon pricing has virtually no impact on the day-to-day expenses of average Canadians and keeps costs low for businesses: Industrial carbon pricing costs Canadian consumers next to nothing—and in some cases even provides benefits. Our research shows that industrial carbon pricing systems have an impact of around zero per cent on household consumption, a measure of income, in 2025. These costs are projected to remain very low and reduce consumption by just a tenth of one per cent by 2030. In some cases, industrial carbon pricing—also called large-emitter trading systems—provides small net benefits for consumers, largely because of provisions in Alberta’s system that can reduce the cost of electricity Industrial carbon pricing applies to goods sold on international markets where most price increases aren’t passed on to consumers. Most companies that participate in industrial carbon pricing systems sell a significant portion of their products in other countries. About 50 per cent of the output of Canada’s large emitters is exported, and some industries export much more, which lowers costs on consumers. For example, the oil sands send closer to 80 per cent of production abroad. In addition, these exported products are sold on global commodity markets, which set the price paid and further limits the amount passed on to consumers. Industrial carbon pricing has essentially no impact on the price of food and the agricultural sector. Our modelling, done in partnership with Navius Research for the Independent Assessment of Carbon Pricing Systemsshows that industrial carbon pricing has near zero overall impact on households’ spending on food. The same analysis projects that the cumulative GDP impact on the agricultural sector would be 0.08 per cent by 2030. Farmers don’t directly pay the industrial carbon price and there are almost no costs to pass through the supply chain on to consumers. Costs for consumers are virtually nothing because industrial goods have only a small impact on the price of finished consumer products. Industrial carbon pricing does not apply directly to individual consumers—only to the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the country, like oil sands facilities, steel mills, and cement plants. Industrial carbon pricing has modest or negligible increases in the cost of industrial goods such as steel, which represent only a small portion of the final cost of consumer products people buy in Canada. For example, research finds that industrial carbon pricing that applies to the highest emitting steel plants in the country would still only add $0.12 to the cost of a refrigerator, and under $3 to the cost of a pickup truck. Industrial carbon pricing is low-cost for businesses, which also limits costs passed on to consumers. Industrial carbon pricing is designed to contain costs because industries only pay for emissions that exceed a specified limit, and if they outperform the limit they make money by selling credits for cash. Data shows that industrial carbon pricing currently only adds an average of 9 cents per barrel to oil sands producer costs. Our research shows that if industrial carbon pricing is strengthened in line with the Canada-Alberta MOU, oil sands producers would still only be paying 50 cents per barrel in 2030—roughly the cost of a Timbit, after inflation is factored in. Industrial carbon pricing imposes much lower costs on total emissions than consumer carbon pricing, around $10 or less per tonne of emissions against a carbon price of $95 per tonne.

I'm not capable because I don't subscribe to X. Come on now.... What if I said the industrial carbon tax adds less than 1% to our cost of food. Would you believe that? And why would you assume I don't care about people of low or no income and vulnerable communities?

It's sick. Psychopathic.

JJ, everything is because of the liberals and Carney. Not sure how but I have little doubt that someone here will spin this war his way sooner or later. At this moment though, X followers everywhere are searching for that info.

Ya...you go with that Dweebles...

FOS LIES, you LIAR!

You are shameless. Jeebus. No, there was no order to release the files. No, that article in no way, shape or form implies that there was such an order. Yes, the word "order" does appear in that article. Want to guess the context? "Trump’s instruction regarding the grand jury files has done little to settle the calls for more transparency, as he has not ordered the release of the DOJ files" You're trying to use an article that says the EXACT opposite of your claim to support your claim.

We did not cause climate change, or the Boar war, , WWI, WWII, Korea war, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan or for that matter any global crises....But we as a nation managed to step up and helped the fix the issue... You can sit here and sulk, and point fingers at who is responsible and pay the man at the pumps or we as a nation Can step up and fix a global issue that effects most of the planet...and at the same time get rid one of the most evil empires in our time...I know it is a lot for a liberal voter to mule over and as per usual we will let some one else fix the problem for us.... To be honest Not to many governments have put going to war of entering a conflict to a vote, at least not down to our level, at least none of them that I've been sent to...And i doubt very much you'd change your liberal vote if they do act...

That's what happens when you book a cheap hotel in a bad neighborhood. LMAO

3 teenage girls rescued from sex trafficking situation in Lethbridge, charges laid | Globalnews.ca Skye Atoa is a serial rapist. He kidnapped 3 young teen girls. He drugged and gang raped the 14-year-old, forever changing her life. One was drugged and raped by multiple men over a course of 3 days. He’s out on bail.

No you're not.

If you're supporting the war despite there was NO IMMINENT THREAT NOR permission from CONGRESS, YOU'RE supporting Trump's DESPERATE attempt to distract from the Epstein Files. And you don't even know why.

No, I don't.

False. Blatantly false. Do you even read the links you post? Clearly not. This is the third time in 2 days you posted citations that undermine or outright contradict the claim you are trying to support. That's a story about voter registration data being hacked before the election--not voting machines for vote manipulation. The story about Trump-Russiacollusion was always about the influence campaigns. That's the conclusion of the Mueller investigation. That's the conclusion of the Republican-led senate intelligence committee report. Russian intelligence was running an influence campaign to help Trump win. That's established fact. Trump's campaign chair (and lacky) were meeting with Russian intelligence operatives while this was happening. That's established fact. It has nothing to do with US intel's conclusion that Russia did not access voting machines. So let me get this straight. We’re supposed to believe, as you apparently do, that a multi-agency, multi-year “treasonous conspiracy” unfolded DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION involving dozens (if not hundreds) of career intelligence professionals somehow: Left behind “irrefutable evidence” ever resulted in a single criminal charge Fooled not just one investigation—but all of them Cool cool cool. Meanwhile, in the real world: The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee—led at the time by Republicans—concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election and did so in a way that benefited Trump https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf The Mueller investigation found sweeping Russian interference and numerous contacts between Trump associates and Russians https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/dl Even the Republican-led committee explicitly stated the intelligence community assessment was “coherent and well-constructed,” not some last-minute fiction https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf So the “theory” here requires you to believe that, career analysts risked prison to fake intelligence, multiple oversight bodies (including Republicans) just… went along with it, and somehow none of this has held up in court, under oath, or under cross-examination. You're out of your goddamn mind, and firmly wedged up Trump's ass. Look—intelligence assessments are human creations and aren’t going to be flawless-- but your OWN DAMN LINK says that the overall analysis was deemed defensible. They involve judgment, uncertainty, and debate. They could even have been wrong in part and right overall--but that is a very different claim from “they were knowingly fabricated as part of a treason plot.”. Gabbard is not releasing intelligence. She's not cracking a case. She's servicing one of Trump's grievances. If he wants to be pissed at somebody, he should be pissed at Paul Manafort. But nah, he pardoned him for causing all of this. I wonder why?

Yep. I too await his sources and clear documentation on that...years later. 😂

I miss the Progressive Conservative Party of years gone by from the the late 70's, early 80's. I do not recognize todays party. Seems to me the Manning Effect casts a long shadow.

Forgot to mention... don't forget to send the back-up you have for Carney's $1B expense summary from last year. You can include it along with your summary of how the industrial carbon tax impacts food inflation if easier 👍

And now the price of fertilizer, diesel, plastic among a thousand or so other products are now 30& higher than three weeks ago thanks to the Orange Plague, so ya, food prices are going to spike bigly. And that is not because of Carney.

Rebuttal ^FAIL, as USUAL

Right. Because the house bill was the ONLY way? Trump did not oppose the bill for it's intent, he opposed it for the unintended consequences. Like the release of victim's names and the false claims that were included. He wanted a way to get the info out there about the potentially guilty while leaving the obviously innocent people alone. But, TDS combined the the Epstein conspiracy theorists were a powerful group, when combined. So he signed the bill, after getting the house to agree to some redactions. The original bill required no redactions. See, you guys lie like this all the time. You take an action and assume a motive, without evidence. ALL of the claims in the Epstein files were lwnjs that went to the DOJ with made up stories in an attempt to keep Trump out of office. The rest of the mentions are Trump giving character statements and hearsay testimony. It is sad how you glam onto rumors and conspiracy theories to fuel your hatred. Must be nice to have so few problems in life that you have to make up new ones to deal with.

So what's wrong with "a fellow named Jenny"? Did she spit on your food when you sneered at her?

😂

@Goddess People like @eyeball are going to do and say anything to deflect from Libbie culpability. Hell he'd sacrifice his own children for "the cause". They are, in fact, monsters. Incapable of common sense or reason. Oh they know the implications of their position on this. But gosh darnit...siding with Conservatives is simply unthinkable. One can only hope such tragedy visits their families. THEN we'll see them either shut up, or try to justify a multiple convicted rapist, being released only to fck the life out of his little girl.

Thanks to the liberals these kids have no food, nowhere to live, no hope for the future, no decent job prospects that will pay them I truly living wage even if they complete University, They're basically hopeless unless their parents are wealthy and will leave them a big inheritance. That's what the liberals have done to Canada. They've killed the hope of an entire generation. Those kids are all entering voting age whereas the old Boomers who support the liberals are dying off.

Eyeball, the vaccines didn't accomplish anything. Not one thing. They didn't prevent the spread at all, and they didn't prevent people from dying. Deaths went up. They had two jobs, they accomplished neither of them. Deaths were actually up by a lot. And the vast majority of the people who died were muti-vaxed. Almost 90% in 2022. How did they spin that into a success? They said "But way more people got infected." Now, just keep in mind, the people who came up with that one were already guilty of lying to us many times before that. They lied about the origin of covid It was a lie for Fauci not to disclose that the NiH developed a coronavirus that was transmissible among humans just a km away from what they're calling ground zero they lied when they said that it was racist to prevent people from flying in from China they lied when they pretended that young people needed a vax they lied when they said that it would prevent the spread: vax manufactures never tested for any such thing they lied for a long time about vax safety - it was killing people and causing serious heart problems in very healthy people while they wee denying those things they lied when they pretended to know that HCQ and ivermectin couldn't possibly work, and when they pretended to know that the vaccines would work that was also a lie They lied when they pretended that the jabs were working as promised, and that they were safe they did abysmally stupid things like "let people fly in from covid-central and wander around inside of crowded public buildings until mid-March, and then ban Canadians from walking outside in public parks a week later". That might not seem like a big deal to you, but to anyone who understands what kills viruses and how they spread, that was an epidemiological abomination they lied when they pretended that covid was over in 2022 - it was killing far more people than ever before they said it was "a vaccine". Then two shots for one vaccine series. Fine. But then it was a 3rd, then it was "you'll always need new boosters". That counts as a lie. So after all those lies - and they were all lies because the truth was known to be the exact opposite of what they said when they said all those things - you wanna take them at their word for "deaths are only up because infections are WAAAAAAYYYYYYY up"? Swabs, eyeball. People died, and we know that, but they are telling you "Yeah but so many more swabs came back positive this year". I'm talking about actual deaths, they are counting the number of positive swabs, but you and I have no way of ever finding out of all those swabs even existed. And why would you take them at their word after so many lies? But even if the real reason actually was "infections were up by so much" then that's still a vax-failure, because "preventing the spread" was the jabs' main selling point? Right? Wasn't "preventing the spread" the only reason we forced young people to vax? And it didn't do that. We forced millions of Canadians to take the jab to prevent the spread and infections went up astronomically. Hey eyeball: deaths were at 15,000/yr in 2020 85% of us got vaxed by 2022, and the vax was supposed to prevent everyone who took it from dying, and even from preventing the spread. Did it prevent everyone who took it from dying? Because round 15,000 multi-vaxed people died in 2022. Oh, right, "the swabs". Stop saying it worked, dude. It failed 100%.

lol... the only thing that twisted is your thinking, which would be a great case study for any phycologist.

Well said. One analysts view of this... Whether he's right or wrong about the timing or pbl if it lasts too long it's going to have a massive impact. I know they're asking for another $200B which says it's going to continue, but an exit strategy looks pretty good right about now too. The Strait of Hormuz must be opened in days, not weeks, to avoid global recession risks – BofA head of research Mar 19, 2026 at 11:25 AM ETCrude Oil Futures (CL1:COM), CO1:COM, SPGSIAUCO, USO, DBO, UNG, USL, UNL, BOIL, OILKBy: Monica L. Correa, SA News Editor Follow Seeking Alpha on Google for the latest stock news The current Middle East conflict could escalate rapidly, potentially driving oil prices (CO1:COM), (CL1:COM) above $200 per barrel if disruptions persist for multiple months, according to Francisco Blanch, head of Commodities and Derivatives Research at Bank of America Global Research. In an interview with CNBC, Blanch emphasized that high energy prices and supply disruptions are creating significant risks of a global recession, with current estimates showing an eight-percentage-point gap in global energy supplies. Blanch identified two critical factors that must be addressed to prevent a global economic downturn: protecting critical energy infrastructure from further strikes and immediately reopening the Strait of Hormuz. “When I say quickly, I mean days, not weeks or months,” Blanch said, underscoring the urgency of the situation. He noted that roughly one percentage point of energy is needed for every percentage point of global GDP, making the current supply gap particularly alarming. The analyst explained that soaring commodity prices are essentially forcing what he called “demand destruction” across the global economy. “Demand destruction is essentially another term for economic activity contraction or recession, whichever way you want to call it,” Blanch stated. Prices, he said, are serving as a signal to effectively force people and businesses out of their normal consumption patterns. The crisis is already triggering widespread industrial and agricultural fallouts beyond the oil markets. Blanch pointed to factories in Asia shutting down on the petrochemical front, the Philippines moving to a four-day work week, and Thailand instructing workers to stay home, while overnight strikes at a GTL plant connected to fertilizer production are putting additional pressure on agriculture. Aluminum (SPGSIA), the most energy-intensive metal, is particularly vulnerable to the energy price surge. While the U.S. is somewhat more insulated as a net energy exporter, Blanch cautioned that the situation remains “frail” for American consumers. Dubai crude has already spiked to $170 per barrel, and Japanese natural gas has reached $26 per MMBtu, though domestic measures like waiving the Jones Act are being implemented to mitigate impacts on U.S. consumers. Blanch’s baseline scenario assumes a relatively quick resolution to the conflict, but he warned that a prolonged crisis would push prices even higher. “We can see prices spiking over $200 a barrel as soon as the market believes that this can be a multi-month operation,” he said, adding that without the return of disrupted supplies, very high prices will be necessary to continue rationing global demand.

I see you meet the forums local ho....she is very special...to bad they discontinued that model, they did not say why, but i'm sure its a good reason...

That was your toaster telling you to keep it out of this. Sure kid.

OMG the girl gave testimony but I guess like all the other women that he assaulted, she was a liar too. So was the one that won her lawsuit. All liars. Only The Don speaks the truth. </sarcasm> added for the benefit of those too f_cking thick to figure that out

Stop projecting. I've m seen a few reviews now too, on CBC even. They seem pretty good. I certainly haven't seen anything that suggests Poilievre said anything that embarrassed himself or Canada. Just asshats emotionally invested in their preconceived notions piping up. Like you, here and now, piping up.

In the short term but in the end this will likelier only push the world harder in the direction of alternatives. Now is when we should be taxing windfall war profits to hasten the development of alternatives.

San Fransisco used to be such a literally magical place.

The red hat cult dont do "facts" You'd think that if you show them the facts, that theyre going to wake up. Thats not going to happen. Remember, you're not challenging their opinion, your challenging their identity. So when confronted, they double down. Even when the evidence is undeniable. Even if the lies are obvious. In their minds, any views that differ must be fraudulent. They need to believe it, because believing the lie makes them feel safe. Their tribe is where they feel safe. Their tribe is where they belong. In their minds, belonging always beats being right. Its almost as if the more logical and evidence based an arguments is, the more desperate they become to hold onto their delusions. Which is overwhelmingly obvious of many of the posters here. Nothing will change in the minds of the red hats, until the lies become more costly than the comfort the lies bring. They've lost all humanity and empathy for those outside their tribe. Remember, empathy and compassion are evolved states of being. They require the mental capacity to step past our most primal urges. In the last few years, the red hats have come to believe that weaponized cruelty is part of some well-thought out Master plan. Cruelty is seen by some as an adroit cudgel to gain power. Empathy and kindness are considered weak. I'm here to tell you that when someone's path through this world is marked with acts of cruelty, they have failed the first test of an advanced society. They never forced their animal brain to evolve past its first instinct. They never forged new mental pathways to overcome their own instinctual fears. And so their thinking and problem solving lacks the imagination and creativity that emotionally mature people have in spades. Over my many years in politics and business, I have found one thing to be universally true. The most evolved folks in the room are the most empathetic, emotionally mature, and humane. In a World full of evolving individuals, the red hats are a clan of cave men. They're not even intelligent enough to be capable of understanding how stupid they are. So, when you talk to these fools, always remember...... They're idi0ts.

President Trump had some fun with Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi today when a reporter from Japan asked why the U.S. did not alert allies about the planned attack on Iran. Nevertheless, some allies including Japan are now leaning towards helping to keep open the Strait of Hormuz.

LOL

Even while the judge admits that he thinks the guy is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This is bullshit. We should be throwing his ass out of the country. Instead, he's going to sue us and demand permanent residency.

Border agency 'systemic collapse' allows man found guilty of immigration fraud to walk free and sue Canada | CBC News Border agency 'systemic collapse' allows man found guilty of immigration fraud to walk free and sue Canada

So why is he desperately recruiting other nations to open the Strait of Hormuz he forgot to protect? LMAO

The left these days is mostly based on hatred and bigotry. Not the first time I've said it, not the first time they've proved it.

"We are aware of reports of strikes in the vicinity of Ali Al Salem Air Base. For operational security reasons, we do not discuss assessments of damage or impacts to military facilities," DND spokesperson Lt. Pamela Hogan said in an email Thursday.

What does that have to do with the fact your Administration has no idea whatsoever what they are doing? How is your Orange man helping you? Trump and his family are laughing at you and cashing in. Lol.

Hey TDS cultists - you lose, again.

Well, we have now read 1.39 million DOJ documents in the Epstein case. Every one. We have built investigation dossiers on eight people: Bill Gates (2,265 documents), Woody Allen (2,613), Reid Hoffman (1,976), Bill Clinton (1,586), Larry Summers (739), Leon Black (667), Elon Musk (55), and Donald Trump. For Donald Trump, across the entire corpus, we found 40 documents. Not 40 damning documents. 40 documents total -- every sworn deposition, every FBI interview, every civil complaint, every flight log entry, every media reference of any kind linking Trump to Epstein in the largest document production in DOJ history. As with Elon, the number is the story. And as with Elon, the documents themselves tell that story even better. Every quote below is verbatim. Every citation is a DOJ document number you can verify. Click the links. This post comes from those links. There are just 40. You can read them yourself. THE FRIENDSHIP It must be made clear: Trump and Epstein were friends. This must be stated plainly, because everything that follows only makes sense if you understand that. They were Palm Beach neighbors in the 1990s. Both owned waterfront estates. Both moved in the same Manhattan social circles -- the dinner-party circuit that included Mort Zuckerman, Leon Black, Ronald Perelman, and a dozen other New York billionaires. In March 2003, Vanity Fair profiled Epstein as "The Talented Mr. Epstein" and named Trump as one of seven businessmen who dined at his 71st Street townhouse [187-11]. Juan Alessi, Epstein's house manager, named Trump among many prominent visitors to the Palm Beach property [055-12]. A 1993 photograph shows Trump and Marla Maples with Epstein and Maxwell at a New York party [EFTA00787056]. This was before Epstein's convictions. In 2002, reached by phone for a New York Magazine profile, Trump gave the currently most weaponized quote in the entire archive: "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it -- Jeffrey enjoys his social life." [EFTA00013640] That quote has been cited thousands of times. It was given on speakerphone, before any public allegations, before any investigation, before any reason to be cautious. "It is even said that" is hearsay framing -- Trump reporting what others say. "On the younger side" is ambiguous. But the quote exists, and it reflects a social warmth that post-Epstein scandal Trump would prefer to erase. In 2003, Ghislaine Maxwell assembled a leather-bound album for Epstein's 50th birthday. Trump's contribution: a card with "several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker," signed below the waist [senate_judiciary_to_bondi]. These are the facts, and the facts must be stated openly. The friendship was real. But what happened next matters more. THE FALLING OUT Around 2004, that friendship ended. Trump outbid Epstein at auction for the Maison de L'Amitie estate in Palm Beach. In Michael Wolff's 2017 recordings, Epstein himself confirmed the real estate dispute as the breaking point [wolff_tapes_transcript_exhibit]. But the real estate dispute was simply the excuse that Epstein made for something darker. Brad Edwards, the attorney who represented Epstein's victims, established under oath that Trump banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after Epstein sexually assaulted an underage girl at the club [773-04]. There is no documented contact between Trump and Epstein after the falling out in 2004. Not one email. Not one phone call. Not one schedule entry. Not one reference of any kind in 1.39 million documents. After 2004, the relationship was over. Trump had drawn a hard line. THE GIRL IN THE SPA Virginia Roberts was sixteen years old, earning nine dollars an hour as a locker room attendant at Mar-a-Lago [1218-11]. In her memoir, she described the club in awestruck terms -- "sheer awe at the gold arches." Ghislaine Maxwell approached her while she was reading a book about massage [EFTA01689026]. "I was working at Donald Trump's spa in Mar-a-Lago and I was prompted by Ghislaine to come to Jeffrey's mansion in Palm Beach that afternoon after work." [1090-16] Roberts names many powerful men in her testimony. Clinton. Prince Andrew. Dershowitz. Wexner. She does not name Trump. He was the property owner. But Maxwell did the recruiting. An FBI interview of a different victim's mother captures how this worked: she "heard that a prince and DONALD TRUMP visited EPSTEIN's house and this made [her] think that if they are there then how could EPSTEIN be a criminal" [EFTA00089603]. That is what Epstein did with famous names. He wore used them as bait. As camouflage. If Epstein was associated with so-and-so, then how could he be a predator? Trump, unlike others, immediately put a stop to that. THE ACCUSATIONS Three allegations against Trump exist in the corpus. A Jane Doe civil lawsuit against Epstein's estate alleges that Epstein introduced her to Trump when she was fourteen, "allegedly elbowing Trump and saying, 'This is a good one, right?' Trump smiled and nodded in agreement" [1078-5]. At the Maxwell trial, a victim testified under oath that Epstein introduced her to Trump and took her to Mar-a-Lago when she was fourteen [120-cr-00330/745]. That testimony confirmed the social introduction. It contained no allegation of misconduct by Trump. Defense counsel used Trump's name to establish Epstein's social reach, not to implicate Trump. In 2016, during the presidential campaign, a civil complaint alleged the rape of a thirteen-year-old at Epstein's 71st Street house in the summer of 1994 -- Katie Johnson v. Trump & Epstein [EFTA01386393]. It was filed pro se, dismissed for improper filing, refiled with an attorney, and dropped before trial. It was never proven, never tested under cross-examination, never corroborated by any other witness in the criminal investigation. In August 2017, Epstein told Michael Wolff on tape: "I was Donald's closest friend for 10 years" [wolff_tapes_transcript_exhibit]. He claimed Trump liked to "f--- the wives of his best friends" and that Melania first slept with Trump on Epstein's plane. These recordings were released days before the 2024 election. They are unsworn claims by a convicted pedophile and serial liar to an author -- a man who told the same journalist his week included "woody allen, elon musk, frank gehri... bill gates" [EFTA02561193]. And that pedophile and liar had an axe to grind. A big one. Those are the allegations. What follows is what happened when they were investigated. THE INVESTIGATION The FBI investigated Donald Trump in connection with the Epstein case. The master case index lists him as a "positive case hit" with "salacious information": "Donald Trump (one identified victim claimed abuse by Trump but ultimately refused to cooperate)" [EFTA00161528]. One allegation. One victim who refused to cooperate. No prosecution. The FBI's National Threat Operations Center received four separate complaints naming Trump [EFTA01660679]. A hearsay oral sex claim via a friend-of-friend chain. An anonymous party guest list. A claim about "big orgy parties" from a sixteen-year-old model. A Trump Golf Course allegation "deemed not credible." All anonymous. None corroborated. The Senate Judiciary Committee -- bipartisan, Grassley and Durbin -- reported that FBI personnel were specifically instructed to "flag" any records in which President Trump was mentioned across all 1.39 million documents. The result: no incriminating "client list." No evidence of criminal conduct [senate_judiciary_to_bondi]. The Southern District of New York, which prosecuted the Epstein case, had Trump's phone records in their evidence. Their grand jury presentation includes a message slip showing Trump called Epstein on November 1, 2000 -- a routine call, no message content [EFTA00008599]. The same presentation, same pages, includes message slips reading "She has females for Mr. J.E." Prosecutors had Trump's innocuous call alongside explicit trafficking procurement. They found nothing to charge. Attorney General William Barr, under oath before the House Oversight Committee: "I was never informed of the evidence, and I'm skeptical there is any... if they had evidence, this would've been low-hanging fruit." [oversight_republican_staff_memo] THE ATTORNEY WHO WOULD KNOW Brad Edwards represented Epstein's victims for years. He investigated every lead. He subpoenaed records, deposed witnesses, and built the case that led to federal prosecution. He was the attorney most motivated to find evidence against anyone connected to Epstein. In April 2010, Edwards filed a sworn affidavit: "While research by other plaintiffs' attorneys and myself has uncovered other persons that were acquaintances of Mr. Epstein, specifically Donald Trump, Alan Dershowitz, Bill Clinton, Tommy Mottola, and David Copperfield, we have no information that any of those people (other than Mr. Dershowitz) have spoken to Mr. Epstein about Jane Doe or any of the other specific victims of Mr. Epstein's molestation." [560-03] Edwards' attorney Jack Scarola: "There is no evidence the President was involved in Epstein's schemes" [773-04]. Edwards filed a notice to depose Trump in September 2009 [701]. As a witness. Not as a suspect. He sought Trump's testimony to help the victim's case. And there is this: when Edwards was investigating Epstein, reaching out to the powerful men in Epstein's orbit for cooperation, Trump was the only person who picked up the phone and returned his call [50-2009-CA-040800/549]. The attorney who spent years investigating on behalf of Epstein's victims -- who had every reason to find evidence, every incentive to implicate the powerful -- swore under oath that his investigation found nothing linking Trump to the abuse. When he called, Trump answered. Readily. Trump knew what Epstein was and wanted to talk about it. WHAT THE DOCUMENTS DON'T SHOW Pilot David Rodgers flew Epstein's planes for twenty-eight years. He sat for a seventeen-page FBI interview and reviewed his flight logs covering 1991 through 2007 [EFTA00159180]. Trump appears once: Flight 934, January 5, 1997. Passengers: Epstein, Maxwell, Donald Trump, Mark Epstein, and Didier, a chef. Route: Palm Beach to Newark. No flight in the corpus shows Trump traveling to Little Saint James, to Zorro Ranch, or to any international destination on Epstein's aircraft. Epstein's famous ninety-two-page personal contact book does not contain a "Donald Trump" entry [black-book-redacted]. It lists Robert and Blaine Trump, Ivana Trump, Ivanka Trump, and Trump Management Inc. -- the socialite channel, not Donald. There are zero financial transactions between Trump and Epstein in any direction. No donations. No investments. No advisory fees. No foundation grants. Even Epstein's own defense lawyers, in a motion to pare down a 169-person witness list, argued that Trump had "no connection at all" to the case [1338]. And Epstein himself, in a draft letter, grouped Trump among "friends and other innocent bystanders" whose names had been dragged in by "abusive discovery" [EFTA01128737]. THE COMPARISON The Epstein documents reveal concentric circles of association. At the center: people who were financially entangled, who visited the island repeatedly, who maintained the relationship through and after Epstein's conviction. Trump was not in any of these circles. Woody Allen: 2,613 documents. Nine years of regular contact. Dinner companion. Epstein attended his film shoots. Bill Gates: 2,265 documents. Multiple confirmed meetings. Donations routed through Epstein. Boris Nikolic named in Epstein's will. Reid Hoffman: 1,976 documents. 36 documented gift exchanges. Slept at Epstein's 71st Street mansion. Bill Clinton: 1,586 documents. 147 sexually explicit messages with Maxwell. Multiple confirmed island visits. Flights on Epstein's plane confirmed by his pilot ("ten or twenty times"). Active participation in the post-arrest denial campaign. Larry Summers: 739 documents. Regular dinner companion. Island visits with family. Harvard Program for Evolutionary Dynamics funded through Epstein. Leon Black: 667 documents. $158 million paid to Epstein across a decades-long financial relationship. Elon Musk: 55 documents. Zero financial transactions. Twenty-two months of sporadic, taciturn emails with Epstein chasing Musk, but leaving Epstein little to grab onto. Donald Trump: 40 documents. Zero financial transactions. Zero island visits. One commuter flight. A friendship that ended in 2004, eleven years before the first federal prosecution, after Trump drew the line and Epstein was banned from Mar-a-Lago for his behavior. The only person in Epstein's orbit who returned the victim's attorney's call. Trump's entire file is 1.8% the size of Gates's. WHAT REMAINS These documents show a man who was part of an early social world he did not yet completely understand, who called a predator "terrific" before anyone knew what that predator was, who sent a crude birthday card before there was any reason not to, whose property was used as a hunting ground without his knowledge or permission -- and who, when the investigation came, banned the predator from his club, picked up the phone for the victim's attorney, and was cleared by every investigative body that looked. 40 documents. Every quote verbatim. Every citation verifiable. Full compendium (40 docs): THE_DONALD_TRUMP_FILES.pdf - Google Drive AI-optimized compendium (upload to any LLM and ask it anything): trump_gold_complete.md - Google Drive

Thank you for admitting you don't realize the truth and are delusional Guardian said they had it from people who had copies. So not from the public relase. DUUUUUuuuuuuhhhhhh The extra people were never charged so they didn't find them THAT convincing obviously. And once again you claim that investigating someone is proof that they're guilty when it's someone you don't like. Your own source called the claims 'outlandish'. Sooooo - According to you bondi lied when she said there were no accusation in the file and it turns out the file was missing. Soooo that would make her right. It was when they went back that YOUR OWN SOURCE says she became more and more "outlandish". Right there in the story YOU provided Oh the article that says her claims were outlandish? And it would be the same file for all four, just for separate interviews . One person. Sooo yeah. And again not only do you look like a complete twat for your childish answers but you still can't explain why he would be so devious that he would remove three out of four files but leave the other one there when it hints to the existence of the other ones as well. I mean even the villains in Scooby-Doo aren't that stupid. So do you want to explain that one?