Jefferey Epstein found dead in jail cell

#4,476
#4,476
lawgator1 said:
A pardon isn't dependent on a DOJ interview. In this case, it would be a bribe, pure and simple.
Click to expand...
So the history of law enforcement and courts there has never been an instant of a deal being made with a l
Say killer to get at the person on who is above them...this is unprecedented..I'm in shock!!!
 
#4,477
#4,477
whodeycin85 said:
So the history of law enforcement and courts there has never been an instant of a deal being made with a l
Say killer to get at the person on who is above them...this is unprecedented..I'm in shock!!!
Click to expand...


The deal would be that she lie and support Trump. In exchange, she gets a pardon.

That would be criminal and should result in Trump's imprisonment.
 
#4,478
#4,478
lawgator1 said:
The deal would be that she lie and support Trump. In exchange, she gets a pardon.

That would be criminal and should result in Trump's imprisonment.
Click to expand...
When did she get a pardon???
And how do you know she is lying??? Trump's in the files everyone knows that...problem for your side is that it's in a way that doesn't incriminate him like it does those you support and vote for.
 
#4,479
#4,479
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
When have I ever excused the left? Just because I've started posting on politics recently on this site doesn't mean I have been sanctioning what the left has been doing in past years. In fact the last time I supported liberal policies was probably in 2004 as a silly high school kid. I voted for Obama twice cause he was black. In 2016 I supported Bernie cause he was the only honest politician. In 2020 I supported Kanye cause he was a true outsider. And in 2024 I supported RFK Jr cause he was anti-vax.

In fact I was fine with Trump winning this time cause Biden was the worst President ever and the Democrats had gone insane in recent years with the whole trans movement.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the timeline excuse. We are discussing Epstein which you’ve somehow found out about just recently. Although it’s been around for 3 decades at least.
 
#4,480
#4,480
whodeycin85 said:
When did she get a pardon???
And how do you know she is lying??? Trump's in the files everyone knows that...problem for your side is that it's in a way that doesn't incriminate him like it does those you support and vote for.
Click to expand...


If she's not willing to lie for him, why pardon her out of the blue? Why the need to go talk to her, first?

Only one possible reason. To make sure she'll cooperate.
 
#4,481
#4,481
jmacvols1 said:
it's highly suspicious one judge gets all these cases as it was highly suspicious anti-trump liberal judges got the bogus cases against Trump

from GROK:

The claim that there is a "1 in 3.73 trillion" chance of Judge Paul Engelmayer being assigned all seven Epstein-related cases in the Southern District of New York (SDNY) appears to originate from posts on X and a related article on Infowars. This calculation assumes there are 45 district judges in the SDNY and that case assignments are purely random, leading to the probability of one judge being assigned all seven cases as (1/45)^7, which equals approximately 1 in 3.73 trillion.

However, this claim lacks verification from primary sources, and several factors undermine its credibility:
  1. Case Assignment Process: The SDNY does not assign cases purely at random. Cases are distributed based on factors like judicial workload, case complexity, and related case rules (e.g., cases involving similar parties or issues may be assigned to the same judge for efficiency). This makes the assumption of pure randomness questionable.
  2. Specific Cases: The seven cases cited (e.g., Doe v. Indyke, Jane Doe 15 v. Indyke, NYT v. Bureau of Prisons, Black v. Ganieva) are not all directly tied to Epstein’s criminal prosecution. Some are civil cases or ancillary matters, and it’s unclear if all were active simultaneously or assigned to Engelmayer at the same time. Without a detailed timeline and case records, the claim that he oversaw "all seven" Epstein-related cases is speculative.
  3. Lack of Evidence: The 3.73 trillion figure is attributed to "Grok" in the Infowars article, but no methodology or court data is provided to confirm the assignments or the calculation. Court records or dockets would be needed to verify which judges were assigned to these cases.
  4. Bias in Source: The Infowars article and X posts label Engelmayer as a "hack Obama judge," indicating a partisan framing that may exaggerate or misrepresent the situation for rhetorical effect. This suggests the claim may be more about narrative than factual accuracy.
  5. Engelmayer’s Role: Engelmayer is confirmed to be overseeing the Justice Department’s request to unseal grand jury records in the Ghislaine Maxwell case, as noted in recent reports. However, this does not confirm he was assigned all seven Epstein-related cases, as the claim suggests. His involvement in Maxwell’s case is due to the original trial judge, Alison Nathan, moving to an appellate court.
Without access to SDNY case assignment records, it’s impossible to confirm the exact probability or whether Engelmayer was indeed assigned all seven cases. The 3.73 trillion figure assumes a simplistic model that likely doesn’t reflect the court’s actual assignment practices. While it’s possible for one judge to handle multiple related cases, the extraordinary odds cited appear designed to imply impropriety rather than reflect a rigorous statistical analysis.

He is a hack Obama Judge...GROK will figure that out someday.
Click to expand...

Did you just prompt grok just so you could call BS on it? 🤣
 
#4,482
#4,482
lawgator1 said:
If she's not willing to lie for him, why pardon her out of the blue? Why the need to go talk to her, first?

Only one possible reason. To make sure she'll cooperate.
Click to expand...
When did she get pardoned??? Got a link??

Why the need??? Cuz no one else freaking did it....first....problem is matter what info does or doesn't come people like you will only believe what you want...and will push that smart narrative because your pathetic and have nothing else.m
 
Last edited:
#4,483
#4,483
whodeycin85 said:
When did she get pardoned??? Got a link???
Click to expand...

We'll see. May be part of the deal that she testify to Congress and say Trump didn't do anything wrong. But a bunch of Dems did, and she gets the pardon as he leaves office.

I doubt they'd be able to keep a lid on that. Someone will rat him out. They'll screw it up somehow.
 
#4,484
#4,484
lawgator1 said:
We'll see. May be part of the deal that she testify to Congress and say Trump didn't do anything wrong. But a bunch of Dems did, and she gets the pardon as he leaves office.

I doubt they'd be able to keep a lid on that. Someone will rat him out. They'll screw it up somehow.
Click to expand...
so what you mean to say is she hasn't gotten a pardon...but you believe she might...you were wrong about pee tapes, Russia hoax, bidens cognitive health...you should really get offline and touch grass I think the internet is effective your brain
 
#4,485
#4,485
whodeycin85 said:
so what you mean to say is she hasn't gotten a pardon...but you believe she might...you were wrong about pee tapes, Russia hoax, bidens cognitive health...you should really get offline and touch grass I think the internet is effective your brain
Click to expand...



Time will tell. She for sure isn't testifying to Congress and exonerating Trump without a deal.
 
#4,489
#4,489
lawgator1 said:
Time will tell. She for sure isn't testifying to Congress and exonerating Trump without a deal.
Click to expand...
Tell you what your a lawyer....
Cite me 1 single case in which a person serving our those sentence for conviction has ever got a full pardon for snitching......not a reduced sentence not what you believe..bring hard data...otherwise just stop
 
#4,490
#4,490
whodeycin85 said:
Tell you what your a lawyer....
Cite me 1 single case in which a person serving our those sentence for conviction has ever got a full pardon for snitching......not a reduced sentence not what you believe..bring hard data...otherwise just stop
Click to expand...


I cant think of one. It would truly be as far as I know unique and unprecedented.

Oops.
 
#4,491
#4,491
lawgator1 said:
I cant think of one. It would truly be as far as I know unique and unprecedented.

Oops.
Click to expand...
My point .your grasping at straws... seriously....I believe. She gets a reduced sentence of charges can be brought....can you point to a case where some convict of given a reduced sentence for information that didn't lead to charges or a conviction??? If not then your so far outside reality in your belief system that you may need a 72 hour hold..just for peace
 
#4,499
#4,499
rekinhavoc said:
The only thing that Trump has going for him on this is David Schoen.

www.cleveland.com

Trump appears in Epstein flight logs 7 times, lawyer says no damaging info exists

Former Epstein attorney David Schoen contradicts Musk's claims about unreleased files as the relationship between Trump and the tech billionaire deteriorates.
www.cleveland.com www.cleveland.com

“I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein’s defense as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died,” Schoen wrote. “He sought my advice for months before that. I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitely that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked that!”
Click to expand...
If true, it's weird that he plead the 5th when asked about Trump under oath
 
  • Like
Reactions: Delmar
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top