Epstein files drop shows Democrats covered for Bill Clinton

[West]

5 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

If anyone commits any crime, then the full weight of the law should be put on them.

What you seem to be implying is that if a Democrat commits that crime, then it absolves Republicans - like Trump - from the same crime. No, they all should be held accountable.

Now, this thread is about the Epstein files, so I will mention that Susie Wiles, in her Vanity Fair interviews, said that Bill Clinton is not in the files. She says she has read the Epstein files, and in her words:

 

Trump has claimed, without evidence, that Bill Clinton visited Epstein’s infamous private island, Little St. James, “supposedly 28 times.” “There is no evidence” those visits happened, according to Wiles; as for whether there was anything incriminating about Clinton in the files, “The president was wrong about that.”

No, what you seem to be doing is trying to deflect from the topic of the discussion. Which is three decades of Democrat coverups of Bill Clinton's sex crimes

[User]

1 hour ago, Radiorum said:

This is a funny thing to say considering only Trump has had a verdict made against him for sexual abuse and not only do the Republicans protect him, they treat him like he is a god

What is funny is how you have to word this as "had a verdict made against him" so as to avoid the obvious truth that it was a civil case... 

59 minutes ago, Radiorum said:

If anyone commits any crime, then the full weight of the law should be put on them.

Except, this is not your attitude toward illegal immigration. 

[User]

1 hour ago, Radiorum said:

said that Bill Clinton is not in the files.

That is not what she said. 

[robosmith]

11 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Yes dear...

^Pu$$y whipped reflex response. LMAO

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, Fluffypants said:

You mean like when the Supreme Court abortion draft was leaked that you drooled over. Did that follow the LAW.

You're LYING. I wasn't even on this board then.

5 hours ago, Fluffypants said:

Did the Democrats release of all those Trump picture they selectively censored pictures of Trump with girls to make it look like they were hiding the faces of minors follow the LAW.

Redacting victims is what was PROMISED. Duh

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, Fluffypants said:

Lets not forget Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones

Let's not forget NO CRIMINAL CHARGES FILED, unlike the NUMEROUS FELONY INDICTMENTS of Trump.

4 hours ago, West said:

Democrats are working overtime to again protect sexual deviant and predator Bill Clinton. This time they are attempting to stall and interfere with any attempt to bring Democrats to justice by going after Pam Bondi

Bondi is breaking the new law everyday now. Bill is old "news."

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Venandi said:

All of this is why I thought the data dump was a bad idea.

There was too much potential to hurt innocent acquaintances and victims alike. At some point you have to trust the DOJ to do the right thing. I'd accept the idea that different administrations have differing motivations wrt prosecutions, but I'm just cynical enough to believe that if Trump was culpable Biden would have outed him... same deal for Clinton under a Trump administration.

All of this has Roboduh demanding evidence to support wild allegations... you have to know something is up when that happens.

I don't believe a word of it and the redacted photos of Trump with the Miss Universe contestants stands as an example of what I mean.... it was a deliberate hit job that did no favours for Democrats in the credibility department. 

The alternative to trusting consecutive DOJs to do the right thing is to release everything with total transparency and let the chips fall where they may. Not only does it strike me as the only other viable option, it completely defangs those who would seek to vilify innocents for their own gain.

I would (again) point to the redacted photos of Trump... the only reason for those redactions was to falsely suggest that the girls were underage. While I'm glad it blew up in Democratic faces, it reinforces the notion that the release either shouldn't have been done at all, or should have been done with total and complete transparency.... nothing in between.

If I were going to release this I would never have done it incrementally.... IMO Trump got this badly wrong. 

Redactions of victims is what was PROMISED. Duh 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, Fluffypants said:

From a crazy woman in a place where they had to change the law for him to even be put on civil trial and where there was 0 chance he would get a fair trial. On top of that had a judge literally claim he defamed her when he said he didn't rape her which literally was one of the charges made against him that came back not guilty and awarded her with a bunch of money.

The law wasn't changed to get Trump, it was changed to get EVERYONE who did what Trump did.

You don't really want to be on that side, and you wouldn't be if this wasn't anonymous, since your employment could be threatened.

[West]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Let's not forget NO CRIMINAL CHARGES FILED, unlike the NUMEROUS FELONY INDICTMENTS of Trump.

Bondi is breaking the new law everyday now. Bill is old "news."

No, Ro Khanna violated the law by passing the nonsense which violated other laws. Its dishonesty by woke Democrats to provide cover yet again as they have for decades. Sick people 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, West said:

It helps when Clinton has the powerful people allowing him to commit heinous sex crimes and get away with it

You mean the women who FAILED to file any complaints?

Epstein was charged and basically given IMMUNITY for all but one of his crimes. 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, West said:

No, what you seem to be doing is trying to deflect from the topic of the discussion. Which is three decades of Democrat coverups of Bill Clinton's sex crimes

Since those "coverups" were successful, you have NO EVIDENCE, AND the statute of limitations has EXPIRED.

[robosmith]

4 minutes ago, West said:

No, Ro Khanna violated the law by passing the nonsense which violated other laws. Its dishonesty by woke Democrats to provide cover yet again as they have for decades. Sick people 

^LYING AGAIN.

Ro Khanna cannot "pass the nonsense." Duh

Thanks for demonstrating you know NOTHING about US legislative procedures.

[West]

16 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You mean the women who FAILED to file any complaints?

Epstein was charged and basically given IMMUNITY for all but one of his crimes. 

Media Matters ran cover for Clinton and Hillary went on the attack when they came out. 

[West]

17 minutes ago, robosmith said:

^LYING AGAIN.

Ro Khanna cannot "pass the nonsense." Duh

Thanks for demonstrating you know NOTHING about US legislative procedures.

Sad to see that you are not ready to acknowledge that you actively support a party and media apparatus who covered up decades of sex crimes against minors 

[robosmith]

54 minutes ago, West said:

Sad to see that you are not ready to acknowledge that you actively support a party and media apparatus who covered up decades of sex crimes against minors 

Sad to KNOW that your fantasies have taken over your brain which is what happens when you have NO EVIDENCE.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Radiorum said:

This is a funny thing to say considering only Trump has had a verdict made against him for sexual abuse and not only do the Republicans protect him, they treat him like he is a god

 

A verdict?

You mean a civil case that wasn't a criminal trial at all?

Try again junior

Oh and by the way, they impeached clinton over sex issues and lying.   So.... nope, not the only one

[West]

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

You mean the women who FAILED to file any complaints?

Epstein was charged and basically given IMMUNITY for all but one of his crimes. 

It DOESN'T MATTER. Trump is a witness and the FBI at the direction of Obama/Clinton intimidated him. 

The statute of limitations has not passed on witness tampering and intimidation. Duh

[gatomontes99]

Did Trump play 4d chess with this? Did he slow play it to time the release as the midterms approach?  

Trump clearly started his campaign to win the midterms this week. Just as this information starts trickling out. I can't help but think he timed the release to help him win the midterms. The trickle of information will probably spill out through November.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, West said:

It DOESN'T MATTER. Trump is a witness and the FBI at the direction of Obama/Clinton intimidated him. 

Guess what. "Intimidation" is not illegal. Nor is lying to a criminal to get a confession.

1 hour ago, West said:

The statute of limitations has not passed on witness tampering and intimidation. Duh

Your amateur legal opinion means nothing except that you're practicing law without a license.

[West]

58 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Guess what. "Intimidation" is not illegal. Nor is lying to a criminal to get a confession.

Your amateur legal opinion means nothing except that you're practicing law without a license.

Nonsense. Witness tampering is a crime, duh. And I am just a guy discussing current events on a political forum. Duh

Edited December 21, 2025 by West

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Guess what. "Intimidation" is not illegal. Nor is lying to a criminal to get a confession.

Your amateur legal opinion means nothing except that you're practicing law without a license.

Hypocrite in back to back sentences? Fascinating new low for you. First you make a legal proclamation, without being a lawyer yourself, then you chastise him for doing the same. 

But you don't care that we all see you as a hypocrite, do you? 

[Venandi]

5 hours ago, robosmith said:

Redactions of victims is what was PROMISED. Duh 

Redactions are easily weaponized as an I/O tool to create new victims for temporary political gain. They're easily proved wrong but the law of primacy still prevails in such matters.

It's easy to imply wrong doing where there was none. Even a democrat can do it, actually, even you can do it... right?

It's one of several reasons I was opposed to the release.

Trump got this wrong, all it will do is victimize people who don't deserve it... and it will be small minded, vicious, partisan little trolls (just  like you) who lead the charge. 

 

Edited December 21, 2025 by Venandi

[robosmith]

22 minutes ago, West said:

Nonsense. Witness tampering is a crime, duh. And I am just a guy discussing current events on a political forum. Duh

You mean like when Trump threatened GA SoS Brad Raffensperger with legal jeopardy if he didn't change the GA vote count?

Brad Raffensperger was not just a witness, he was a government official.

Too bad you got nothing like that.

[robosmith]

9 minutes ago, Venandi said:

Redactions are easily weaponized as an I/O tool to create new victims for temporary political gain. They're easily proved wrong but the law of primacy still prevails in such matters.

It's easy to imply wrong doing where there was none. Even a democrat can do it, actually, even you can do it... right?

It's one of several reasons I was opposed to the release.

Trump got this wrong, all it will do is victimize people who don't deserve it... and it will be small minded, vicious, partisan little trolls (just  like you) who lead the charge. 

 

You have NO IDEA who "deserves it."

IF they're palling around with Epstein and getting "massages," there's a very good chance they "deserve it."

[Venandi]

14 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You have NO IDEA who "deserves it."

And neither do you.... that's the point.

The difference is that you think you do and you'll happily act on it in the complete absence of the sort of proof you constantly demand of others. As I said above, the law of primacy is governing with character assassination efforts and it's easily exploited.... even by people with little more to say than Duh.

IMO, trolls like you are one of the reasons this was a bad idea.