- 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
re: BWAHAHAHA Magnificent bastard did it again! Now both Ds and Rs support Maxwell's testimony
Posted on 7/25/25 at 3:42 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 7/25/25 at 3:42 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
The only reason anyone on either side cares about Epstein is because they’ve been told by the Internet that their political enemies are on a list that doesn’t exist.
Oh there is definitely a list of some sort. It's just a matter of if there is proof that can lead to convictions.
1
Posted on 7/25/25 at 3:45 pm to Powerman
quote:
Oh there is definitely a list of some sort. It's just a matter of if there is proof that can lead to convictions.
There isn’t ever going to ever be some release of names if those people cannot be connected to prosecutable crimes.
It’s hard to fathom that so many don’t seem to understand that. Which was my point. Everyone apparently just wants names to freak out over out of political expediency. If the DOJ had any evidence whatsoever they’d have moved years ago.
Believing that someone like Epstein kept some sort of ledger of his crimes is just naive and hilarious at the same time. That doesn’t exist. Any “list” is just going to be people that Maxwell saw at the island. If she had observed anyone important doing something illegal, why would she not have leveraged that during her trial? It makes no sense that it’s somehow still a secret.
Just another situation that the internet has convinced itself is broader and more intricate than it was in reality.
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 3:47 pm
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:15 pm to Powerman
quote:
There is at least reasonable suspicion of wrong doing on his part
Not really. If there was any "there" there it would have come out sooo many years ago. I admire your dedication to this delusion though. Respect!
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 4:16 pm
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:25 pm to Mushroom1968
quote:
That video was brought up yesterday and I posted another video of him answering other questions the exact same way. He answered 100s of questions with exact same answer.
Facts be damned mang!! They are literally taking the non-answer of a now dead convicted pedo as an admission of guilt
How stupid are you lefties exactly?
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:30 pm to Powerman
quote:
The deputy AG went to visit her in prison. The optics will be that she is going to clear Trump of any wrong doing in exchange for a pardon.
You say that only because you're committed to believing President Trump is guilty of something.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:37 pm to CAD703X
quote:
do you even lie detector?
Polygraphs aren’t admissible in most U.S. courts due to reliability concerns.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:38 pm to dgnx6
quote:certainly used to fire government workers for leaking recently
Polygraphs aren’t admissible in most U.S. courts due to reliability concerns.
and is she going to be doing this in court or in front of congress?
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:39 pm to Saint Alfonzo
quote:
You say that only because you're committed to believing President Trump is guilty of something.
I mean this is clearly how the MSM is going to play this, if it occurs that way.
"Trump pardoned a convicted sex trafficker for flimsy evidence to attack his political enemies"
The headlines write themselves
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:39 pm to CAD703X
quote:
i imagine she knows if she tries to make up stuff that doesn't match documents/flight logs she'll be skewered.
Skewered? She has already been convicted they can’t anything else to her. She really has nothing to lose.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:39 pm to CAD703X
quote:
and is she going to be doing this in court or in front of congress?
If it's a serious inquiry, neither.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:41 pm to Dizz
quote:well if her pardon is contingent upon honesty i would think she would
Skewered? She has already been convicted they can’t anything else to her. She really has nothing to lose.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:43 pm to CAD703X
quote:
well if her pardon is contingent upon honesty i
You can't revoke a pardon
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:43 pm to CAD703X
quote:
well if her pardon is contingent upon honesty i would think she would
Short of a document directly contradicting something how would you show she is lying. Without documents or other verification everything she says is suspect.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:i would assume she would have to confess to the crimes first, before a pardon would cover them
You can't revoke a pardon
Posted on 7/25/25 at 4:55 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You can't revoke a pardon
That’s genuinely an interesting point, and I don’t intend any offense by this but I’d like to know the source or citation for it.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 5:02 pm to davyjones
If you could undo pardons it would have happened already. Not to mention that ability would create an insane amount of uncertainty.
Federal our ruled that pardons are a final act and irrevocable.
Federal our ruled that pardons are a final act and irrevocable.
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 5:04 pm
Posted on 7/25/25 at 5:09 pm to Dizz
Well I wasn’t dismissing the concept of pardons being irrevocable, I was only asking for whatever statutory source makes it official, or enforceable if you will. I suppose it could possibly come in a number of possible forms/ways. And I wasn’t arguing the wisdom of making pardons irrevocable or irreversible either - I don’t necessarily disagree with your thoughts on that. Just looking for the law or other form of “rule” that covers it, specifically if possible.
This post was edited on 7/25/25 at 5:11 pm
Posted on 7/25/25 at 5:14 pm to Tuscaloosa
quote:
The big problem here is that it gives Dems an out to allege a sweetheart deal in exchange for exonerating Trump.
That will 100% be the play, regardless.
It's not as if Trump initiated this. He is on records as saying he doesn't understand why people are still curious about the Epstein saga and blasted a portion of his base for buying into it. That should be how his press secretary responds.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 5:29 pm to BigPerm30
quote:
No one has ever lied for a pardon or leniency in sentencing.
Well thanks for sharing the new dem war cry on this story. Seriously do they email you sheep things to say or by text?? How do you all get on the same page like a bunch of parrots?? It’s impressive actually.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 5:31 pm to Powerman
quote:
The deputy AG went to visit her in prison. The optics will be that she is going to clear Trump of any wrong doing in exchange for a pardon
Only one problem for you. Why did Biden leave Trump alone for 4 years? I guess it was out of his loyalty towards Trump?
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News