https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article256740662.html
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21165424-epstein-flight-logs-released-in-usa-vs-maxwell
Donald Trump appears to have flown on Jeffrey Epstein’s private jets six more times than was previously known, according to flight logs released as evidence in Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial.
Read more at: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article256740662.html#storylink=cpy
Unlike you if Trump is indeed implicated in malicious and criminal behavior toward underage girls, I will be the first to disown him. You can’t even bring yourself to do that against the Democrats who we’ve repeatedly shown you to be pedophiles. Mr. Integrity
IF THEY HAD ANYTHING REAL ON TRUMP IT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN 2015-2016 NOT NOW WHEN THEY ARE IN CHECKMATE…
That’s correct storm. I think what we’re gonna find out is that Trump was a deep informant for the FBI against Epstein. But let me stress,and I emphasize, if Trump is involved in a criminal way, hang the fucker.
Ah, so before GSC said it was a foregone conclusion and all but confirmed that Trump worked with the FBI. Had a whole thread with me about it. Now he’s saying it’s not obvious public knowledge at least, but something we might find out.
I admitted to you that I misunderstood the original story because of the headline. So what’s your beef.
We’ve established this plenty of times…. If I’m wrong, I admit I’m wrong.
I’m human- it happens.
Maybe I was mistaken but I don’t remember coming away from that conversation with you admitting you were wrong. I thought you called me out for semantics again and tried to weasel out of it. Maybe I’m misremembering. That was the reason for the jab.
Ok, here’s what I’m talking about GSC. You didn’t say you were wrong, or that you misunderstood the headline. I corrected you and you said:
Lol - unfortunately 305, the FBI doesn’t publicly release who works for them.
It’s inferred…
If you want to dance around that fact to win an online semantics debate, have at it.
I go on to explain to you how a civil lawyer has nothing to do with the FBI, and you say:
305- you win.
…
You win your semantic/technical debate. I win the substance.
You continue that thread without ever backing down, so no, when you’re wrong, you don’t admit you’re wrong.
It is nice, now that you’re separated from the conversation, perhaps not emotiopnally invested in it, that you can look back and admit you were wrong. It would have been nicer if you were man enough to admit it at the time.
I admitted you technically won…. But I won in terms of Trump’s intentions. I don’t see where you are confused. It’s in writing. Black and white.
Because I never argued Trump’s intentions, so how could you “win”?
All I said was Trump wasn’t working with the FBI against Epstein (In fact, I didn’t even assert that. I just said it wasn’t public knowledge.)
This is an example of a straw man argument. You take a position against a fake one of mine so you can walk away with a “win.” It’s like you were stuck in argument mode and couldn’t back down so you twist the discussion to save face.
When people say they’re wrong, they don’t say, “well TECHNICALLY you’re right but really IT’S SEMANTICS and if you look at the SPIRIT then I’M RIGHT.” I mean, come on, that’s how a 12-year-old wins debates. All you should’ve said was, “You’re right, my bad. The FBI thing is my personal belief but there’s no outward reporting of that.”
Sounds like Trump has a lot to hide
I think Trump was smart and distanced himself from Epstein a long time ago.
No, no you won’t. How do I know? Because you haven’t already
Whereas…what happened with Al Franken? He was kicked out immediately. Cuomo? Find me a Democrat defending Cuomo. But, you Republicans? You’ll run convicted felons and cheer them on
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article255548606.html
You are literally, LITERALLY, the dumbest human I’ve ever encountered. Hands down. No hyperbole.
Everything above is unfounded.
