XPost: alt.politics, talk.politics.misc
From: nuh-uh@nope.com
On 2026-02-12 10:41, Meme them till they cry wrote:
> On 2/12/26 1:19 PM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2026-02-12 09:47, Meme them till they cry wrote:
>>> On 2/12/26 12:16 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>> On 2026-02-12 08:56, Meme them till they cry wrote:
>>>>> On 2/12/26 11:43 AM, Lee wrote:
>>>>>> Socialism is for losers wrote in
>>>>>> news:01fpokhj028c4m7m7at2sdob5dfb431p97@4ax.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 16:07:42 +0000, Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Socialism is for losers wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:lvqmokli1khclbi61c4d9t0ts4r9eq51ir@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 17:02:17 +0000, Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:10mffk4$lo$5@reader2.panix.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Do you think that Donald Trump was involved in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crimes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | allegedly committed by Jeffrey Epstein?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Yes.....: 46%
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | No......: 30%
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Not sure: 24%
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>>>> | President Donald Trump has repeatedly maintained that he
>>>>>>>>>>> | had no knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's sex crimes.
>>>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>>>> | But in July 2006, just as Jeffrey Epstein's criminal sex
>>>>>>>>>>> | charge became public, Trump called then-Palm Beach police
>>>>>>>>>>> | chief Michael Reiter to tell him that Epstein's activities
>>>>>>>>>>> | with teenaged girls were well known in both New York and
>>>>>>>>>>> | Palm Beach.
>>>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>>>> | "Thank goodness you're stopping him, everyone has known
>>>>>>>>>>> | he's been doing this," Trump told Reiter, according to a
>>>>>>>>>>> | 2019 FBI interview with Reiter contained in the Justice
>>>>>>>>>>> | Department's Epstein case files.
>>>>>>>>>>> | ...
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> government/article314631578.
>>>>>>>>>>> html>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --bks
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The same Trump who paid Stormy Daniels
>>>>>>>>>> #130,000 to deny the sex he never had with
>>>>>>>>>> her.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Stormy Daniels was an adult.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And Trump lied about screwing
>>>>>>>> her and bribing her.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can't condemn him for that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can't condemn Trump for anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who wouldn't have lied about screwing her?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you admit Trump lied.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not that you care about that....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just your daily reminder that Trump released 3.5 million more
>>>>> documents from the Epstein files than Biden.
>>>>
>>>> Because Congress passed a law requiring it...
>>>>
>>>> ...and he's actually in violation OF that law.
>>>
>>> Now explain Biden's failure to release them; or even democrats'
>>> failure to seek their release at any other time except during Trump's
>>> presidencies.
>>
>> Biden obeyed the laws which applied at that time.
>
> Non sequitur. There was no law requiring the release of the Epstein
> files during his administration, so his DOJ released exactly zero pages
> from the full investigative trove. Democrats in Congress didn't push for
> any legislation to force it either, despite controlling the House for
> part of his term. They had four years and did nothing.
There were laws that required they remain confidential.
>
>> Now explain why MAGAts are both claiming that the files are a hoax AND
>> that they implicated Democrats...
>
> Beats me. If it's a hoax, why did Trump sign the law mandating their
> release?
Because he expected his toadies to redact his name...
...which they spent months doing.
>
>> ...despite Democrats leading the charge to get the law passed that
>> requires their release...
>
> Since when is Thomas Massie a democrat? Massie, not Democrats, filed the
> discharge petition to force the vote when it stalled. It got bipartisan
> support: 427-1 in the House, unanimous in the Senate, and Trump signed
> it. If Democrats were hiding something, why push for a law forcing full
> release? This was a rare win for transparency across parties—credit
> where due, but it's not a one-sided story."
He filed the discharge petition along with a Democrat, Ro Khanna...
...and that petition got just 4 Republicans who signed on to it...
...as opposed to all the Democrats.
The 427-1 vote was after Trump had finally capitulated...
...and someone explained to him how they could fiddle with actual
compliance.
>
> By the way, why didn't democrats lead the charge when Biden was president?
>
>> ...while the DoJ is still trying to avoid fully complying with that law.
>
> The DOJ did miss the Dec. 19 deadline and got slammed for it—bipartisan
> lawmakers like Massie (R) and Khanna (D) called it a 'massive failure'
> and threatened contempt against AG Bondi. But they released over 3.5
> million pages by Jan. 30, plus thousands of videos/images, and claim
> it's full compliance with the law Trump signed. Critics say redactions
> are too heavy and not everything's out (e.g., maybe up to 6 million
> pages total), then turn around and whone that too much was released. If
> they're 'avoiding' compliance, why release millions after the backlash?
> This is more about bureaucratic delays and privacy fights than a cover-
> up—bipartisan pressure fixed the initial fumble.
Because they've been scrubbing as many mentions of Donald Trump from
what they've released as the feel they can get away with.
To the point that the word "don't" is redacted in some documents because
it consists of "don" and "t".
The DoJ is clearly redacting things other than information that can
identify the actual victims of these horrific crimes.
'(b)Prohibited grounds for withholding
(1)No record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of
embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to
any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.'
Trump's DoJ has clearly violated that section
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
