Moderator: Community Team
Neither proven nor unproven.jusplay4fun wrote: Tue Jan 20, 2026 12:59 amDuk KNOWS (I am rather sure) that this is another UNPROVEN allegationDukasaur wrote: Mon Jan 19, 2026 9:36 pm Operations require around-the-clock attention to making sure that none of the documents mentioning Trump are accidentally released with the others.
how come you left out them 34 felonies?jusplay4fun wrote: Wed Jan 21, 2026 6:32 am pack rat:
Tell me ONE of Epstein's victims who implicated ANY Crime by Trump in this matter. YOU CANNOT. SO your allegations, awaiting ANY evidence to the contrary, are ALL UNPROVEN. Lack of evidence implicating Trump is NOT totally exonerating, but barring evidence otherwise, NO ONE can make any legitimate claim that Trump is Guilty HERE.
Trump is guilty of some things, like bad manners, being a braggart, and being an egotist. Guilty in the matter of Epstein is a DREAM by Liberals, such as pack rat and friends.
for more with Poor Memories, go back and READ:Re: Trump's Trials (4 in all, April 2024)
Post by jusplay4fun » Wed May 15, 2024 5:25 am
This basically summarizes what I have said about the NYC case:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 924c&ei=34A jury of level-headed Manhattanites would appreciate these facts that verify the profound vacuity and fundamental unfairness of District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s "case" against Trump:
An April 25, 2023, US Justice Department Memorandum of Understanding with the Federal Election Commission leaves Bragg powerless to prosecute this matter. "The Department has exclusive jurisdiction over criminal enforcement of the federal campaign finance laws," the memorandum states. "The Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over civil enforcement," the memo also says. Nowhere does this federal rule grant local prosecutors authority to enforce federal election laws. Thus, Bragg’s case is a shack built atop a cloud of helium.
Bragg indicted Trump on April 4, 2023, four months after the statute of limitations expired on the corresponding Class E felonies.
Bragg skirted the statute of limitations by claiming that Trump falsified business records to commit a second violation. After three weeks of this trial, that second crime remains a mystery. (...)
Bragg claims that Trump should have paid for this private matter with campaign cash. That would have been illegal. Instead, Trump legally used his own money. Trump faces 34 counts of alleged falsification of business records because his bookkeepers posted ledger entries for checks to Cohen as "legal expenses." Would Bragg prefer false descriptions like "plumbing supplies" or "marble tiles?" Trump faces prison for reporting legal expenses as "legal expenses," which is legal.
With 48% of registered voters telling Reuters-Ipsos last month that Trump’s Kafkaesque cases are "excessive and politically motivated" (41% disagree) even a Manhattan jury could scrap Bragg’s contraption.
Add to all this that Bragg campaigned for his DA job on the promise to "get Trump."
There is NO CASE here; this is purely political attack on Trump, disgused as a legal "case."
Trump may have done illegal things; this is NOT a case to demonstrate any such illegalities or criminal acts.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA1RdgBPFani Willis’ Case Against Trump Is Officially Over
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ case against President Donald Trump has officially come to an end.
Judge Scott McAfee agreed to dismiss the racketeering case on Wednesday after the prosecutor who inherited Willis’ troubled effort urged him to take it off “life support.”
.......(Let me use the ConfedSS technique): 
As of January 2026, polls indicate an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of Americans—roughly 81% to 89%—support the full release of Jeffrey Epstein investigation files. Despite a November 2025 congressional mandate, only 6% are satisfied with the release efforts, with 67% believing the government is intentionally withholding information.
Key findings on the Epstein files, based on 2025-2026 data, include:
Public Demand: Over 80% of Americans want all files released, and a majority (52% to 78%) consider continuing the investigation into his network highly important.
Handling Disapproval: A majority of Americans (around 63% as of July 2025) disapprove of the Trump administration's handling of the files.
Cover-up Concerns: By January 2026, 49% of Americans believed the administration was trying to cover up Epstein's crimes, a figure that has remained consistent since late 2025.
Partisan Divide: While 88% of Democrats and 69% of independents disapproved of the handling in Oct 2025, Republicans were more divided, with 45% approving of the administration's actions at that time.
Voluminous Data: The DOJ indicated in late December 2025 that over a million documents were identified for potential release.
I have already dealt with this KEY point and pack rat fails to comprehend what this means LEGALLY and Logistically. Look it up, pack rat.Voluminous Data: The DOJ indicated in late December 2025 that over a million documents were identified for potential release.
I have to hand it to the Llama, he has had at least TWO good posts in recent months, such as this one (above).riskllama wrote: Tue Jan 13, 2026 5:10 pm um, probly because Biden has more than a few friends/associates on that list as well, duh. it ain't fuckin' rocket science...
This is SO WRONG on SO Many levels, but let's begin.Pack Rat wrote: Tue Jan 27, 2026 10:17 am [b [size= Release all the Epstein Files![/size][/b]
I really don't give a fuk who is in the files, do you understand? You keep on broadcasting about Democrats being on the Epstein Files, as if that gives Trump a pass.
[b
Americans want the full release of the Epstein Files. You on the other hand want the Trump regime to redact all 5 million pages to protect the perpetrators of pedophilia and rape. Do you discuss this with your Sunday School parents. I'm sure they would be thrilled about your position on the Epstein Files.[/b]
