Epstein bar syndrome (you have to be drunk in one to believe what Democrats are saying)

Diogenes

Diogenes

Nemo me impune lacessit
The Acosta transcript just DESTROYED the Democrats' Epstein–Trump smear. Ranking Member Garcia and @OversightDems
have spent months pushing a LIE against President Trump.

1/ Acosta NEVER talked to Trump about Epstein.Not in person. Not on the phone. Not over email."He moved in circles that I did not move in." (p. 65)That's straight from his testimony.

G3enKBSWMAAyl8W



2/ Trump's name did not appear in the case. (p. 129): "I have no knowledge of Donald Trump's name appearing in any Epstein document ... (or) being associated with the Epstein investigation in any way." "If there was, it's pretty spectacular it hasn't leaked by now." (p. 130):

G3es0ALW8AAV4gN
G3es0AGWgAAbkC6

3/ Did Trump appoint Acosta because of Epstein? "No".

"Not in the least bit, no." (p. 124).

Did Trump ask Acosta to resign? No."[It] was my choice. It was not suggested by anyone at the White House that I resign." (p. 124).

This entire talking point was fabricated by Democrats.


G3et9fpXEAAvNLg


4/ Why did Acosta resign? "If you become a distraction, then it's not appropriate for you to serve in these jobs. ... I did not want to be a distraction to his administration, and I chose to resign." (p. 125)

The Democrat-dominated media and their Democrat overlords said he was forced out. Another lie.

G3eu3CFWQAAGGK8

​
5/ What about Epstein's sweetheart deal?

"We had an ASSURANCE that he would be in continuous confinement." (p. 44) "And had we known that he was going to get work release, this WOULD NOT have gone forward." (p. 156)

Palm Beach betrayed that deal, and Epstein walked.

G3exlyWXoAAaGk0

G3exlwhWoAAmMyb


6/ According to Acosta, the plea deal was about getting Epstein IN JAIL when a trial risked letting him off completely."

The trial was a crapshoot, and we just wanted the guy to go to jail." (p. 26)

Democrats knew this and lied anyway.


G3ez8CKXUAAOvzq

​


You can find it all here:


oversight.house.gov

Oversight Committee Releases Acosta Transcript - United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
oversight.house.gov oversight.house.gov
​
 
Diogenes said:
The Acosta transcript just DESTROYED the Democrats' Epstein–Trump smear. Ranking Member Garcia and @OversightDems
have spent months pushing a LIE against President Trump.

1/ Acosta NEVER talked to Trump about Epstein.Not in person. Not on the phone. Not over email."He moved in circles that I did not move in." (p. 65)That's straight from his testimony.

G3enKBSWMAAyl8W



2/ Trump's name did not appear in the case. (p. 129): "I have no knowledge of Donald Trump's name appearing in any Epstein document ... (or) being associated with the Epstein investigation in any way." "If there was, it's pretty spectacular it hasn't leaked by now." (p. 130):

G3es0ALW8AAV4gN
G3es0AGWgAAbkC6

3/ Did Trump appoint Acosta because of Epstein? "No".

"Not in the least bit, no." (p. 124).

Did Trump ask Acosta to resign? No."[It] was my choice. It was not suggested by anyone at the White House that I resign." (p. 124).

This entire talking point was fabricated by Democrats.


G3et9fpXEAAvNLg


4/ Why did Acosta resign? "If you become a distraction, then it's not appropriate for you to serve in these jobs. ... I did not want to be a distraction to his administration, and I chose to resign." (p. 125)

The Democrat-dominated media and their Democrat overlords said he was forced out. Another lie.

G3eu3CFWQAAGGK8

​
5/ What about Epstein's sweetheart deal?

"We had an ASSURANCE that he would be in continuous confinement." (p. 44) "And had we known that he was going to get work release, this WOULD NOT have gone forward." (p. 156)

Palm Beach betrayed that deal, and Epstein walked.

G3exlyWXoAAaGk0

G3exlwhWoAAmMyb


6/ According to Acosta, the plea deal was about getting Epstein IN JAIL when a trial risked letting him off completely."

The trial was a crapshoot, and we just wanted the guy to go to jail." (p. 26)

Democrats knew this and lied anyway.


G3ez8CKXUAAOvzq

​


You can find it all here:


oversight.house.gov

Oversight Committee Releases Acosta Transcript - United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
oversight.house.gov oversight.house.gov
​
Click to expand...
Trump’s man to a Comer/Jordan Committee, now there’s a daily double not known for their honesty, what’s next, Junior telling us Dad didn’t even know Jeffery

NEXT
 
archives said:
Trump’s man to a Comer/Jordan Committee, now there’s a daily double not known for their honesty, what’s next, Junior telling us Dad didn’t even know Jeffery

NEXT
Click to expand...


If you have evidence that the testimony was perjured, post it.

Naturally, I'll understand if you don't.
 
archives said:
No, nor do you have proof if is true other than the guy saying it is, and based upon his history, any skeptic would question its validity
Click to expand...


Sworn testimony before a Congressional subcommittee is generally considered credible evidence, as it is given under oath with legal consequences for perjury. Isn't it, Anchovies?
 
archives said:
Trump’s man to a Comer/Jordan Committee, now there’s a daily double not known for their honesty, what’s next, Junior telling us Dad didn’t even know Jeffery

NEXT
Click to expand...
You are trying to reason with a person who supposes the Democrats shut the government down...even though the Republicans control the presidency, the House of Representatives, the Senate...and apparently have the SCOTUS on their side.

That is like trying to reason with a rock.

I wish you good luck...but it ain't gonna work.
 
Ross Dolan said:
You are trying to reason with a person who supposes the Democrats shut the government down...even though the Republicans control the presidency, the House of Representatives, the Senate...and apparently have the SCOTUS on their side.

That is like trying to reason with a rock.

I wish you good luck...but it ain't gonna work.
Click to expand...

:palm:

It takes 60 votes in the Senate, Yank.
 
Acosta did a blatantly illegal deal to cover up for Epstein, and try to ensure no one who was associated with him could ever be charged.

You now have a Magat saying 'see Acosta said things', as if anyone should take a word he says as truthful.

Just release the files and let the Dems inside it be held to account for what they did.

JD Vance and Kash and others say it is Dem's named in it that would pay a price and Trump should stop protecting them and release the files.
 
Diogenes said:
:palm:

It takes 60 votes in the Senate, Yank.
Click to expand...
Yes it does.

And in every form of government, when you NEED the other party to give you votes you negotiate with them on some non partisan issues you can compromise on, to get their votes.

What you do not do is say 'fuck you, you will get nothing, just give us your damn vote'.

If you do that, then you are responsible for your governments failures.
 
QP! said:
Yes it does.

And in every form of government, when you NEED the other party to give you votes you negotiate with them on some non partisan issues you can compromise on, to get their votes.

What you do not do is say 'fuck you, you will get nothing, just give us your damn vote'.

If you do that, then you are responsible for your governments failures.
Click to expand...

Fuck you, you will get nothing.

Sucks to be you, I guess.
 
Diogenes said:
If you have evidence, post it. I'll understand if you can't, of course.
Click to expand...

Legal

Judge: Prosecutors violated law in dealings with Jeffrey Epstein victims​


A judge ruled on Thursday that federal prosecutors broke the law by failing to keep victims adequately informed about a plea deal that Jeffrey Epstein, a prominent financier, cut to avoid federal prosecution for sexual encounters with numerous underage girls....


....“Particularly problematic was the Government’s decision to conceal the existence of the NPA and mislead the victims to believe that federal prosecution was still a possibility,”...


------------------------------------

An Actual Conspiracy Kept Jeffrey Epstein’s Accomplices out of Prison​

With four little words, the government granted immunity to Epstein’s co-conspirators. Why?​


But not limited to: It was just a four-word phrase, a bit of plain contractual verbiage, but even now, more than a decade later, Spencer Kuvin has a hard time expressing just how bizarre it was. “It’s incredibly odd language,” said Kuvin, an attorney in Florida. “I’ve never seen it before in a non-prosecution agreement.”... Kuvin and I were talking about the infamous and inexplicable 2007 plea deal offered by then–US Attorney Alexander Acosta,...

The deal on its face is incredibly favorable to Epstein. If you look closer, things get even better for him:

The United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Lesley Groff, or Nadia Marcinkova.
Click to expand...
The four women named had allegedly helped recruit underage girls for Epstein at his direction. But that four-word phrase “but not limited to” gave a free pass to anybody who would have helped Epstein acquire or traffic underage girls for sex.

How could the government agree to immunize “any potential co-conspirators” of an alleged serial child rapist? ...
 
^ so in the above, even if the government came upon a person after the fact, who was working with Epstein and did even worse things than him, this deal tried to protect that person from ever being indicted.

WHY?

No defense lawyer would ask for that in the "deal" and if they did then certainly no Prosecutor should give it as it suggests you have not found certain criminal offenders yet that he is trying to protect.
 
Diogenes said:
Fuck you, you will get nothing.

Sucks to be you, I guess.
Click to expand...
I do not expect anything.

I am just explaining why the blame for this is on Trump and his admin and you support what i said with your statement here. This is all on Trump and his view "you will get nothing... give me your vote anyway', which anyone who is not stupid (so therefore not you) will see is what is to blame for this.
 
QP! said:
Legal

Judge: Prosecutors violated law in dealings with Jeffrey Epstein victims​


A judge ruled on Thursday that federal prosecutors broke the law by failing to keep victims adequately informed about a plea deal that Jeffrey Epstein, a prominent financier, cut to avoid federal prosecution for sexual encounters with numerous underage girls....


....“Particularly problematic was the Government’s decision to conceal the existence of the NPA and mislead the victims to believe that federal prosecution was still a possibility,”...


------------------------------------

An Actual Conspiracy Kept Jeffrey Epstein’s Accomplices out of Prison​

With four little words, the government granted immunity to Epstein’s co-conspirators. Why?​


But not limited to: It was just a four-word phrase, a bit of plain contractual verbiage, but even now, more than a decade later, Spencer Kuvin has a hard time expressing just how bizarre it was. “It’s incredibly odd language,” said Kuvin, an attorney in Florida. “I’ve never seen it before in a non-prosecution agreement.”... Kuvin and I were talking about the infamous and inexplicable 2007 plea deal offered by then–US Attorney Alexander Acosta,...

The deal on its face is incredibly favorable to Epstein. If you look closer, things get even better for him:


The four women named had allegedly helped recruit underage girls for Epstein at his direction. But that four-word phrase “but not limited to” gave a free pass to anybody who would have helped Epstein acquire or traffic underage girls for sex.

How could the government agree to immunize “any potential co-conspirators” of an alleged serial child rapist? ...
Click to expand...


Hadn't you better ask those concerned? At any rate, what you failed to present was any evidence of "a blatantly illegal deal to cover up for Epstein, and try to ensure no one who was associated with him could ever be charged".
 
Diogenes said:
:palm:

It takes 60 votes in the Senate, Yank.
Click to expand...
Yeah...and it takes all sorts of things to get legislation passed and signed.

YOU assholes just cannot do it.

YOU assholes do not know how to govern...how to negotiate.

YOU assholes should stick to being the loyal opposition...keeping the extreme left (like me) in check. THAT you are good at. But you have no ability at all to govern.
 
QP! said:
I do not expect anything.

I am just explaining why the blame for this is on Trump and his admin and you support what i said with your statement here. This is all on Trump and his view "you will get nothing... give me your vote anyway', which anyone who is not stupid (so therefore not you) will see is what is to blame for this.
Click to expand...


Trump doesn't control the Democrats in the Senate. No king, remember?

Cave, bend the knee, and the shutdown will end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top