tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

I would say I am curious about the site surveillance cameras for yesterday.

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

Let's stop it with the BS Tommie

Should you be joking about this, whether it's murder or suicide?

Florda_mike said:

---

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

Let's stop it with the BS Tommie

Should you be joking about this, whether it's murder or suicide?

---

Joking about a scumbag pedophile is off limits?
It's not like he's talking about the president

Oldbear83 said:

---

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

I would say I am curious about the site surveillance cameras for yesterday.

---

The security cams that had an outage during that particular time?

YoakDaddy said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

I would say I am curious about the site surveillance cameras for yesterday.

---

The security cams that had an outage during that particular time?

---

If that happened, yeah we need a much deeper investigation.

Epstein was a scumbag, but I think we can all agree that letting guilty person X have a scumbag killed to protect his/her own hide is something we want to stop.

Florda_mike said:

---

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

Let's stop it with the BS Tommie

Should you be joking about this, whether it's murder or suicide?

---

You seem to gravitate towards the defense of pedophiles. Roy Moore. Jeffrey Epstein. Did you just buy the new R Kelly? Do you sing " I believe I can fly" in the shower?

tommie said:

---

Florda_mike said:

---

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

Let's stop it with the BS Tommie

Should you be joking about this, whether it's murder or suicide?

---

You seem to gravitate towards the defense of pedophiles. Roy Moore. Jeffrey Epstein. Did you just buy the new R Kelly? Do you sing " I believe I can fly" in the shower?

---

I'll admit you made me laugh .... again

YoakDaddy said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

I would say I am curious about the site surveillance cameras for yesterday.

---

The security cams that had an outage during that particular time?

---

I heard they called in the McLennan DA to disappear ten minutes.

You mean the last DA?

Don't throw Barry in with that

Malbec said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

tommie said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

I was watching ABC News last night with my wife, and literally heard them confirm Epstein was on suicide watch ... now he wasn't?

I've been near week-old fish that did not stink this bad.

---

Are you saying they watched him commit suicide?

---

I would say I am curious about the site surveillance cameras for yesterday.

---

The security cams that had an outage during that particular time?

---

I heard they called in the McLennan DA to disappear ten minutes.

---

Maybe Moody can get cell tower evidence to pin this on the Clintons, or Trump, or the Royal Family, or Sam U

Former MCC inmate: There's 'no way' Jeffrey Epstein killed himself

https://nypost.com/2019/08/10/former-mcc-inmate-theres-no-way-jeffrey-epstein-killed-himself/

By Brad Hamilton and Bruce Golding

August 10, 2019 | 6:17pm | Updated

Metropolitan Correction Center, Jeffrey Epstein (inset).Reuters/AP

The following account is from a former inmate of the Metropolitan Correction Center in lower Manhattan, where Jeffrey Epstein was found unresponsive Saturday, and declared dead at a hospital of an apparent suicide. The ex-convict, who spoke to The Post's Brad Hamilton and Bruce Golding on the condition of anonymity, spent several months in the 9 South special housing unit for high-profile prisoners awaiting trial like Epstein.

There's no way that man could have killed himself. I've done too much time in those units. It's an impossibility.

Between the floor and the ceiling is like eight or nine feet. There's no way for you to connect to anything.

You have sheets, but they're paper level, not strong enough. He was 200 pounds it would never happen.

When you're on suicide watch, they put you in this white smock, a straight jacket. They know a person cannot be injurious to themselves.

The clothing they give you is a jump-in uniform. Everything is a dark brown color.

Could he have done it from the bed? No sir. There's a steel frame, but you can't move it. There's no light fixture. There's no bars.

They don't give you enough in there that could successfully create an instrument of death. You want to write a letter, they give you rubber pens and maybe once a week a piece of paper.

Nothing hard or made of metal.

There's up to 80 people there. They could put two in cell. It's one or two, but I'll never believe this guy had a cellmate. He was too blown up.

The damage that unit can do to someone.

It's like you're an animal and you've been brought into a kennel. A guy like Jeffrey, it's like, "Holy sh-t."

I told my parents not to come there. God wasn't in the building.

I've had some heavy incidents in the building. What happened is permanent.

Some of the guards are on a major power trip. They know guys there are suffering. They know something the rest of the world hasn't seen, that a place like this exists in this country, and they get off on it.

If the guards see that the guy is breaking, they're going to help you break.

But it's my firm belief that Jeffrey Epstein did not commit suicide. It just didn't happen.

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

YoakDaddy said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

---

Bump LOL!!

---

Lol. But seriously dude. There are people on here who will think that's real.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

YoakDaddy said:

---

---

Bump LOL!!

---

Lol. But seriously dude. There are people on here who will think that's real.

---

I know LOL!!! I tweeted it and a responder believed that I thought it was real. It's funny but totally a fake account.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

---

I agree, except that your insult of Trump is false and damages your own credibility.

But here's the thing. There are a lot of ways someone with Trump or Clinton's money and influence can get rid of evidence or convince witnesses not to testify without threats of violence or killing.

Also, there have been so many alleged incidents, and so many people who hate Clinton/Trump in the different occasions, that if it happened, some concrete evidence should exist.

In the case of Epstein, I believe he hung around both Clinton and Trump because they were high-profile men, and being seen with them helped him build his own image of influence. There is absolutely no evidence that either Bill Clinton or Donald Trump were into under-age kids.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

---

I agree, except that your insult of Trump is false and damages your own credibility.

But here's the thing. There are a lot of ways someone with Trump or Clinton's money and influence can get rid of evidence or convince witnesses not to testify without threats of violence or killing.

Also, there have been so many alleged incidents, and so many people who hate Clinton/Trump in the different occasions, that if it happened, some concrete evidence should exist.

In the case of Epstein, I believe he hung around both Clinton and Trump because they were high-profile men, and being seen with them helped him build his own image of influence. There is absolutely no evidence that either Bill Clinton or Donald Trump were into under-age kids.

---

Spare me. It's not an insult to say the President isn't very competent. It's factual to notice he hasn't built a single mile of his wall and it took him 5 tries to pass a travel ban because he couldn't stop calling it a "Muslim travel ban." Or you could look at his hiring processes. Failed negotiations with North Korea. Absolute failure with Venezuela, etc.

He hasn't been able to tell a lie that hasn't been leaked by one of the many staffers engaged in the revolving door that is the cabinet/White House selling their books.

If he hadn't been gifted an incredible economy, there'd be nothing good for him to show. But that's all beside the point.

As for "no evidence he likes little girls..." well thats actually untrue. Wasn't there a case where he was named one of the rapists by a girl also suing Epstein? It was thrown out because of statute of limitations, right?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158-26b6-dda3-afd8-b6fe46f40000

cinque said:

---

---

I saw that today.

What is he thinking?!?! If it's true, and something DID happen, then the most powerful man on earth should know about it. Or at least know better than to show his cards.

And if he DOESNT know anything, or nothing did happen, then he's just a doddy old man sharing conspiracy theories that undercut the very country he's serving.

He's a child. He can't control himself.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

---

I agree, except that your insult of Trump is false and damages your own credibility.

But here's the thing. There are a lot of ways someone with Trump or Clinton's money and influence can get rid of evidence or convince witnesses not to testify without threats of violence or killing.

Also, there have been so many alleged incidents, and so many people who hate Clinton/Trump in the different occasions, that if it happened, some concrete evidence should exist.

In the case of Epstein, I believe he hung around both Clinton and Trump because they were high-profile men, and being seen with them helped him build his own image of influence. There is absolutely no evidence that either Bill Clinton or Donald Trump were into under-age kids.

---

Spare me. It's not an insult to say the President isn't very competent. It's factual to notice he hasn't built a single mile of his wall and it took him 5 tries to pass a travel ban because he couldn't stop calling it a "Muslim travel ban." Or you could look at his hiring processes. Failed negotiations with North Korea. Absolute failure with Venezuela, etc.

He hasn't been able to tell a lie that hasn't been leaked by one of the many staffers engaged in the revolving door that is the cabinet/White House selling their books.

If he hadn't been gifted an incredible economy, there'd be nothing good for him to show. But that's all beside the point.

As for "no evidence he likes little girls..." well thats actually untrue. Wasn't there a case where he was named one of the rapists by a girl also suing Epstein? It was thrown out because of statute of limitations, right?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158-26b6-dda3-afd8-b6fe46f40000

---

Well, there was the possibility of a decent discussion, but BBL pissed that away, I see.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

---

I agree, except that your insult of Trump is false and damages your own credibility.

But here's the thing. There are a lot of ways someone with Trump or Clinton's money and influence can get rid of evidence or convince witnesses not to testify without threats of violence or killing.

Also, there have been so many alleged incidents, and so many people who hate Clinton/Trump in the different occasions, that if it happened, some concrete evidence should exist.

In the case of Epstein, I believe he hung around both Clinton and Trump because they were high-profile men, and being seen with them helped him build his own image of influence. There is absolutely no evidence that either Bill Clinton or Donald Trump were into under-age kids.

---

Spare me. It's not an insult to say the President isn't very competent. It's factual to notice he hasn't built a single mile of his wall and it took him 5 tries to pass a travel ban because he couldn't stop calling it a "Muslim travel ban." Or you could look at his hiring processes. Failed negotiations with North Korea. Absolute failure with Venezuela, etc.

He hasn't been able to tell a lie that hasn't been leaked by one of the many staffers engaged in the revolving door that is the cabinet/White House selling their books.

If he hadn't been gifted an incredible economy, there'd be nothing good for him to show. But that's all beside the point.

As for "no evidence he likes little girls..." well thats actually untrue. Wasn't there a case where he was named one of the rapists by a girl also suing Epstein? It was thrown out because of statute of limitations, right?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158-26b6-dda3-afd8-b6fe46f40000

---

Well, there was the possibility of a decent discussion, but BBL pissed that away, I see.

---

You don't do decent discussions.

You were wasting your time with BBL

He's a sassy child is all he is

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

---

I agree, except that your insult of Trump is false and damages your own credibility.

But here's the thing. There are a lot of ways someone with Trump or Clinton's money and influence can get rid of evidence or convince witnesses not to testify without threats of violence or killing.

Also, there have been so many alleged incidents, and so many people who hate Clinton/Trump in the different occasions, that if it happened, some concrete evidence should exist.

In the case of Epstein, I believe he hung around both Clinton and Trump because they were high-profile men, and being seen with them helped him build his own image of influence. There is absolutely no evidence that either Bill Clinton or Donald Trump were into under-age kids.

---

Spare me. It's not an insult to say the President isn't very competent. It's factual to notice he hasn't built a single mile of his wall and it took him 5 tries to pass a travel ban because he couldn't stop calling it a "Muslim travel ban." Or you could look at his hiring processes. Failed negotiations with North Korea. Absolute failure with Venezuela, etc.

He hasn't been able to tell a lie that hasn't been leaked by one of the many staffers engaged in the revolving door that is the cabinet/White House selling their books.

If he hadn't been gifted an incredible economy, there'd be nothing good for him to show. But that's all beside the point.

As for "no evidence he likes little girls..." well thats actually untrue. Wasn't there a case where he was named one of the rapists by a girl also suing Epstein? It was thrown out because of statute of limitations, right?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158-26b6-dda3-afd8-b6fe46f40000

---

Well, there was the possibility of a decent discussion, but BBL pissed that away, I see.

---

You don't do decent discussions.

---

I certainly do, just not with people who can't manage better posts than weak efforts at sliming their opponents.

It's too much to expect you can change the minds of people on the opposite end from your opinion, but you can learn from the style of writers like Sam or Oso. They write excellent posts which will appeal to anyone with a moderate POV.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

cinque said:

---

---

I saw that today.

What is he thinking?!?! If it's true, and something DID happen, then the most powerful man on earth should know about it. Or at least know better than to show his cards.

And if he DOESNT know anything, or nothing did happen, then he's just a doddy old man sharing conspiracy theories that undercut the very country he's serving.

He's a child. He can't control himself.

---

Let's not forget, Trump is an InfoWars fan.

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

---

I agree, except that your insult of Trump is false and damages your own credibility.

But here's the thing. There are a lot of ways someone with Trump or Clinton's money and influence can get rid of evidence or convince witnesses not to testify without threats of violence or killing.

Also, there have been so many alleged incidents, and so many people who hate Clinton/Trump in the different occasions, that if it happened, some concrete evidence should exist.

In the case of Epstein, I believe he hung around both Clinton and Trump because they were high-profile men, and being seen with them helped him build his own image of influence. There is absolutely no evidence that either Bill Clinton or Donald Trump were into under-age kids.

---

Spare me. It's not an insult to say the President isn't very competent. It's factual to notice he hasn't built a single mile of his wall and it took him 5 tries to pass a travel ban because he couldn't stop calling it a "Muslim travel ban." Or you could look at his hiring processes. Failed negotiations with North Korea. Absolute failure with Venezuela, etc.

He hasn't been able to tell a lie that hasn't been leaked by one of the many staffers engaged in the revolving door that is the cabinet/White House selling their books.

If he hadn't been gifted an incredible economy, there'd be nothing good for him to show. But that's all beside the point.

As for "no evidence he likes little girls..." well thats actually untrue. Wasn't there a case where he was named one of the rapists by a girl also suing Epstein? It was thrown out because of statute of limitations, right?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158-26b6-dda3-afd8-b6fe46f40000

---

Well, there was the possibility of a decent discussion, but BBL pissed that away, I see.

---

You don't do decent discussions.

---

I certainly do, just not with people who can't manage better posts than weak efforts at sliming their opponents.

It's too much to expect you can change the minds of people on the opposite end from your opinion, but you can learn from the style of writers like Sam or Oso. They write excellent posts which will appeal to anyone with a moderate POV.

---

Yawn. What part of what I said was false? I think it's a fair point that the President's personality just doesn't give me faith that he could pull off something like this if he wanted to.

We're actually agreeing.

And remember, this stuff with Epstein and the young girl preceded the reporting by the Miami Herald. It was dismissed, but for procedural reasons.

It certainly pokes a hole in the idea that there was nothing to tie Trump to this.

Epstein was a guy who had his tendrils everywhere, supposedly.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

cinque said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

"Arkancides"? Remind me again, who runs DoJ these days? You might be surprised to learn it's not the Clintons.

---

DOJ does not run the New York jails.

Personally, I don't see a Clinton connection here, but the way you're hinting is a ridiculous reach, Huck.

---

I'm not saying Barr caused the guy to off himself, but Epstein was in Federal custody and Barr did specifically unrecuse himself from the case, so it is reasonably his fckup. Someone is going to have to answer for why he wasn't on 24/7 surveillance.

---

I agree someone will get into trouble, but only a certified loon would see this as happening "from the top".

---

I absolutely agree with you. I don't trust Trump at all. But he's just entirely too incompetent to pull something like this off.

Honestly, that's why I don't really believe in conspiracy theories much at all. The level of competence it takes to do something like this without getting caught... probably would have been put into not allowing the situation in the first place.

Please say you will apply this same reasoning to the Clinton kill list.

---

I agree, except that your insult of Trump is false and damages your own credibility.

But here's the thing. There are a lot of ways someone with Trump or Clinton's money and influence can get rid of evidence or convince witnesses not to testify without threats of violence or killing.

Also, there have been so many alleged incidents, and so many people who hate Clinton/Trump in the different occasions, that if it happened, some concrete evidence should exist.

In the case of Epstein, I believe he hung around both Clinton and Trump because they were high-profile men, and being seen with them helped him build his own image of influence. There is absolutely no evidence that either Bill Clinton or Donald Trump were into under-age kids.

---

Spare me. It's not an insult to say the President isn't very competent. It's factual to notice he hasn't built a single mile of his wall and it took him 5 tries to pass a travel ban because he couldn't stop calling it a "Muslim travel ban." Or you could look at his hiring processes. Failed negotiations with North Korea. Absolute failure with Venezuela, etc.

He hasn't been able to tell a lie that hasn't been leaked by one of the many staffers engaged in the revolving door that is the cabinet/White House selling their books.

If he hadn't been gifted an incredible economy, there'd be nothing good for him to show. But that's all beside the point.

As for "no evidence he likes little girls..." well thats actually untrue. Wasn't there a case where he was named one of the rapists by a girl also suing Epstein? It was thrown out because of statute of limitations, right?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000158-26b6-dda3-afd8-b6fe46f40000

---

Well, there was the possibility of a decent discussion, but BBL pissed that away, I see.

---

You don't do decent discussions.

---

I certainly do, just not with people who can't manage better posts than weak efforts at sliming their opponents.

It's too much to expect you can change the minds of people on the opposite end from your opinion, but you can learn from the style of writers like Sam or Oso. They write excellent posts which will appeal to anyone with a moderate POV.

---

Yawn. What part of what I said was false? I think it's a fair point that the President's personality just doesn't give me faith that he could pull off something like this if he wanted to.

We're actually agreeing.

And remember, this stuff with Epstein and the young girl preceded the reporting by the Miami Herald. It was dismissed, but for procedural reasons.

It certainly pokes a hole in the idea that there was nothing to tie Trump to this.

Epstein was a guy who had his tendrils everywhere, supposedly.

---

^^^ Old Bear my suggestion would be to just continue to give it a break with BBL

BBL, I agreed with you that there is no reasonable evidence linking either Clinton or Trump to Epstein's crimes.

Then you turned and threw out that turd of a BS claim.

We agreed until you went ****head.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BBL, I agreed with you that there is no reasonable evidence linking either Clinton or Trump to Epstein's crimes.

Then you turned and threw out that turd of a BS claim.

We agreed until you went ****head.

---

You said there was "no evidence." That's just not true.

Is it definitive? Absolutely not. But there HAVE been allegations. Allegations that have only been given more depth since. (it was originally dismissed because of bad paperwork and then dropped because she couldn't afford legal counsel). But honestly, her allegations are consistent with what has come out since.

It's weird that you lectured me on how we can't have nice conversations and then went on to hurl personal insults.

I haven't done that at all. I've simply shared information you don't like. And rather than add commentary or dispute the information itself, you've called names AND tone-policed.

In any case, I'm not sure why you're so worked up and bothered. There could be video footage of the President ordering the suicide watch to be lifted and his followers would only either deny it or claim that he did a good deed by letting the dude kill himself and save the taxpayers the money of keeping him in jail.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BBL, I agreed with you that there is no reasonable evidence linking either Clinton or Trump to Epstein's crimes.

Then you turned and threw out that turd of a BS claim.

We agreed until you went ****head.

---

You said there was "no evidence." That's just not true.

Is it definitive? Absolutely not. But there HAVE been allegations. Allegations that have only been given more depth since. (it was originally dismissed because of bad paperwork and then dropped because she couldn't afford legal counsel). But honestly, her allegations are consistent with what has come out since.

It's weird that you lectured me on how we can't have nice conversations and then went on to hurl personal insults.

I haven't done that at all. I've simply shared information you don't like. And rather than add commentary or dispute the information itself, you've called names AND tone-policed.

In any case, I'm not sure why you're so worked up and bothered. There could be video footage of the President ordering the suicide watch to be lifted and his followers would only either deny it or claim that he did a good deed by letting the dude kill himself and save the taxpayers the money of keeping him in jail.

\_()_/

---

Stop stroking yourself. You made a good point about who was likely not involved, then you went chicken**** and tried to connect Trump to it anyway.

Admit you tried a cheap shot, and we can discuss the story reasonably. Please note that I am not going after Bill Clinton despite far more evidence against him than Trump.

That's because what I see is so weak against either man that yeah, "no evidence" is the shorthand I would use. As in, nowhere near anything a reasonable person would consider meaningful. But yeah, there's always going to be a shred of this or that which some delusional malcontent could try to build into a story, but if you want to play that game, you can play by and with yourself.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BBL, I agreed with you that there is no reasonable evidence linking either Clinton or Trump to Epstein's crimes.

Then you turned and threw out that turd of a BS claim.

We agreed until you went ****head.

---

You said there was "no evidence." That's just not true.

Is it definitive? Absolutely not. But there HAVE been allegations. Allegations that have only been given more depth since. (it was originally dismissed because of bad paperwork and then dropped because she couldn't afford legal counsel). But honestly, her allegations are consistent with what has come out since.

It's weird that you lectured me on how we can't have nice conversations and then went on to hurl personal insults.

I haven't done that at all. I've simply shared information you don't like. And rather than add commentary or dispute the information itself, you've called names AND tone-policed.

In any case, I'm not sure why you're so worked up and bothered. There could be video footage of the President ordering the suicide watch to be lifted and his followers would only either deny it or claim that he did a good deed by letting the dude kill himself and save the taxpayers the money of keeping him in jail.

---

Check out this story from left-wing Vox about the "Katie Johnson lawsuit"

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/3/13501364/trump-rape-13-year-old-lawsuit-katie-johnson-allegation

Do I need to point out that the prosecution - the serious one - against Epstein started and gained traction during Trump's administration? It could have started during Bush or Obama, but it was Trump's Administration which oversaw the prosecution. If Trump had reason to worry about Epstein, it would have been much easier and simpler to just squash the investigation that way it was during the last two administrations, but instead under Trump it went forward.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Do I need to point out that the prosecution - the serious one - against Epstein started and gained traction during Trump's administration? It could have started during Bush or Obama, but it was Trump's Administration which oversaw the prosecution. If Trump had reason to worry about Epstein, it would have been much easier and simpler to just squash the investigation that way it was during the last two administrations, but instead under Trump it went forward.

---

LMAO.

You're right. This is Obama's fault. It's not like one of the main things that brought this all to the forefront was the prosecutor that made the sweetheart deal was made Labor Secretary by President Trump...

Oh wait.

I just think it's really sad you have to resort to name-calling and insults. This is why we can't have nice things.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Do I need to point out that the prosecution - the serious one - against Epstein started and gained traction during Trump's administration? It could have started during Bush or Obama, but it was Trump's Administration which oversaw the prosecution. If Trump had reason to worry about Epstein, it would have been much easier and simpler to just squash the investigation that way it was during the last two administrations, but instead under Trump it went forward.

---

LMAO.

You're right. This is Obama's fault. It's not like one of the main things that brought this all to the forefront was the prosecutor that made the sweetheart deal was made Labor Secretary by President Trump...

Oh wait.

I just think it's really sad you have to resort to name-calling and insults. This is why we can't have nice things.

---

Translation - BBL won't take part in a discussion unless he gets to smear Trump.

Tell me, BBL, where in that post you quoted did I engage in "name-calling and insults"?

BBL IS A WASTE OF TIME!

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Do I need to point out that the prosecution - the serious one - against Epstein started and gained traction during Trump's administration? It could have started during Bush or Obama, but it was Trump's Administration which oversaw the prosecution. If Trump had reason to worry about Epstein, it would have been much easier and simpler to just squash the investigation that way it was during the last two administrations, but instead under Trump it went forward.

---

LMAO.

You're right. This is Obama's fault. It's not like one of the main things that brought this all to the forefront was the prosecutor that made the sweetheart deal was made Labor Secretary by President Trump...

Oh wait.

I just think it's really sad you have to resort to name-calling and insults. This is why we can't have nice things.

---

Translation - BBL won't take part in a discussion unless he gets to smear Trump.

Tell me, BBL, where in that post you quoted did I engage in "name-calling and insults"?

---

Do you not remember when you told me how I went full "**** head"?

Cause it's on this page, my friend.

It's okay, guy. Take the win. No one thinks Trump did it. I actually stated sincere reasons why I don't think he could have. They're shockingly similar to why I think Hillary or Bill, or anyone did.

I mean, I guess he COULD be Mossad, but I doubt it.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Do I need to point out that the prosecution - the serious one - against Epstein started and gained traction during Trump's administration? It could have started during Bush or Obama, but it was Trump's Administration which oversaw the prosecution. If Trump had reason to worry about Epstein, it would have been much easier and simpler to just squash the investigation that way it was during the last two administrations, but instead under Trump it went forward.

---

LMAO.

You're right. This is Obama's fault. It's not like one of the main things that brought this all to the forefront was the prosecutor that made the sweetheart deal was made Labor Secretary by President Trump...

Oh wait.

I just think it's really sad you have to resort to name-calling and insults. This is why we can't have nice things.

---

Translation - BBL won't take part in a discussion unless he gets to smear Trump.

Tell me, BBL, where in that post you quoted did I engage in "name-calling and insults"?

---

Do you not remember when you told me how I went full "**** head"?

Cause it's on this page, my friend.

It's okay, guy. Take the win. No one thinks Trump did it. I actually stated sincere reasons why I don't think he could have. They're shockingly similar to why I think Hillary or Bill, or anyone did.

I mean, I guess he COULD be Mossad, but I doubt it.

---

His right hand madam Ghislaine Maxwell has documented links to Mossad. It's not out of the question that he's outlived his usefulness to them.....