Started By
Message

re: Acosta Sworn Testimony: DJT's Name Not in Any Epstein COURT Documents

Posted on 10/18/25 at 6:34 pm to
Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
69159 posts
Posted on 10/18/25 at 6:34 pm to
happy Saturday, gent
Posted by rob0710
LA
Member since Oct 2004
941 posts
Posted on 10/18/25 at 6:54 pm to
quote:

Then why are Republicans fighting to keep the files unreleased?


Personally. I think they're baiting the left. Making them beg for the release. Not gonna help their cause.
Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
69159 posts
Posted on 10/18/25 at 7:01 pm to
It's entirely possible some people really are wanting to do a very careful review of the information to make sure they aren't outing someone who truly did nothing illicit.

It's also possible they are chasing leads to potentially bring charges to people that did do something criminal and don't want to disturb ongoing investigations.

Just throwing out some reasonable reasons to counter the unreasonable ones being tossed around.
Posted by davyjones
NELA
Member since Feb 2019
35156 posts
Posted on 10/18/25 at 7:02 pm to
I think the primary problem is the people demanding said “release.” They don’t know what’s actually already been released, or that file information even has been released, and IMO nor do they really even want to. Thus, they don’t really know what they’re even demanding, and again, IMO nor do they really even care to be fully aware.

Once more, IMO, they’re fostering a moving goalposts situation because in the end they’re not truly concerned with or interested in any actual substance of the matter, but rather simply only want it to be a serious problem and distraction for Trump. Which when you think about it, how stupid is that because a negatively affected President perhaps means a negatively affected them.
Posted by davyjones
NELA
Member since Feb 2019
35156 posts
Posted on 10/18/25 at 7:06 pm to
quote:

It's entirely possible some people really are wanting to do a very careful review of the information to make sure they aren't outing someone who truly did nothing illicit.

It's also possible they are chasing leads to potentially bring charges to people that did do something criminal and don't want to disturb ongoing investigations.

Just throwing out some reasonable reasons to counter the unreasonable ones being tossed around.

Very well thought out and very well said. Which likely means it will be rejected by less reasonable and rational people. Another possibility is what I mentioned immediately below you, albeit in a slightly less friendly manner. Not typically my preferred style, but I’m a mere mortal and falter from time to time.
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
170769 posts
Posted on 10/18/25 at 7:09 pm to
quote:


I really don't think this is the case... at least I sincerely hope not. Something is going on behind the scenes- but I just can't bring myself to believe that Trump would protect abusers of young women.

There is also the more sinister possibility that the people on the list can be controlled by threat of releasing anything related to them. Vote on this bill or we release the shite type of thing
Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
69159 posts
Posted on 10/18/25 at 7:11 pm to
You're not wrong. Much like the ceasefire in Gaza, it's all just a facade to hinder Trump. I would wager even the enlightened folks on the PT making it the only issue, haven't read a single source doc released to date. It's just a fun rallying cry until it goes stale and they have to pick up the next cause they care so deeply about.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 4Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram