It would be great to charge and convict guilty people. Go ahead and start pointing out the evidence that a grand jury can act on that they have somehow been waiting on through 2 administrations to get it done. For the millionth time, if the Biden regime had the smoking gun, why wouldn't they have used it instead of the fabricated cases they brought forward? Even if there was collateral damage. I remember being told Donald Trump is an existential threat to our democracy.

Theoretically, for Prince Pervert, I'm betting they have enough evidence that he provided insider info and can charge that, but they won't have enough evidence to prove the sex. That's too bad, but likely just the reality of what is available after 100s of hands and thousands of eyes have been on these documents behind the scenes.

"The specific allegation is that he sent confidential trade reports to Jeffrey Epstein during his time as the UK's envoy for international trade. Those reports came to light from correspondence between the two men found among the millions of pages of Epstein documents released by the U.S. Justice Department last month."

Probably just completely unrelated coincidence.


We all know how they got Capone, right?

Sources:
https://www.npr.org/2026/02/19/nx-s1-5719098/former-prince-andrew-arrested-on-suspicion-of-misconduct-in-public-office-reports

https://www.wdbj7.com/2026/02/19/former-prince-andrew-arrested-suspicion-misconduct-public-office/

Hopefully he sings like a bird.

Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:

---

It would be great to charge and convict guilty people. Go ahead and start pointing out the evidence that a grand jury can act on that they have somehow been waiting on through 2 administrations to get it done. For the millionth time, if the Biden regime had the smoking gun, why wouldn't they have used it instead of the fabricated cases they brought forward? Even if there was collateral damage. I remember being told Donald Trump is an existential threat to our democracy.

Theoretically, for Prince Pervert, I'm betting they have enough evidence that he provided insider info and can charge that, but they won't have enough evidence to prove the sex. That's too bad, but likely just the reality of what is available after 100s of hands and thousands of eyes have been on these documents behind the scenes.

---

They don't want to charge a Prince with anything just like our rulers don't want to arrest people and crash the stock market lol.

They're left with no choice, the people would take down the Monarchy. Same thing will happen in this Country, all we have to do is keep pushing.

About trade deals and corruption on a charge people are seldom convicted on in the UK, let alone a member of the royal family. Don't get your hopes up.

Queso1 said:

---

Hopefully he sings like a bird.

---

Saw a post saying Bari Weiess wife was named in the files, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nellie_Bowles.

Her name now doesn't show up on the Google search summary for her. It did before. It does if you vpn to certain certain countries (I tried Australia, it shows her spouse, swap back to America, same browser session, disappears.

Yes, you can simply go to her wiki. But what an odd series of, again, coincidences.


You wanna talk about feeling like a tinfoil crazy...

Edit: Her name slips my mind, but there's a woman named in the files who, when you try to Google them, has been impressively scrubbed from the web. To the point of me questioning the "the Internet is forever" adage... Ill go find the name, brb.

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

93MarineHorn said:

---

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

---

No, half of the files have been released (3MM out of 6MM). They are heavily redacted. Trump told us there were no files and they were a "democrat hoax".

Keyno said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

---

No, half of the files have been released (3MM out of 6MM). They are heavily redacted. Trump told us there were no files and they were a "democrat hoax".

---

Troll troll troll your boat, quickly down the loo.

Bondi has represented they have released all documents that were responsive to Massie and Ros nonsensical bill.

Massie is not the DOJ. He can bang on his X account all he wants but he is not running his own congressional witch hunt, and what an absolute waste of time that would be.

Whether the DOJ has any current investigations or is prepared to act (or dismiss) previous investigations is something that is legitimate to demand.

And there are to be explanations on why information was withheld and redacted.

But to say Trump told us there were no files and it is a Democrat hoax is just lying. Just tasteless, tacky lying.

ETFan said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Keyno said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

---

No, half of the files have been released (3MM out of 6MM). They are heavily redacted. Trump told us there were no files and they were a "democrat hoax".

---

Troll troll troll your boat, quickly down the loo.

---

Stating facts isn't trolling. They haven't released them all. They've also broken the law on redactions. Every thing they were supposed to release has not been released.

What are you doing??

---

goaltending.

ETFan said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Keyno said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

---

No, half of the files have been released (3MM out of 6MM). They are heavily redacted. Trump told us there were no files and they were a "democrat hoax".

---

Troll troll troll your boat, quickly down the loo.

---

Stating facts isn't trolling. They haven't released them all. They've also broken the law on redactions. Every thing they were supposed to release has not been released.

What are you doing??

---

They did not state facts. They lied. And the broken law crap is old. I have asked numerous times and ne'er will an Epsteiner answer… if Massi and Ro cared so much, were so super serious, why did they not include provisions in their "law" for noncompliance? Why will you or others not answer. What are you doing??

Quote:

---

Bondi has represented

---

Well that settles it!



She also claimed privilege to documents that were not privileged, claimed there are tens of thousands of hours of video of people attacking minor, and claimed Maxwell was not put into a lower level security facility in Bryan.

Even you have to admit she's not exactly credible.

Keyno said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Keyno said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

---

No, half of the files have been released (3MM out of 6MM). They are heavily redacted. Trump told us there were no files and they were a "democrat hoax".

---

Troll troll troll your boat, quickly down the loo.

Bondi has represented they have released all documents that were responsive to Massie and Ros nonsensical bill.

Massie is not the DOJ. He can bang on his X account all he wants but he is not running his own congressional witch hunt, and what an absolute waste of time that would be.

Whether the DOJ has any current investigations or is prepared to act (or dismiss) previous investigations is something that is legitimate to demand.

And there are to be explanations on why information was withheld and redacted.

But to say Trump told us there were no files and it is a Democrat hoax is just lying. Just tasteless, tacky lying.

---

Blah blah blah. Half of the files have been released. Heavily redacted. Trump told us these files did not exist and were a "democrat hoax".

---

Blah blah blah, you just lied again.

Be serious and quit the goaltending / pedo protector crap and discussions can occur. You kids are just slinging **** seeing what may accidentally stick, then getting mad when the ****stains are cleaned up with truth.

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

Bondi has represented

---

Well that settles it!



She also claimed privilege to documents that were not privileged, claimed there are tens of thousands of hours of video of people attacking minor, and claimed Maxwell was not put into a lower level security facility in Bryan.

Even you have to admit she's not exactly credible.

---

Impeach her?

Bondi is the Attorney General for the United States. If you think she is lying, show your cards and take some action.

CSAM was redacted as per ALL LAWS not just St Massies "Law". Are you requesting a personal viewing of the videos to confirm?

Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:

---

It would be great to charge and convict guilty people. Go ahead and start pointing out the evidence that a grand jury can act on that they have somehow been waiting on through 2 administrations to get it done. For the millionth time, if the Biden regime had the smoking gun, why wouldn't they have used it instead of the fabricated cases they brought forward? Even if there was collateral damage. I remember being told Donald Trump is an existential threat to our democracy.

Theoretically, for Prince Pervert, I'm betting they have enough evidence that he provided insider info and can charge that, but they won't have enough evidence to prove the sex. That's too bad, but likely just the reality of what is available after 100s of hands and thousands of eyes have been on these documents behind the scenes.

---

Why should random internet posters be responsible for doing the job of the DOJ?

Quote:

---

Impeach her?

Bondi is the Attorney General for the United States. If you think she is lying, show your cards and take some action.

---

What exactly would you like me to do? Nice deflection. Right on script.

She has no credibility.

Quote:

---

CSAM was redacted as per ALL LAWS not just St Massies "Law". Are you requesting a personal viewing of the videos to confirm?

---

The criticisms of Massie are mostly on point. But The DoJ has in fact redacted things that were not permitted to be redacted. They have removed files related to Trump. Is that a crime? I don't think so, but lets tell it like it is.

Great strawman about me wanting to watch videos., again right on script.

If there are tens of thousand of videos, are they all of Epstein? Thats not likely. She lied. Just like with the binder nonsense.

WinTheWholeDamnThing said:

---

Epstein files coverup is ok because it's TRUMP! All of the team red partisans would be out for blood if a dem POTUS did this, but since it's Our Guy trying to cover up this massive conspiracy it's okay!

---

But the DOW was at 50,000… so it's all good

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

Impeach her?

Bondi is the Attorney General for the United States. If you think she is lying, show your cards and take some action.

---

What exactly would you like me to do? Nice deflection. Right on script.

She has no credibility.

Quote:

---

CSAM was redacted as per ALL LAWS not just St Massies "Law". Are you requesting a personal viewing of the videos to confirm?

---

The criticisms of Massie are mostly on point. But The DoJ has in fact redacted things that were not permitted to be redacted. They have removed files related to Trump. Is that a crime? I don't think so, but lets tell it like it is.

Great strawman about me wanting to watch videos., again right on script.

If there are tens of thousand of videos, are they all of Epstein? Thats not likely. She lied. Just like with the binder nonsense.

---

What would you like me to do? Nice deflection, right on script.

You said she had videos and did not produce them. Explain yourself if you don't like the "strawman", which it is not because you introduced the topic.

They didn't just have to comply with Massie's Law of Redactions, they still have to redact per other laws and existing policy. Massie doesn't just get to saw his law reigns supreme. I would have thought you would have known that and recognized that.

I recall early on there was accusation of file removals, but they were restored. Then there is the hash thing above. Are you saying they removed all files related to Trump for now reason. Is that what you are trying to indicate?

Your own vagueness leaves things open to interpretation. You are free to state your positions clearer.

If they thought allowing the impeachment of Bondi would satisfy the masses they'd have already done that.

They know there's no way out of this lol

Trump wouldn't have ruined his entire reputation and legacy over this if there were a way out of it. Just keep talking about Epstein.

Where in there did he say there were no files and that Epstein never existed?

flown-the-coop said:

---

ETFan said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Keyno said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

---

No, half of the files have been released (3MM out of 6MM). They are heavily redacted. Trump told us there were no files and they were a "democrat hoax".

---

Troll troll troll your boat, quickly down the loo.

---

Stating facts isn't trolling. They haven't released them all. They've also broken the law on redactions. Every thing they were supposed to release has not been released.

What are you doing??

---

They did not state facts. They lied. And the broken law crap is old. I have asked numerous times and ne'er will an Epsteiner answer… if Massi and Ro cared so much, were so super serious, why did they not include provisions in their "law" for noncompliance? Why will you or others not answer. What are you doing??

---

Again, if my grandma had two wheels she'd be a bicycle. I'm not sure why they didn't include more verbiage on repercussions of not following the law??

Maybe they assumed, naively, the federal government would follow a law passed unanimously by Congress?

Silly us for expected that as well.

Luckily, Trump has surrounded himself with other named people to protect him. He also has a (shrinking) base that will defend him until the end.

It is sad you refuse to ever have an honest discussion on this. Stop putting words into everyone's mouth.

I never said they removed everything about Trump. You are insufferable.


I do not think Trump raped anyone or did anything illegal with regarding to kids and Epstein. So don't start with your typical "derp TDS derp"

Carry on and have a great day. I will not be reading any more of your drivel.

Yukon Cornelius said:

---

None of the criticisms are on point. Massie is being marginalized for following through with one of the Presidents campaign promises. It's beyond wild to see him attacked so vehemently because he sponsored a bill the entire Congress passed and was signed by the President. To have an unelected official, Pam Barbie, break the law when the entire elected federal government passed said law and Massie rightly calls it all and he's the one who gets flamed.

---

It's not "beyond wild" when you realize those doing the attacking are in a cult.

ETFan said:

---

Saw a post saying Bari Weiess wife was named in the files, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nellie_Bowles.

Her name now doesn't show up on the Google search summary for her. It did before. It does if you vpn to certain certain countries (I tried Australia, it shows her spouse, swap back to America, same browser session, disappears.

Yes, you can simply go to her wiki. But what an odd series of, again, coincidences.


You wanna talk about feeling like a tinfoil crazy...

Edit: Her name slips my mind, but there's a woman named in the files who, when you try to Google them, has been impressively scrubbed from the web. To the point of me questioning the "the Internet is forever" adage... Ill go find the name, brb.

---

Am I crazy, when I search her now on Google she doesn't even have the side bar summary anymore. Google has it down to fix after being caught or simply removed it.

I can switch to an Australian VPN and it comes back.

Huh.

Oh I have longed skimmed over your nonsense. Trying to always skirt a middle road so as to not have to take actual stands.

I have had nothing but serious discussions. You wanted to make some quips about Bondi and you got called out.

You say "I never said XYZ" you are trying to hide behind "I allude to XYZ but never said it EXACTLY that way and you are wrong for taking it that way" then when asked to clarify you take your ball and go home.

Over and over again.

Well said

Keyno said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

Have all the files been released? It's my understanding that members of Congress have access to the redacted portions. Perhaps Massie et al can start demanding investigations into specific people. Maybe that's already going on.

---

No, half of the files have been released (3MM out of 6MM). They are heavily redacted. Trump told us there were no files and they were a "democrat hoax".

---

Do Congressman have access to the unredacted portions? If so, Dems & Massie can start demanding investigations. STILL waiting for 1 person, anybody (victim, congressman...) to accuse a specific person of a crime regarding Epstein. Until that happens, all we have is innuendo. Some might call that a "hoax".