Jefferey Epstein found dead in jail cell

#8,276
#8,276
Sea Ray said:
In the first minute of this video the gal starts with "we all know that Donald Trump sex trafficked underage girls to Epstein and Maxwell..."

Right there the video lost all credibility. It's BS. Do better
Click to expand...

So, when Trump says Bill Clinton was doing its credible?

It has nothing to do with credibility, the 302s simply don't appear to exist. The redactions are there to cover up the people involved, what does that have to do with credibility? Credibility was lost a long time ago which is why we are here. All the 302s should be there including the ones from his previous indictment.

She doesn't even need to be credible, what you can do is go find the file and look for the interview and you won't find them. (watch video)

They have been taking down documents after they were released even, its ongoing. 😂
 
Last edited:
#8,277
#8,277
LSU-SIU said:
You're lost because I never said anything such thing old man, go put yourself in a home or something. Context is clearly a problem for you. Any investigation should have generated a 302s, if investigations were done... there would be 302s as to those. If there were no investigations, that would explain no 302s.

I'm sorry you guys got a case of the Orange Man Good Syndrome, that's not my problem.

Documents which were already public already provide the problem -> there are other co-conspirators and they are not disclosing the documents on that and they are redacting the names on the files.
Click to expand...

Why would they do an investigation “on Trump and everyone else”?
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#8,278
#8,278
LSU-SIU said:
So, when Trump says Bill Clinton was doing its credible?

It has nothing to do with credibility, the 302s simply don't appear to exist. The redactions are there to cover up the people involved, what does that have to do with credibility? Credibility was lost a long time ago which is why we are here. All the 302s should be there including the ones from his previous indictment.

They have been taking down documents after they were released even, its ongoing. 😂
Click to expand...
I made no comment about Trump/Bill Clinton. You're making crap up. Please stick to facts
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85
#8,279
#8,279
Vol8188 said:
Why would they do an investigation “on Trump and everyone else”?
Click to expand...

Because they received tips or complaints, obviously they received those as some of them were in the files although I can't say they are all still up.

How do you think all this works?
 
#8,280
#8,280
Sea Ray said:
I made no comment about Trump/Bill Clinton. You're making crap up. Please stick to facts
Click to expand...

I don't care if you made a comment about Trump or not, the chief law enforcement officer keeps talking about clinton. That's a fact.

She actually steps you through it how you can confirm they are not providing everything. This is all kind of duh stuff. There are e-mails, photos and videos but very little if no investigation documents including the 302s.

The decisions as to the investigations and decisions to criminal prosecute or not should be in the documents.
 
Last edited:
#8,281
#8,281
LSU-SIU said:
Because they received tips or complaints, obviously they received those as some of them were in the files although I can't say they are all still up.

How do you think all this works?
Click to expand...
FD-302s are not evidence exhibits and they are almost never public.
They’re basically an agent’s summary of what they remember and thought was important from an interview. Not a transcript, not sworn testimony, not the witness’s own words.
How common is it for 302s to be public?
Very uncommon. They show up publicly only in a few narrow situations:
Criminal discovery
Given to defense counsel, not the public
Often under protective orders
Not filed on the docket
Impeachment fights
If a witness testifies inconsistently, a judge may allow limited use
Even then, usually sealed or heavily redacted
FOIA litigation
Rare and usually brutally redacted
Names, details, and sometimes entire pages blacked out
Courts routinely uphold those redactions
Accidental or strategic leaks
This is how the public usually sees them
Come from discovery leaks, not lawful disclosure
Outside of that? They stay internal

They cannot be legally released outside of that instances... So your harping on them it's pointless
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#8,282
#8,282
whodeycin85 said:
FD-302s are not evidence exhibits and they are almost never public.
Click to expand...

Yes, they can, matter of fact the law that Trump signed orders it to be so. Matter of fact, all the 302s would have to be given to a defendant in prosecution, which interesting enough is basically what Maxwell is complaining about now. They weren't given to here, nor was she aware of other co-conspirators getting secret deals.
 
#8,284
#8,284
Trump... wasn't crackin' the kids. But knowing about it and not doing anything about it is just as bad, especially with how influential he is. It's criminal, technically, but he won't ever be tried for it.

It was an inside job from Israel and America, and a lot of influential people did those horrible things to kids.
 
#8,285
#8,285
Good Ol' Charlie Brown said:
Trump... wasn't crackin' the kids. But knowing about it and not doing anything about it is just as bad, especially with how influential he is. It's criminal, technically, but he won't ever be tried for it.

It was an inside job from Israel and America, and a lot of influential people did those horrible things to kids.
Click to expand...
If you think you neighbor committed a child sex crime but can't verify it have no evidence.... Do you turn them in?
 
#8,286
#8,286
#8,287
#8,287
whodeycin85 said:
If you think you neighbor committed a child sex crime but can't verify it have no evidence.... Do you turn them in?
Click to expand...
I don't think you turn them in but definitely at least tip off someone that it could be happening.
If Trump had a suspicion about Epstein doing that than he certainly could've told someone. With his influence, the FBI or even CIA would've listened.
 
#8,289
#8,289
whodeycin85 said:
Your not following.. Show me precedent where 302s are released outside of those scenario... Your just looking the law which doesn't specify or include those records. Your making an assumption without understanding...
Click to expand...
Justice Department Records of Cohen and Davidson FBI Form 302s - American Oversight

FBI records of interviews (form 302s) of former Trump personal attorney Michael Cohen and Keith Davidson, a lawyer who represented Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. American Oversight had requested records related to the investigation into President Trump’s potential campaign-finance violations conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. The interview forms are heavily redacted.
Click to expand...


Have you considered the possibility that you're ignorant? I'm not saying you are, I'm saying have you considered that possibility?
 
#8,290
#8,290
What I don't get is in some of these emails it's pretty obvious that the participants are talking about molesting/raping/even buying underage girls so have the FBI investigated the people on these emails and found nothing prosecutable? To me those are the files that need to be released.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, DuckInAPen, MercyPercy and 2 others
#8,291
#8,291
Good Ol' Charlie Brown said:
I don't think you turn them in but definitely at least tip off someone that it could be happening.
If Trump had a suspicion about Epstein doing that than he certainly could've told someone. With his influence, the FBI or even CIA would've listened.
Click to expand...
So you send the police to the person house with zero proof knowing the stigma of the accusations?? No offense did you call the police on people not making too?
 
#8,292
#8,292
whodeycin85 said:
So you send the police to the person house with zero proof knowing the stigma of the accusations?? No offense did you call the police on people not making too?
Click to expand...
Are you sure you understand what I'm saying? You do understand that a tip-off isn't immediately raid, right? That just means usually that we'd look into it and decide whether or not to take action. The military did it, and law enforcement does it also.

I've worked in both so say it ain't so!
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
#8,293
#8,293
#8,294
#8,294
whodeycin85 said:
Those were released because they were used in criminal proceedings... Try again... There are specific reasons.. You found one .. Congrats... Now find one outside of those reasons.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Meaning once prosecutions are over than there is no reason not to release them to the public. In this case, the executive branch said they're not prosecuting anyone else.

In theory only a FOIA would be needed, but in this case Congress has lawfully ordered release.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Good Ol' Charlie Brown
#8,295
#8,295
Good Ol' Charlie Brown said:
Are you sure you understand what I'm saying? You do understand that a tip-off isn't immediately raid, right? That just means usually that we'd look into it and decide whether or not to take action. The military did it, and law enforcement does it also.

I've worked in both so say it ain't so!
Click to expand...
Maybe I did misunderstand.. Would an investigation require interviews with accused, and other involved, checking the area where the crime was committed etc . And this would be public knowledge correct? At least to the area they live in
 
#8,296
#8,296
whodeycin85 said:
Maybe I did misunderstand.. Would an investigation require interviews with accused, and other involved, checking the area where the crime was committed etc . And this would be public knowledge correct? At least to the area they live in
Click to expand...
It depends on the situation. For a crime like this, yes usually interviews and call recordings/emails pulled, and occasionally we'd check out the area where it happened/happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
#8,297
#8,297
LSU-SIU said:
Exactly. Meaning once prosecutions are over than there is no reason not to release them to the public. In this case, the executive branch said they're not prosecuting anyone else.

In theory only a FOIA would be needed, but in this case Congress has lawfully ordered release.
Click to expand...
But there is not prosecution for what your asking ... The 302s from Maxwell and Epstein weren't available because they weren't enter into the trial as evidence.. Meaning they were not used in the trials. And Epstein never had a trial to have them entered... Your reaching
 
#8,299
#8,299
LSU-SIU said:
Because they received tips or complaints, obviously they received those as some of them were in the files although I can't say they are all still up.

How do you think all this works?
Click to expand...

Not at all tips or complaints should be investigated. How do you think all this works
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#8,300
#8,300
whodeycin85 said:
But there is not prosecution for what your asking ... The 302s from Maxwell and Epstein weren't available because they weren't enter into the trial as evidence.. Meaning they were not used in the trials. And Epstein never had a trial to have them entered... Your reaching
Click to expand...

Its all the 302s for anything associated with Epstein, there might be a few sealed things in Maxwell, but she is saying she doesn't have everything as well. Her stuff has nothing to do with after early 2000s.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top