More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Anything and Everything political, express your view, but play nice
Kpdemello
Tree Psycho
Posts: 1917
Joined: Feb 2nd, '16, 14:19

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by Kpdemello »

f.a.s.t. wrote:My other sources are from talk radio that is the best source of real news, I'm not going to waste my time going onto their websites to provide their sources. The facts speak for themselves, everything I post is true. In addition, it's hard to provide sources when the biased and hate filled hearts and minds that run google have algorithms and shadow blocking that block anything in favor of my positions.
I used to listen to a lot of talk radio. About ten years ago or so I stopped. After growing up some and looking at some of the other information out there, I realized that a lot of what I was listening to was highly slanted to the right and a lot of it was just not accurate. The most egregious issues were the things they said about Democrat and liberal political motivations, and the idea that the "liberals" were all on the same page about what they wanted and how they wanted to get it. In fact most of talk radio seemed to be dedicated to the idea that liberals were the enemy that needed to be defeated.

What I realized was the Democrats and liberals are motivated by the same human motivations that the Republicans and conservatives are. Mostly they want good government, healthy families, and financial security. Throw in the few bad apples that want power for power's sake, which are present on both sides.

Bottom line is that I don't think talk radio is a very good source of news. And I've seen no evidence that google has any bias in its search results, btw. I often use google to check on things that get posted here by Trump supporters, and believe me there's no shortage of results that come up from the crazy conspiracy theory part of the right wing. I also regularly see Fox news articles in the google news feed, and Fox is the right-wing's main stream media.
Kpdemello
Tree Psycho
Posts: 1917
Joined: Feb 2nd, '16, 14:19

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by Kpdemello »

On the topic of people currently in office being tainted by association with Epstein's horribleness:
President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, the 66-year-old financier charged this week with sex trafficking and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking, were once the only attendees at a party at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, where roughly two dozen women were brought in to entertain, a former Trump associate told The New York Times.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-e ... men-2019-7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I see no evidence that Trump was involved with sex trafficking. But there's quite a bit of evidence in that article that Trump is a sleaze bag (as if we didn't know that already). Where are the self-righteous critics of Bill Clinton's sexual escapades on this one? Going to give Trump a pass because he's your guy, I assume.
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19609
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

madhatter wrote:
Kpdemello wrote:Anyone involved in this horribleness, be it Clinton, or Trump, or even Bob Kraft, should be imprisoned for life or worse. But everyone is innocent until proven guilty. And I'm a lot nore concerned about the taint to people who are actually in office right now than someone who hasn't been in office for a decade. yep cuz yer not concerned about the VICTIMS at all but the political aspect of it despite your " anyone involved" screed...some are always more equal than others in your world...

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
but of course you are balki...don't be ridiculous...good luck w your TDS and your 10 billionth failed " get trump" fantasy...

why does currently in office carry any extra weight? but leave it to you to be highly concerned about taint...
Speaking of concerns about the victims ... Trump feels so bad for Acosta ... no mention of the victims or why Trump previously said Epstein is a terrific guy that's a lot of fun to be with.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1148631690576879616
daytripper
Wanted Poster
Posts: 3468
Joined: Nov 6th, '04, 20:27
Location: Long Island

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by daytripper »

Kpdemello wrote:On the topic of people currently in office being tainted by association with Epstein's horribleness:
President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, the 66-year-old financier charged this week with sex trafficking and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking, were once the only attendees at a party at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, where roughly two dozen women were brought in to entertain, a former Trump associate told The New York Times.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-e ... men-2019-7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I see no evidence that Trump was involved with sex trafficking. But there's quite a bit of evidence in that article that Trump is a sleaze bag (as if we didn't know that already). Where are the self-righteous critics of Bill Clinton's sexual escapades on this one? Going to give Trump a pass because he's your guy, I assume.
99% of politicians are sleaze bags. I didnt care that Clinton cheated on his wife just like I wouldn't care if Trump cheated on his wife.
Kpdemello
Tree Psycho
Posts: 1917
Joined: Feb 2nd, '16, 14:19

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by Kpdemello »

daytripper wrote:99% of politicians are sleaze bags. I didnt care that Clinton cheated on his wife just like I wouldn't care if Trump cheated on his wife.
While I tend to agree, I prefer good people in office when possible. Also I was directing my post more to the hypocrisy of people who are willing to criticize Clinton for his association with Epstein but will give Trump a pass just because he's their chosen guy.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by madhatter »

Kpdemello wrote:
daytripper wrote:99% of politicians are sleaze bags. I didnt care that Clinton cheated on his wife just like I wouldn't care if Trump cheated on his wife.
While I tend to agree, I prefer good people in office when possible. Also I was directing my post more to the hypocrisy of people who are willing to criticize Clinton for his association with Epstein but will give Trump a pass just because he's their chosen guy.
I dunno trump banned him from mar a lago long before his epstein got in trouble...

Steele tried to pin something w Epstein on trump but was unable to make any connection...association isn't a crime...it remains to be seen if clinton is guilty of anything...seems like christine pelosi thinks some D faves are guilty...wonder who they are...

I get it yer DESPERATE to get trump out of office by ANY means necessary...yet every time it fails to come to fruition...very little chance of trump being implicated in any crime here, it would have come out long ago... but the D's will proclaim him guilty by association and try to inflict whatever damage they can via the MSM all with the utmost approval of the ( barely) useful idiot class...



good luck w that guilt by association thing...

ya gotta do what they tell you...
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19609
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

madhatter wrote:
Kpdemello wrote:
daytripper wrote:99% of politicians are sleaze bags. I didnt care that Clinton cheated on his wife just like I wouldn't care if Trump cheated on his wife.
While I tend to agree, I prefer good people in office when possible. Also I was directing my post more to the hypocrisy of people who are willing to criticize Clinton for his association with Epstein but will give Trump a pass just because he's their chosen guy.
I dunno trump banned him from mar a lago long before his epstein got in trouble...

Steele tried to pin something w Epstein on trump but was unable to make any connection...association isn't a crime...it remains to be seen if clinton is guilty of anything...seems like christine pelosi thinks some D faves are guilty...wonder who they are...

I get it yer DESPERATE to get trump out of office by ANY means necessary...yet every time it fails to come to fruition...very little chance of trump being implicated in any crime here, it would have come out long ago... but the D's will proclaim him guilty by association and try to inflict whatever damage they can via the MSM all with the utmost approval of the ( barely) useful idiot class...

good luck w that guilt by association thing...

ya gotta do what they tell you...
Yes, Trump banned him from Mar a Lago in 2007 because Epstein sexually assaulted a girl at the club in 1999 ... Trump went on to make the aforementioned comments about him being a terrific guy in 2002.

... carry on ...
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by madhatter »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
madhatter wrote:
Kpdemello wrote:
daytripper wrote:99% of politicians are sleaze bags. I didnt care that Clinton cheated on his wife just like I wouldn't care if Trump cheated on his wife.
While I tend to agree, I prefer good people in office when possible. Also I was directing my post more to the hypocrisy of people who are willing to criticize Clinton for his association with Epstein but will give Trump a pass just because he's their chosen guy.
I dunno trump banned him from mar a lago long before his epstein got in trouble...

Steele tried to pin something w Epstein on trump but was unable to make any connection...association isn't a crime...it remains to be seen if clinton is guilty of anything...seems like christine pelosi thinks some D faves are guilty...wonder who they are...

I get it yer DESPERATE to get trump out of office by ANY means necessary...yet every time it fails to come to fruition...very little chance of trump being implicated in any crime here, it would have come out long ago... but the D's will proclaim him guilty by association and try to inflict whatever damage they can via the MSM all with the utmost approval of the ( barely) useful idiot class...

good luck w that guilt by association thing...

ya gotta do what they tell you...
Yes, Trump banned him from Mar a Lago in 2007ya sure about 2007? I couldn't find any reference to that year...best I could find was an article from 2007 confirming he had been banned prior to that date... https://pagesix.com/2007/10/15/sex-case ... lining-up/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; because Epstein sexually assaulted a girl at the club in 1999 ... Trump went on to make the aforementioned comments about him being a terrific guy in 2002. prepare the gallows... :roll:

... carry on ...
good fvking grief...he said he was a good guy in 2002, surely that's a crime...I mean who says stuff like that?




again good luck w the guilt by association thing....hard to imagine trump implicated in this yet no one touched on it til now...

not a witch hunt though...
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19609
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

Trying to understand your logic here hurts my brain.

1) Clinton associated with Epstein
2) Clinton is guilty / under suspicion

1) Trump associated with Epstein
2) Trump says Epstein a terrific guy in 2002 years after Epstein sexually assaults girl in 1999 at his club
3) Trump bans Epstein after #1 and #2
4) Trump not guilty / not under suspicion

I certainly agree with your views on Clinton ... to me its nearly water under the bridge. However, it's anything but clear whether Trump was aware or involved in anything Epstein did over the last 20+ years.

This is the clearest example of your bias.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by madhatter »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Trying to understand your logic here hurts my brain.

1) Clinton associated with Epstein
2) Clinton is guilty / under suspicion

1) Trump associated with Epstein
2) Trump says Epstein a terrific guy in 2002 years after Epstein sexually assaults girl in 1999 at his club
3) Trump bans Epstein after #1 and #2
4) Trump not guilty / not under suspicion

I certainly agree with your views on Clinton ... to me its nearly water under the bridge. However, it's anything but clear whether Trump was aware or involved in anything Epstein did over the last 20+ years.

This is the clearest example of your bias.
I never said clinton was guilty, there's a lot of documented evidence of a close relationship between clinton and epstein and a history of large donations to the DNC and clinton foundation...pelosi daughter says some of our faves are likely to go down because of this...who are those "faves"? clinton certainly comes to mind as one possibility...

steele tried desperately to make a connection to trump but was unable to make more than a casual connection...The DNC, MSM and various pols and gov agencies have thrown everything but the kitchen sink at trump and none of it has come to bear fruit...but THIS is gonna be different?

you can draw whatever conclusions you wish but my guess is virtually zero chance trump is implicated in any kind of sexual abuse of minors...the logic being if there was dirt on him, someone would have spilled it long ago...there's no bias in evaluating the evidence and predicting a likely outcome...

what's funny is you people think I actually defend trump the person or even him...He's an effective leader that is working to do the job I elected him for despite the daily objections and obstructions of the ( barely) useful idiot class and their masters...

I don't give to sh!ts about trump personally, I just disagree w virtually every one of the petty issues raised here to attack trump and anyone who even remotely supports anything he does......

I don't care that he said airport, I don't care that he's orange, has two scoops of ice cream or that the left hates him...none of that matters to me....

the death by a thousand paper cuts approach only serves to appease the lefts butt hurt over losing to him, it does nothign to undercut him w his constituents...if anything it galvanizes them...

what do you think the a likely outcome based on evidence to date would be?
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19609
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

madhatter wrote:
XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Trying to understand your logic here hurts my brain.

1) Clinton associated with Epstein
2) Clinton is guilty / under suspicion

1) Trump associated with Epstein
2) Trump says Epstein a terrific guy in 2002 years after Epstein sexually assaults girl in 1999 at his club
3) Trump bans Epstein after #1 and #2
4) Trump not guilty / not under suspicion

I certainly agree with your views on Clinton ... to me its nearly water under the bridge. However, it's anything but clear whether Trump was aware or involved in anything Epstein did over the last 20+ years.

This is the clearest example of your bias.
I never said clinton was guilty, there's a lot of documented evidence of a close relationship between clinton and epstein and a history of large donations to the DNC and clinton foundation...pelosi daughter says some of our faves are likely to go down because of this...who are those "faves"? clinton certainly comes to mind as one possibility...

steele tried desperately to make a connection to trump but was unable to make more than a casual connection...The DNC, MSM and various pols and gov agencies have thrown everything but the kitchen sink at trump and none of it has come to bear fruit...but THIS is gonna be different?
No idea if it will be different, but we should have the same skepticism of Trump with Epstein as we do with Clinton and Epstein. Not like Trump and Bill were strangers before 2016.
madhatter wrote:what's funny is you people think I actually defend trump the person or even him...He's an effective leader that is working to do the job I elected him for despite the daily objections and obstructions of the ( barely) useful idiot class and their masters...

I don't give to sh!ts about trump personally, I just disagree w virtually every one of the petty issues raised here to attack trump and anyone who even remotely supports anything he does......
When Trump asserts that he and Kim Jong Un fell in love and you defend him ... I don't understand why ... maybe I misunderstood.
madhatter wrote:what do you think the a likely outcome based on evidence to date would be?
Too early to tell.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by madhatter »

true?

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07- ... telligence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alex Acosta Reportedly Claimed Jeffrey Epstein "Belonged To Intelligence"
In that piece, I shared many lesser known, but extremely bizarre facts about Jeffrey Epstein and the people around him. I also noted that it appeared his real job was to run a blackmail operation to ensnare some of the most wealthy and powerful people on earth. I alluded to the possibility that he was collecting this priceless information on behalf of a third party, and then just today we learn the following via the Daily Beast:

“Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)...

For almost two decades, for some nebulous reason, whether to do with ties to foreign intelligence, his billions of dollars, or his social connections, Epstein, whose alleged sexual sickness and horrific assaults on women without means or ability to protect themselves is well-known in his circle, remained untouchable.
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
XtremeJibber2001
Signature Poster
Posts: 19609
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 09:35
Location: New York

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by XtremeJibber2001 »

madhatter wrote:true?

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07- ... telligence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alex Acosta Reportedly Claimed Jeffrey Epstein "Belonged To Intelligence"
In that piece, I shared many lesser known, but extremely bizarre facts about Jeffrey Epstein and the people around him. I also noted that it appeared his real job was to run a blackmail operation to ensnare some of the most wealthy and powerful people on earth. I alluded to the possibility that he was collecting this priceless information on behalf of a third party, and then just today we learn the following via the Daily Beast:

“Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)...

For almost two decades, for some nebulous reason, whether to do with ties to foreign intelligence, his billions of dollars, or his social connections, Epstein, whose alleged sexual sickness and horrific assaults on women without means or ability to protect themselves is well-known in his circle, remained untouchable.
Thought provoking for sure ... Acosta's job may depend on it being true.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by madhatter »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
madhatter wrote:
XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Trying to understand your logic here hurts my brain.

1) Clinton associated with Epstein
2) Clinton is guilty / under suspicion

1) Trump associated with Epstein
2) Trump says Epstein a terrific guy in 2002 years after Epstein sexually assaults girl in 1999 at his club
3) Trump bans Epstein after #1 and #2
4) Trump not guilty / not under suspicion

I certainly agree with your views on Clinton ... to me its nearly water under the bridge. However, it's anything but clear whether Trump was aware or involved in anything Epstein did over the last 20+ years.

This is the clearest example of your bias.
I never said clinton was guilty, there's a lot of documented evidence of a close relationship between clinton and epstein and a history of large donations to the DNC and clinton foundation...pelosi daughter says some of our faves are likely to go down because of this...who are those "faves"? clinton certainly comes to mind as one possibility...

steele tried desperately to make a connection to trump but was unable to make more than a casual connection...The DNC, MSM and various pols and gov agencies have thrown everything but the kitchen sink at trump and none of it has come to bear fruit...but THIS is gonna be different?
No idea if it will be different, but we should have the same skepticism of Trump with Epstein as we do with Clinton and Epstein. well if the EVIDENCE were equal then that might be the case... Not like Trump and Bill were strangers before 2016.
madhatter wrote:what's funny is you people think I actually defend trump the person or even him...He's an effective leader that is working to do the job I elected him for despite the daily objections and obstructions of the ( barely) useful idiot class and their masters...

I don't give to sh!ts about trump personally, I just disagree w virtually every one of the petty issues raised here to attack trump and anyone who even remotely supports anything he does......
When Trump asserts that he and Kim Jong Un fell in love and you defend him I don't care one way or the other, it's irrelevant...FACTCHECK: trump did not fall in love w Kim jon un, it was figure of speech saying they got along well... ... I don't understand why ... maybe I misunderstood.maybe your emotions get in the way of reason?
madhatter wrote:what do you think the a likely outcome based on evidence to date would be?
Too early to tell.what great insight... :roll: ... I know, yer waiting to be told...
I'm still sticking with virtually zero chance of trump being implicated...and that one of the faves will turn out to be bill clinton...that doesn't mean anything will stick to clinton but he's gonna feel a lot of heat...

there's a big difference between the political class and the wealthy class...clinton being of the former enjoyed many protections that trump will never see...problem for clinton is his political power at this point is largely the dirt he's accrued on others previously... and his willingness to expose it...but while there is not much clinton can do to help the party there's a lot he can do to harm it, some of it beyond his ability to control...
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: More sexual abuse acusations for Bill Clinton?

Post by madhatter »

XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
madhatter wrote:true?

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07- ... telligence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Alex Acosta Reportedly Claimed Jeffrey Epstein "Belonged To Intelligence"
In that piece, I shared many lesser known, but extremely bizarre facts about Jeffrey Epstein and the people around him. I also noted that it appeared his real job was to run a blackmail operation to ensnare some of the most wealthy and powerful people on earth. I alluded to the possibility that he was collecting this priceless information on behalf of a third party, and then just today we learn the following via the Daily Beast:

“Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)...

For almost two decades, for some nebulous reason, whether to do with ties to foreign intelligence, his billions of dollars, or his social connections, Epstein, whose alleged sexual sickness and horrific assaults on women without means or ability to protect themselves is well-known in his circle, remained untouchable.
Thought provoking for sure ... Acosta's job may depend on it being true.
no idea, couldn't care less about acosta, trump said he;s investigating into why he made the deal w Epstein he did...maybe trump already knows?
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
Post Reply