sturg33
I
Bill is a shabby predator and Hillary chose to enable him. As bad as that is I felt strongly she was the lesser of the two evils in 2016.
Enabling a child see trafficker is less evil than the mean tweeter?
Bill is a shabby predator and Hillary chose to enable him. As bad as that is I felt strongly she was the lesser of the two evils in 2016.
Enabling a child see trafficker is less evil than the mean tweeter?
Enabling a child see trafficker is less evil than the mean tweeter?
Suggestion to the wise, I wouldn't rush out to defend anyone connected with Epstein.
Very good advice my friend! I can't wait to see the Trumpeters go into nuclear meltdown when DJT's name gets included on this list, and you know it will. Right now the Repubs are working way too hard to point the finger at the Dems who are involved both this Epstein and his lady friend and pointing out the evils of child trafficking, which I'm TOTALLY fine with. ANYONE involved in this needs to be punished IMO. The problem WILL be when the Donald's name comes up, and again you KNOW it will sooner or later. Then the whole discussion will get shifted and start spinning like that Bill Clinton lie clock in hell joke from back in the day.
Not saying trump isn't involved, but is there anything concrete that leads you to believe he is?
Not saying trump isn't involved, but is there anything concrete that leads you to believe he is?
I mean what makes something concrete? Multiple reports of him walking into women's dressing rooms? Him saying Epstein is a fun guys who likes young beautiful women? There's a number of things that are creepers
Not saying trump isn't involved, but is there anything concrete that leads you to believe he is?
Flight logs to island or something similar
he and epstein had a falling out a long time ago...i actually think Bill has more to fear about what might come out
All the evidence they need is the R beside a person. They start there and work backwards
I believe ALL those people were involved to some extent, obviously some more than others. Trump ran in those circles just like the Clintons and many others did. My point here is there is already a lot of activity on Facebook and other quality places like that, that accuse the Clintons, Prince Andrew, and pretty much every Dem on the planet. I even saw a reference to Barney Frank in one of them from a long time back. There was one I saw that was well over a full page long and ONLY accused Dems. Does this no seem odd to you? Yes I have no love for the Dems but isn't this a pretty blatant attempt to put the spotlight on them so nobody pays attention to which Repubs were also guilty of some/many versions of this crap?
So, how easy is it for Repub to believe anything and everything they hear about a Dem, especially anyone named Clinton, Biden, or Obama? Do Repubs even really need actual evidence or is just a list of accusations and names to believe it?
What would it take for Repubs to believe it of one of their own (or many)? It's been my experience that Repubs will only believe "facts" from one of their "reliable sources" is Fox, OAN, Talk Radio, etc., and those sources simply won't report anything bad on them, unless they've been excommunicated from the order, ala John Bolton. So, if the current administration does get implicated and the usual suspects of "great and honest news reporting" like the ones I just mentioned won't report these accusations in a fair way, or touch on it in such a way that Repubs just dismiss it like then tend to do everything negative about DJT, will Repubs believe it?
Will you? What about the other Repubs on this forum? What will it take?
Enabling a child see trafficker is less evil than the mean tweeter?
They’ll admit it as soon as the left admits that the Russia collusion was a made up hoax
They’ll admit it as soon as the left admits that the Russia collusion was a made up hoax
So, "not letting THEM win" is still priority #1. Is that a fair statement?