If the Epstein files are released and it turns out Trump molested underage girls, will that affect your support of him?

[Anonymous]

[Avicenna]

Idiot leftists never learn. Just because you hate Trump’s politics doesn’t mean your deranged fantasies are anywhere near the truth.

Think about this: Biden’s DOJ had whatever documents may exist for four years. Do you think they would have covered up such a thing?

[Asker]

Just because they had them doesn't mean they read them. I don't know if they actively decided not to release them or not, but just because they possessed the documents doesn’t mean they actually read them. I’m not sure if there was an active decision not to release them, but at this point, it really doesn’t matter.

I understand that you want everyone to forget about them, suggesting that if Biden didn’t release them, they must not be significant. However, that is a weak argument. The documents will be released regardless of what Biden did or didn’t do. At this point, it doesn't FUCKING MATTER.

[Avicenna]

As usual, you live in an alternate reality. First of all, trying to cover for your fellow leftists isn’t going to work- no reasonable person would believe your suggestion that the Biden DOJ would not have looked at any documents related to Epstein, especially when they were trying to find anything they could to “get Trump”. But it’s funny to see you claim incompetence as the excuse. And an “active decision not to release them”? - if do, why (whether active or passive”? Who were your fellow leftists trying to protect? Certainly none of their political enemies.

As for your claims about what I supposedly think, it does not follow that I don’t want them released- that’s you making more shit up. But I do think that you’re going to be very disappointed when you find out that your wildest fantasies aren’t anchored in the tiniest bit of reality.

[Asker]

So now that you have managed to use several disparaging terms and generally been rude and ugly, let's get to the core of it:

Are you going to be disappointed and upset if some incriminating things about Trump DO get released, which would then invalidate your entire hypothesis that they never existed, because if they had, Biden would have released them?

I know you are working as hard as you can to persuade others that nobody should check to see if there is anything about Trump in those files - but what if there is? Then what?

If there is nothing about Trump in those files, as you say, then why are you so worried that somebody will look, find something, and release it?

[Avicenna]

I know that when someone has as much of a losing hand as you, they aren't going to play fair, but I'm not going to let you distract us from the inherent contradictions in your latest lunatic ravings.

In spite of your attempts at straw men, I have never suggested that no one should check what the DOJ possesses on Epstein, and that certainly isn't my view. You, on the other hand, in addition to assuming without any evidence that the information you are desperately hoping to be in there is, have speciously suggested that the Biden DOJ would not have known it was there. No one is dumb enough to honestly believe such BS. Nor is anyone dumb enough to believe the Democrats would have covered up crimes of the sort that you think have been committed IF they were committed by their political opponents. Your crazy claims simply defy reason and reality.

All I am saying is that your innuendo has no basis in reality and that you will be disappointed with whatever is released (although you will no doubt propagandize whatever comes out, even if it's zilch, as is most likely the case). The truth of the matter is that your solely driven by hatred of Trump to the point that it may no longer even be about policy- you desperately need your deranged hatred to be validated, no matter how many times it has been shown to be based on lies and to be pathological.

So, to make it clear to even the most deliberately obtuse- release everything. And I am totally unconcerned that Democrats' wet dreams of compromising material will bear any fruit as regards Trump.

[Asker]

Perhaps there is nothing in there that would affect Trump, but if that's the case, why is he trying so hard to prevent anything from being released?

This makes as much sense relative to your position as you say my thought that there is something in there does relative to your point that the Democrats released nothing, and they did not.

The truth is that neither you nor I knows what is in there, if anything, and all of our tea leaf reading is not helping either of us to understand.

This is your last warning from me relative to your insulting language when communicating with me: Control yourself and speak like a gentleman, or just get blocked and hear nothing from me again. I have asked nicely in the past, and that didn't seem to help - hopefully this will. You are a 54-year-old adult man, and I would hope you might behave a bit better.

[Avicenna]

You seem to think anyone cares whether you block them or if there is some great need to communicate with you. Take or leave what I say and how I say it, and it's not as if what I've said is anything bad. No one is going to be ordered around by you, least of all me.

Your claims that Trump is preventing release of any information are not backed by any facts. In fact, he's ordered the DOJ to release grand jury testimony related to Epstein, pending judicial approval. Furthermore, his lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal for defamation is going to include discovery related to whatever the DOJ might have. Doesn't sound like a coverup to me.

So, at the end of the day, I guess we'll have to see. And, like it or not, a decade of Democrats lying, misrepresenting and exaggerating doesn't make them trustworthy in the least or give them the benefit of the doubt. Nor does pretending that the Biden DOJ would not have had incriminating info or would not have released it.

[lightbulb27]

It might, depends on the depth of the details. Ya can't do that stuff.

I agree with a lot of trump policies, I support the policies and what striving for... many, not all... and I don't always agree with his approach. I don't get to pick though do I. I don't generally agree with the other side, so Trump.

But I doubt this is the case else Biden DOJ would have exposed that already. You know how many times I've heard "We've got trump"... his taxes, legal cases, a gaggle of women he's molested, blah blah blah. And he's in control of that information... if he can be fried by it, he won't release it... not with his name on it.

So that's that isn't it? you can't get the guy at the top, ever. It's very dificult. One of the few was Nixon, maybe one other shot. not many can be dethroned outside the vote.

[FreyaRed]

No. It will just prove many of my theories about elites and pathological human psychology of limitless impunity

[exitseven]

This is not the case. It would affect my support but also if he was on the list , the democrats would have used it to win the election. My own opinion is that Justice Roberts is on the list and Trump wants to have a Supreme Court Justice in his pocket.

[Asker]

So I guess all those photos of Trump with Epstein are meaningless?

[exitseven]

The two knew each other and travelled in the same circles but they were not friends. Trump had him kicked out of Mar A lago when he found out what he was up to. He rode in one of his private planes but so did a lot of other rich people. He never went to his island and Epstein was not on the plane at the same time.

[Asker]

Yeah, that's a nice recitation of Trump's excuses. Of course we all know that Trump always tells the truth and never lies, right?

[Asker]

Also that rationalization about if he was on the list, the Democrats would have used it to win the election neglects the fact the Democrats probably wouldn't even have known about it. I believe that that information became public knowledge fairly recently.

[exitseven]

The Biden DOJ was in possession of the list for three years. They knew who was naughty and it wasn't Trump.

[Asker]

How do you know those things?

[exitseven]

I am the Whistler. I know many things for I walk by night.

[Asker]

sure you do.

[DrPepper12]

They will be

He did

No. I already know he's a POS

[Anonymous]

I disliked the orange haired bastard before the Epstein case came up. All that would prove is that he is a preditor , pedifile sex pervert. which would not supprise me.

[Pterodon]

Yes it would but I can’t see his AG letting that slide. This isn’t the Biden administration where everyone enabled the old bastard

[beefcakebradybatson]

The MAGANs won't care !!!

[Asker]

There are some indications that at least some of them might care. I don't think you were wrong about this, but I don't think you are completely right either.

[beefcakebradybatson]

I'm RARELY completely right or totally wrong.

[slatyb]

Not at all. I never supported him.

[kavakava]

Seriously? 😉😉😉😉😉

[Asker]

Answer the question please

[kavakava]

It's a flight list it doesn't reveal anything. And if it did Biden, would have released that 4 years ago. Why didn't he? Was it because the CIA would put a bullet in his head? This goes far beyond the island.

[Asker]

If it is a flight list (or log, actually), it will yield names, dates, times, destinations, and maybe a bit of weather info. I am not sure what can be inferred from all of that. Maybe trips to Epstein island?

[Asker]

As a poet myself, I can tell you that when we keep a log we record the place, date and time that we take off and the kind of airplane we use and sometimes remarks about the weather. We also record all of that information for every place that we land. That would include Epstein Island in this case. So if the logs become public, we will see what they say. This also presupposes by the way that whoever is flying, the plane will record the logs. Honestly. That may be an unreasonable bull presupposition in this case obviously.

[Asker]

Sorry I'm not a poet but I am a pilot although an amateur pilot and not a professional.

[seeyounexttuesday]

If Trump molested underage girls it would have been headline news for the past 4 years.

[Asker]

Do you think they might have kept it secret?

[Asker]

Just answer the question, please.

[Anonymous]

no. not at all