Trump is probably on the list, so he has to protect that. The Democrats had it during their entire presidency; even if they didn’t want turmoil during their time in office, they could have released it after their presidential defeat and before Trump took office.
Because Democratic leadership is aware that Republicans aren’t their actual enemies, and a ton of them are also on the list.
The democrats are aware that their names are on the list and they’re the only ones that will be held accountable for it. The republicans will hold witch burnings while completely ignoring their own member’s names on the list.
will be held accountable for it
sweet summer child
As non-American, the reason I think that Democrats didn’t release the list was that not only were some Democrats and their donors on it, they knew that they would be crucified by Republicans and Americans for it. The also knew that at the same time all the Republicans and their donors on the list would be let off because laws, morality, ethics are only ever to be used to oppress the poor and non-whites or to combat Democratic politicians. Do you think Trump would ever have made it to President as a Democrat? There is a reason he switched to become a Republican.
No idea, but I read the title like it was the setup to a joke.
The Aristocrats!
Maybe the idea that Epstein was at the head of a global network of paedophiles, involved with trafficking young girls and boys for the likes of Trump, Clinton and Gates is fanciful.
Impossible? No. Improbable? Yes.
The idea that this is all some Mossad psi-op to influence US politics is also bonkers and predictably falls into classic anti-semitic tropes.
Is it tittilating and fun to speculate about with people online? Sure. Does social and traditional media love a good juicy story like this and will continue to give it play and play? Absolutely.
Propriety, ironically.
Probably a lot of people on both sides.
guilty by association.
Your premise is wrong. The Democrats never had the list, and the Republicans don’t have it now. The people who actually have that list, and those documents, have names. Use those names. Don’t trick yourself into believing that some random congressperson has access or authority.
What is “the list”? How do we know the government even has “the list”?
Because they said they did.
It’s probably the same as the flight logs
Because they said they did.
Did the Biden government say they had “the Epstein client list”?
I am wondering now. How could such a list even be proven real or couldn’t trump just fake one?
Because anyone (everyone) on that list is going to immediately sue for defamation etc, and if they don’t have evidence or they messed up the chain of custody on that evidence, it’ll be an issue. They also will be able to look at all the evidence through discovery and see if it’s tampered with. So that’s why they can’t release even 1 name, because they are protecting Trump
But still then, how would all this evidence even look like? Some piece of papers and flight logs? Even if they released all the real evidence I suspect it won’t hold up against all the people on the list discrediting it.
Epstein took extensive video footage of every single thing that happened in his houses. That’s why Pam Bondi said it was “child porn.” They have the entire act on footage. Blackmail isn’t very effective otherwise.
I think manufacturing the complex evidence needed here wouldn’t be possible.
I had a similar thought. Why didn’t they just release democrat names? And I think it’s because while they know they can claim nothing exists (What they are doing now, after having access), if they try to cherry-pick info and claim that’s all that exists, someone with knowledge in the matter will be able to leak/prove they are cherry picking.
It’s also very tempting to buy into the idea that if the list is as long and vast as some suggest, it will undermine trust in a very real way that goes beyond MAGA/Qanon fringe conspiracy circles. I could see the Trump admin, as stupid and bumbling as they are, recognizing the fire they are playing with.
I hate how kooky that all sounds. What a fucked up situation.
I assume because there were some high profile dems on the list.
Yup. Everybody’s just going to pretend nothing ever happened and move on.
Just to be clear, that is not what should happen
Even if it comes to light, I have doubts anything will come of it. Look what happened with the Panama papers. Basically only Iceland did anything about it.
Australia acted on it for what it’s worth.
they bombed a reporter over it.
Iceland had the highest profile result so perhaps it may seem that way, but many countries investigated and prosecuted individuals. In addition, it caused the entire global financial system to redouble AML efforts.
probably some hollywood execs, and AIPAC people too.
For the same reason republicans won’t: They’re on the list, their friends are on the list and their donors are on the list.
The last point is the most important.
The difference is the democrats didn’t campaign on the promise of releasing it. And MAGAs believed him for some weird reason
So? Do you think a politician cares about their campaign promisses, or gets held to them? They very often do the exact opposite of what they promised actually
The point I’m making is Biden never campaigned on releasing the Epstein files. So it shouldn’t be surprising that he protected the people on the list. Trump did and his idiots fully expected him to release the list because he’s an honest person who keeps his promises. Trump knowingly and intentionally got votes from the psycho qanon types who have always believed trump is playing 4D chess.
It’s important to note that the goal posts have moved. Originally people wanted to see the “black book” which may be what the client list has come from. The black book got released and it’s got lots of people in it but it didn’t prove any crimes, only that he associated with them. People kept talking about it and believed it was being kept secret because nothing happens and no one got charged with anything. I believe the “client list” which appears to be a new idea, is directly talking about a list of people who the fbi have information on of committing crimes where Epstein supplied underaged girls to them.
Nobody thinks that. Case in point - Trump is never held to anything he has ever said.
Because most of their big money donors are also on the list.
If someone hands you $50,000 a year with no questions every year, it’s hard to say no when they squeeze your hand and ask you to reconsider releasing it.
Especially if even if you released it it probably wouldn’t change literally a single thing.
Bill Clinton.
And Bill Gates, probably. I have a feeling that was a reason for Melinda to split because she has never given a straightforward answer. It was just, “Oh, we’re splitting for reasons.”
People just split for irreconcilable differences all the time, they don’t owe the public an explanation.
Except their split happened when it was revealed he was in contact with Epstein. And “differences” is vague enough that not many people care after. Keeping silent isn’t admitting “differences” with a spouse that you’ve been with for years.
deleted by creator
She just gave an interview where she confirmed Epstein was a major reason for the divorce amongst other reasons. She said she met Epstein one time and had nightmares afterwards.
Citation?
2:09-3:10, the question directly before this is about his infidelities, she ends it with specific legal language “Ask Bill.”
Yeah, but that wouldn’t be news. Same as Trump and Prince Andrew being on it aren’t news. I’m guessing some really popular people are on there. People like Bernie Sanders (I’m NOT saying he’s on there but you get my gist).
You’re right, it’s not news so much as that the Clintons come from an era of politics where merely embarrassing things are still kept on the down-low. Especially considering the continued influence of 1990’s Clinton-era politicking on the Democratic party. Even Obama couldn’t really break that hold, as seen by Hillary being given the Secretary of State position during Obama’s tenure and then running and losing after Obama. There was actually a lot of evidence at the time that the DNC was basically broke and was living off of the generosity of the Clinton foundation. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, chair of the DNC from 2011 to 2016, was literally in Hillary Clinton’s pocket. While Bill Clinton himself is not particularly important as a figure these days, the family influence continues to extend deep into nearly every facet of the Democratic party, and as such, Democrats are unlikely to bite the hands that feed them so to speak.
