White House's Epstein 'Hoax' Explanation Makes Zero Sense
By: Nikki McCann Ramirez
"send the bimbo out to stall while pam finishes scrubbing me out of that file ..."
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
To no one's surprise, President Donald Trump's demand that everyone shut up about Jeffrey Epstein isn't going over too well with Americans who are upset about the Justice Department ignoring calls for transparency about the dead convicted sex offender. As the administration struggles to get their outraged surrogates back in line, its answers to basic questions about the case are becoming increasingly incoherent.
Trump has already fallen back to absurdist claims that the lingering questions about Epstein's alleged sex trafficking operations and the circumstances surrounding his death are a "hoax" engineered by former President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton — one his supporters were "stupid" for believing.
When asked during Thursday's press briefing exactly what Trump thinks is the "hoax," White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt replied: "The president is referring to the fact Democrats have now seized on this as if they ever wanted transparency when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein," and that "the Democrats have control of this building, the White House, for four years and they never did a dang thing when it came to transparency in regards to Jeffrey Epstein and his heinous crimes."
So the "hoax" is that Democrats didn't release the Epstein files while they were in power? This makes zero sense considering Trump has been saying Democrats "made up" the files in the first place as part of a ploy to make him look bad, a la the Russia investigation. Meanwhile, the Trump's administration is actively attempting to bury the situation and demanding that their supporters simply look the other way.
Leavitt went on to stumble through a whole round of questioning regarding the administration's reversal on promises to release large troves of evidence related to Epstein, and their decision to effectively close the book on allegations of a widespread sex trafficking ring.
When asked if Trump would consider pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell "if the Epstein case is a hoax," Leavitt simply ignored the question. She also indicated Trump will not appoint a special prosecutor to assess the trove of Epstein evidence the Justice Department is keeping under wraps.
When asked what was stopping the administration from redacting sensitive information that could potentially harm or identify victims, Leavitt deferred to the Justice Department, and said that it was "out of the president's control."
"I only say, the American people should trust in President Trump," Leavitt said at one point.
Given that the president is currently calling the people who trusted him and his administration to provide the public answers about the Epstein case "stupid," it's hard to imagine why anyone would take his spokesperson at her word.
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that are known plagiarists, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt/deflect the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the phrase "Trump Derangement Syndrome" or the TDS acronym in a comment will be deleted. Any use of the term "Brandon", "Traitor Joe", or any variations thereof, when referring to President Biden, will be deleted. Right wing trolls can expect to have their irrelevant questions and comments deleted. Posting debunked lies will be subject to deletion. Use of the terms "leftist" or "lefty" will also be subject to deletion.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
92 visitors
POS/POTUS has already put a warning shot across maga's bow. I can hardly wait for the broadside into those that don't fall in line ...
Up is down
sun rises in the West and sets in the East
The Sun revolves around the Earth
It's opposite day
maga logic ...
[✘]
I note Karoline Leavitt has exchanged her 'praised' "smile" for a deer staring at headlights look.
I don't know what to think about this issue anymore. This thing has been hyped and used as a political weapon by both sides since the beginning. So much so that I wonder if, even if every last scrap were released, it wouldn't be just more of the same. Is there something there or would operatives on both sides just mine it for what, if handled right, would be suggestive of wrongdoing but impossible to prove either way?
Is there something there but so damaging to both sides that neither side has been willing to release it? That would explain why neither side has. Conversely, and possibly more likely, are people so preconceived in their opinions that, if released, innocent people will be harmed simply because they have some sort of connection to Epstein? Imagine that you yourself have some connection to Epstein. Wouldn't you worry that such a fact by itself condemns you in a lot of people's eyes? Are we asking to try all these people in the court of public opinion?
I mean, is there even a chance at arriving at the truth, even with a bipartisan committee looking at it? In my opinion, looking at past such committees over the last decade or two, hell no. I have serious doubts that this will ever have a satisfactory conclusion, mostly because I think people will reject the conclusion, true or not, if it doesn't reach the one they already have.
According to Time magazine Epstein sex trafficked underage girls from 2002 through 2005. Trumps birthday letter to Epstein where he talks about "secrets" was sent in 2003.
I think there is a very good chance Trump knew what was going on, even if he didnt take part.
One day the country will learn to stop letting this guy slide.
I would have to see some actual evidence of that. There is evidence Trump was willing to express sexual interest in teenagers , but no evidence I have seen that he conspired on this particular undertaking with Epstein , at least for now. I wish our media would get on this aspect of it, but I'm afraid the chance of that is small.
Okay. So, what? Should we grab our torches and pitchforks and storm the White House based on what you personally think?
In any case, thanks for providing an example of what I'm talking about.
You'd excuse Trump if he started pissing on the White House lawn. That is taken for granted now. Trump is lying about Epstein. You are free to not care and others are free to consider you a dupe.
No, I just wouldn't care all that much since my opinion on the matter wouldn't make any difference. I mean, I can always not vote for him again, if that would make you happy, but they'd have to change the law for me to not vote for him again.
Now? I'm pretty sure you always have.
Well, you might be able to make me care if you could provide evidence. A birthday letter with a hand drawn naked woman, crude as that may be, is not something any rational person is going to convict someone on. You could provide me tons of evidence that I would agree proves Trump is, or can be a jerk, but that still doesn't make him guilty of what you seem to be implying. It only makes him guilty of being a jerk. I don't want people who are willing to charge people with criminal acts simply because the guy is a jerk to have the power to do so. That bothers me far, far greater than Trump being a jerk.
Trump rants like a fucking lunatic every day, and lies and blames "Obama" and "Comey" for an FBI report written when neither of them were in office. In other words lies his ass off. Do you say anything about that? Of course not, because Trump is doing what you like him to do in terms of policy.
Pesonally I'd rather be on the side of trying to hold him to account than the side that looks the other way.
You and Jack seem to think that nothing makes any difference. Live and let live, unless you are woke.
You are disingenuously arguing that unless Trump committed a convictable crime he is in the clear in all this.
First of all, he is one of those who initially started all the far right conspiracy theories about Epstein. When Epstein was charged Trump speculated that Bill Clinton was involved. The nutcases picked up on that and it led to QAnon and the idea that Trump was a crusader against the liberal pedophile ring.
Do you think Trump is an anti- pedophile crusader ? LOL.
Not going to speak for Jack, but my difference is made when I vote, both with the ballot and my money, not destroying property, fighting cops or preventing people from getting where they want to go. Things that only serve to give these people the 'feeling' they're doing something useful and courageous, when in actuality, they're only pissing off the people they supposedly want to convince to their cause. Most people don't respond well to "do it our way or else!"
Well, yes, actually. That would be because the woke keep trying to make everyone live according to their ideology. Instead of everyone earning what they get they imposed affirmative action, which they now call DEI. They want it to be okay for a man to use the women's bathroom or undress in the women's locker room, regardless of how anyone else feels about it. They want open borders, regardless of how anyone else feels about it. They don't care about people having actual living wage jobs as having those is bad for the environment. They want children indoctrinated into their version of sexuality regardless of what parents think of it. And, worst of all, they want to make the lives of those who disagree with them a living hell to the extent they can. They want to switch to socialism and central planning for everything. Just look at teacher's unions, for goodness sake.
You never stop giving me examples of what's wrong with your approach, do you? Unless Trump commits a convictable crime, he can't be convicted of that crime, now can he? And because I point that out, you seem to think projection is a valid response. And that's the problem. You really think it is. You think appealing to emotion, in this case shame, is an actual argument. It's not. It's just projection. I don't agree with you so I should feel shame. Whether what you want me to agree with has any merit isn't a consideration for you. All that matters is that you believe it has merit and that justifies the rest.
I do not know what hasn't been revealed in the files, if anything. Therefore I would not say that Trump is in the clear. That's simple logic, JR, not emotional appeal.
And??? That's nothing the Left hasn't done. I will remind you of the Kavanaugh hearing and the Ford woman and the endless speculations of the left side of the news cycle. They ran that guy through the ringer with no evidence at all, not for justice but to do whatever it took to keep Kavanaugh off the bench. So, please don't waste my time.
Correct or not, the woman in the Kavanaugh matter was an eyewitness. She was the alleged victim. To compare the appropriateness of her accusation to Trump accusing Clinton is laughable.
Trump is not morally , ethically, intelligence -wise , or psychologically, fit to hold any office.
The sad part is we have known this for more than a decade but enough people wanted to "take back their country" from multiculturalism that his monstrous flaws have not been enough to keep him at bay.
incest and pedophilia aren't deal breakers for thumpers, the biggest segment of the maga coalition ...
Trump is demonstrating his ability to lay down a narrative: That is, he is hoping to trigger MAGA supporters into rallying around him against democrats. Therefore, he 'trots' out names and blames democrats hoping this supporters will follow along. . . and let him go scot free/pass once again.
Sorry. Seemed to have missed this one.
And what can you point to in what I've said that gives evidence for this? Please provide a quote or quotes. Thanks.
I think we're only a few short steps away from trmp wandering the White House lawn in his bathrobe and pissing on the shrubs
why do you think they paved the rose garden ...
so he doesn't pee on the rose bushes?
that was expected from his last term. it was when he started doing circles in the grass earlier this year ...
She lies even more than trump does, and that's really saying something.