you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 86 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (13 children)

How many months (years?) did the dems sit on this shit and delay making it public?

Edit. I realized the delay might have been far longer than just months if they could have compiled the info during Trump 1.0.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 70 points 3 days ago* (3 children)

    How many months (years?) did the dems sit on this shit and delay making it public?

    Bill Clinton moved in the same circles back then, he did the same shit, so the dems were there while Trump did this.

    Some of this happened as far back as the 1980s, a lot of it is from the mid 1990s, a lot of the allegations on file are from Epsteins first trial, from the Maxwell trial or shortly before or after these, but a lot of it was not made public before. This has been going on forever and has been successfully covered up over and over again, with the redacting of the Epstein Files being the most recent cover-up. Apparently some Dems have gotten access to some unredacted files some time after that, so technically this was info they accquired during Trump's second term, at least in this form.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    The fact that new, specific Epstein-related allegations haven't surfaced against Bill Clinton in the last few years is extremely odd. Although I can understand why none of his victims want to be like Juanita Broaddrick and start campaigning with Trump over it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    Or they're scared of the entirity of Dem-adjacent media giving them the Tara Reid treatment. Coming forward with allegations against anybody this powerful is pretty daunting, you can also safely bet that there's a lot more than these 11 women that could accuse Trump of CSA, but that they're terrified of what would be done to them by the public.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 20 points 3 days ago

    Oh, absolutely. But even if no victims came forward to present themselves for character assassination I'm still surprised there's nothing like "In 2019 the FBI interviewed Jane Doe, who witnessed Arkansas Man #1 on the island." The only new thing about Clinton in the last few years was that joke from Epstein's brother about Clinton and Trump having consensual sex.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 51 points 3 days ago (7 children)

    Releasing this an on october surprise is incredibly cynical

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

    Justice being done is contingent, in part, of getting the people responsible out of office because they control all 3 branches of government and basically all the agencies.

    It is also contingent on Democrats doing something about it once if that happens which I have STRONG doubts about.

    But, regardless of what Dems do, and while it is obviously a very cynical attempt to get leverage on the voting population, you do have to get these people out of office first if you want anything to be done.

    The many obvious points of failure here and the slim likelihood of getting anything accomplished is obviously why electoralism is insufficient at best and fatally flawed at worst, but if electoralism can be used to strip power from the people who need to be investigated and tried, then it should be used.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    I'm not looking forward to who the current administration starts bombing to get this out of the media cycle this time.

    Guy is getting all gassed at these rallies where people cheer him like he's Jesus. He might strike NK.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments