- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Where Was the Corporate Media's Outrage When Bill & Hillary Ignored the Epstein Subpoena?
Posted on 12/1/25 at 10:50 am
Posted on 12/1/25 at 10:50 am
I ask this for 2 reasons:
1) Peter Navarro actually went to prison for ignoring his subpoena to appear before the J6 committee. Why wouldn't the same rules apply to the Clintons?
2) Bill Clinton has been linked to Epstein Island multiple times. Photos of him with young girls, including the girl who recently and allegedly "Epsteined" herself. Flight logs name BOTH CLINTONS, although it's something like 27 flights for Bill and about 6 for Hillary.
Bottom-line, the Clintons appear to be in a position to know a great deal about Epstein, the island, etc.
So, why is it they can simply refuse a subpoena and face ZERO CONSEQUENCES, while Peter Navarro went to prison?
PS - If the likes of George Stephanopoulos, Jake Tapper, Nicolle Wallace, etc. have expressed outrage over this and I simply missed it, please post a video of them doing so. So far, I haven't seen even one instance where any member of the corporate media has done so.
1) Peter Navarro actually went to prison for ignoring his subpoena to appear before the J6 committee. Why wouldn't the same rules apply to the Clintons?
2) Bill Clinton has been linked to Epstein Island multiple times. Photos of him with young girls, including the girl who recently and allegedly "Epsteined" herself. Flight logs name BOTH CLINTONS, although it's something like 27 flights for Bill and about 6 for Hillary.
Bottom-line, the Clintons appear to be in a position to know a great deal about Epstein, the island, etc.
So, why is it they can simply refuse a subpoena and face ZERO CONSEQUENCES, while Peter Navarro went to prison?
PS - If the likes of George Stephanopoulos, Jake Tapper, Nicolle Wallace, etc. have expressed outrage over this and I simply missed it, please post a video of them doing so. So far, I haven't seen even one instance where any member of the corporate media has done so.
8
Posted on 12/1/25 at 11:15 am to KCT
The media stopped telling informational stories long ago, to become leftist propaganda.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 11:25 am to KCT
I'll have you know I'm ....... 
Posted on 12/1/25 at 11:30 am to KCT
Corrected my mistake
Clinton's subpoenaed Aug 5, 2025
Clinton's subpoenaed Aug 5, 2025
This post was edited on 12/1/25 at 11:50 am
Posted on 12/1/25 at 11:31 am to KCT
quote:Good Lord, no one ignored the subpoenas.
Where Was the Corporate Media's Outrage When Bill & Hillary Ignored the Epstein Subpoena? ... (W)hy is it they can simply refuse a subpoena and face ZERO CONSEQUENCES, while Peter Navarro went to prison?
The Clintons contacted the Committee and told them that the proposed date was not possible for them. Their attorneys and the Committee are working together to find a workable date. This has been acknowledged by the Committee many times.
95% (or more) of depositiona in this country are scheduled by agreement. Outside Congress, however, most people have the courtesy to try and find a convenient date for the witness BEFORE sending the subpona.
This is not remotely analogous to the Navarro situation. He absolutely refusd to appear and refused to produce any documents.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 11:35 am to Viator106
quote:This is not correct.
Thay haven't been subpoenaed yet. They were just asked to give depositions and refused. Next step is subpoenas.
They were issued subpoenas to provide testimony to the Committee.
Yes, testimony before a Congressional Committee is technically called a "deposition," even though it differs somewhat versus a traditional deposition in a civil proceeding.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 1:37 pm to KCT
(D)ifferent.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 1:45 pm to KCT
Because they dgaf unless they can hang it on drumpf.
Not one frick for anything other than Drumpf.
Not one frick for anything other than Drumpf.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 2:22 pm to KCT
quote:You have your answer, you just refuse to acknowledge it. ?They have not "refused" anything.
I ask this for 2 reasons:
1) Peter Navarro actually went to prison for ignoring his subpoena to appear before the J6 committee. Why wouldn't the same rules apply to the Clintons?
2) Bill Clinton has been linked to Epstein Island multiple times. Photos of him with young girls, including the girl who recently and allegedly "Epsteined" herself. Flight logs name BOTH CLINTONS, although it's something like 27 flights for Bill and about 6 for Hillary.
Bottom-line, the Clintons appear to be in a position to know a great deal about Epstein, the island, etc.
So, why is it they can simply refuse a subpoena and face ZERO CONSEQUENCES, while Peter Navarro went to prison?
PS - If the likes of George Stephanopoulos, Jake Tapper, Nicolle Wallace, etc. have expressed outrage over this and I simply missed it, please post a video of them doing so. So far, I haven't seen even one instance where any member of the corporate media has done so.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 2:31 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
You have your answer, you just refuse to acknowledge it. ?They have not "refused" anything.
So, as long as you just keep saying, "that's a bad date for me," then you can never be deposed or get arrested. And you'll even have people who claim to hate corruption run cover for you in the public. What a brilliant system we have.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 2:33 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Scrub TX
Oh, look another phony "conservative." This one even falsely claims to be a Trump supporter.
Dude, they did refuse to appear. But, keep kissing that Clinton arse.
Posted on 12/1/25 at 2:41 pm to KCT
More important, why hasn't the Republican Congress referred the matter to the Trump DOJ for criminal prosecution?
While reluctant, the Dems get high marks for discipline and ruthlessness.
Our Republican representatives? All bark. No bite.
ETA: Sorry for not reading the thread. Have the Clintons NOT ignored a subpoena?
While reluctant, the Dems get high marks for discipline and ruthlessness.
Our Republican representatives? All bark. No bite.
ETA: Sorry for not reading the thread. Have the Clintons NOT ignored a subpoena?
This post was edited on 12/1/25 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 12/2/25 at 10:41 am to KCT
quote:Link?
Dude, they did refuse to appear.
Posted on 12/2/25 at 11:30 am to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
ETA: Sorry for not reading the thread. Have the Clintons NOT ignored a subpoena?
They were subpoenaed in August, but their attorneys requested another date. Last month, they asked to make a written statement rather than appear. They were ordered to appear on Dec. 17 at 10:00 AM and Dec. 18 at 10:00 AM. NY Post
To my knowledge, they have not refused to appear. The date they have been ordered is a few weeks out.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News