- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- 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: EPSTEIN FILES: PHASE 1 is OUT!
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:11 pm to BugAC
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:11 pm to BugAC
quote:
Insulting you isn't a "straw man".
No. Creating an argument I didn't make is a straw man.
Which you did.
I never claimed they were given empty binders like Loomer did.
quote:
You might want to look up the definition again.
1
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:12 pm to Miner
quote:
SFP, is there any way that releasing these files would corrupt prosecution, if (lol) there were any in the works?
Yeah. I posted that a page or 2 back.
The DOJ isn't going to release documents related to an ongoing investigation. No prosecutorial body would and every FOIA law in the US exempts these documents, I believe.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
. Creating an argument I didn't make is a straw man.
Cool, i said you and Loomer were on the same side. You are. Both angry mean ole Bondi didn't release the files in the manner you wanted it.
quote:
I never claimed they were given empty binders like Loomer did.
No shite. You realize i have a heavy bit of sarcasm in most my posts, right? For being an internet lawyer, you aren't very perceptive.
Anywho, i'm bored talking about this subject. Anything else before i leave?
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
Thanks! 
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:17 pm to BugAC
quote:
Cool, i said you and Loomer were on the same side.
No
You said
quote:
SFP and Loomer have the same opinions on the matter.
quote:
I never claimed they were given empty binders like Loomer did.
Therefore, you implying that I said there was a fake binder = straw man.
You can try to pivot and change what you said, but the quotes are the quotes.
quote:
You realize i have a heavy bit of sarcasm in most my posts, right?
Now, that you've been embarassed again, revert back to ad homs
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:18 pm to BCreed1
The client list will never be released. not sure what the end goal is here. this just makes the trump administration look stupid. What a waste of time.
These influencers know those books are not worth a damn but are holding them up like its the smoking gun.
This has backfired bigly on Trump.
These influencers know those books are not worth a damn but are holding them up like its the smoking gun.
This has backfired bigly on Trump.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:19 pm to Miner
That's the underlying current I think people are missing.
I don't see how the DOJ can release all the evidence on Epstein while still planning prosecutions related to Epstein. They only have one of those choices and release = no prosecution. Or....if there may be possible prosecutions, the release is going to be missing a lot.
I don't see how the DOJ can release all the evidence on Epstein while still planning prosecutions related to Epstein. They only have one of those choices and release = no prosecution. Or....if there may be possible prosecutions, the release is going to be missing a lot.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The DOJ isn't going to release documents related to an ongoing investigation. No prosecutorial body would and every FOIA law in the US exempts these documents, I believe.
Where did you get your law degree?
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:20 pm to bleedsgarnet
So nothing of substance was realized today?
Is that correct?
Is that correct?
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:22 pm to supadave3
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:22 pm to BigPerm30
quote:
Where did you get your law degree?
You think prosecutorial bodies release evidence in ongoing investigations?
Here is the LA FOIA law, for instance
quote:
§3. Records of prosecutive, investigative, and law enforcement agencies and communications districts
A. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to require disclosures of records, or the information contained therein, held by the offices of the attorney general, district attorneys, sheriffs, police departments, Department of Public Safety and Corrections, marshals, investigators, public health investigators, correctional agencies, communications districts, intelligence agencies, Council on Peace Officer Standards and Training, Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Criminal Justice, or publicly owned water districts of the state, which records are:
(1) Records pertaining to pending criminal litigation or any criminal litigation which can be reasonably anticipated, until such litigation has been finally adjudicated or otherwise settled, except as otherwise provided in Subsection F of this Section; or
This is SOP in, I assume, every LEO outfit in the US (and pretty much everywhere else).
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
I agree. I'd rather not know until an indictment was announced.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Now, that you've been embarassed again, revert back to ad homs
I'm not embarrassed to say that you and loomer are alike.
I did say there is sarcasm in a lot of my posts. I did not say, however, that my sarcasm wasn't accurate. In no way am i telling you my sarcasm is me backtracking. It's just to make you look ridiculous with an added touch of humor.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No prosecutorial body would and every FOIA law in the US exempts these documents, I believe.
Well, you certainly “believe” wrong.
Southern law school grad I see.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:25 pm to Cotten
quote:
Well, you certainly “believe” wrong.
Which states' FOIA permits release of evidence in ongoing criminal investigations? I'd like to read their statute.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:25 pm to TheSadvocate
Old Link, bruh.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:26 pm to SlowFlowPro
How long has the FBI had these documents? Since his arrest?
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:26 pm to BCreed1
This thread title is triggering the frick out of me.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:26 pm to supadave3
Correct, Sir.
Posted on 2/27/25 at 2:27 pm to TigerNAtux
We don't know.
That arrest was for a specific act. The stuff about "The Epstein List" involves other allegations/actors. No idea when that evidence/data was accumulated. Clearly a lot was done beforehand.
That arrest was for a specific act. The stuff about "The Epstein List" involves other allegations/actors. No idea when that evidence/data was accumulated. Clearly a lot was done beforehand.
Page 15 of 31
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News