Here's a gift link. Check it out. I think it's interesting to see who thinks what. I'd like to ask them why. Obviously, Democrats are hot to think ill of Trump. But why aren't they more concerned that there's bad stuff about Democrats in there? There needs to be some reason why the Biden administration didn't release this information when it was so desperate to stop Trump in 2024. But the way of the human mind is not reason. It is wishful thinking. We are optimists, even about scurrilous ugly things.
Posts
67 comments:
It's not about rational. It's about enjoying fiction.
If there was ANY dirt on Trump in the Epstein files, the Biden regime would have released it between 2021-2024, since they had full control over those files. The fact that there was no such release tells us everything we need to know.
Help me Epstein Wan-Kenobi, you're my only hope.
Key question - are we talking about the Epstein files as they were found, or as they presently exist having gone through FBI custody?
“We are optimists, even about scurrilous ugly things.”
Some might say cockeyed optimists who got caught up in the dirty game of world diplomacy and international intrigue?
https://getyarn.io/yarn-story/dbd1dc7e-4c3d-4747-bd3d-36d4e8f8eb62
Not quite Clyde. The fact that there presently is no release disqualifies your argument.
I couldn’t read the article without giving my email fyi.
That said, it’s interesting that they weren’t asked about “Republicans” or “Foreign Leaders”.
We know Bill Clinton used Epstein’s plane in the 2000’s. He’s admitted to doing so dozen of times. The WSJ article that contains hearsay evidence that Democrats claim to believe also notes Bill Clinton also sent a birthday message to Epstein. If that’s not embarrassing, then it is because they don’t hold themselves to the standards they apply on others.
"But why aren't they more concerned that there's bad stuff about Democrats in there?"
Because many Democrats are unhappy with their own leadership for not being extremist enough. If the full release of the Epstein files ruined the careers of top normie (especially white) Democrats, half the people who vote in their primaries would be thrilled that space opened up for AOC and Crockett.
This is also why I'm confident there's nothing damning about Trump to be found. I just don't think it's credible that not a single person who had access during the Biden admin wouldn't have considered ruining the reputations of many billionaires and old timer Democrats to be, not even acceptable collateral damage, but a bonus.
It's possible that Trump is withholding the files with an intent to release them at a time that is strategic, perhaps to affect the midterm elections. I don't know why Democrats are the ones who are most enthusiastic about seeing files when they don't know what is in them. The best answer to that is, I think, that they just want to hurt Trump now and so they are using what they have, his refusal to show us the files. Later, they may want to do something else, but they'll cross that bridge when they come to it.
Has anyone else found themselves increasingly puzzled and
annoyed by the graphics used to display "information" these days? Each one is different, and increasingly counter-intuitive.
It's like you have to invest time and energy into understanding how brilliant the graphics people (or AI?) are, rather than just be able to understand the content quickly and simply.
In the Democrats’ mental state there is no way for Trump to win.
Most of them still believe the fine people hoax and that he colluded with Russia in 2016.
#MeToo part deux. #NoJudgment #NoLabels #LiberalLicense #SocialProgress #DemocraticLaw
I think the more interesting poll would be to poll the national news media. See what their opinions are of the Epstein files and Trump's 'handling' of it all.
I don't recall their newsiness all over this story pre-January 21st of this year.
Another twist would be to ask them to rate the newsworthiness (newsiness) on the recent Russia Collusion conspiracy document release vs the Epstein file.
I'm pretty sure that if Kamala was President, the name Epstein would simply never be heard of again. But we'd still be looking at lawsuits against Donald Trump with the media breathlessly covering each one.
Norpius, I too am having a lot of trouble parsing these graphs nowadays. But I thought it was just rapidly approaching senility.
Who needs confusing dot surveys if you've got AI? Don't get lazy, ann, now that you've trained your robot to understand your dizzy way of asking a question in 20 attempts.
Surely you'll be able to formulate something to have it kick out the answer you want more quickly as it trains you to train it. "Grok: what do my fellow Americans think about politics, specifically the alleged Epstein Files."
Then you'll get a decent summary, at least, of all the news articles that the computer search base has been uploaded with, along with a bit of machine "fudging" to convince you it knows it all in there. You're like Dorothy, but with no one to tell you to pull back the curtain that AI is not really the WIzard...
Everything I see here, and in the comments too, points to one thing: Release whatever information is there and make it public record - including how, and for what purpose, the information has been kept under wraps for so long. How did Epstein gain his wealth? What has become of it? Who did he work for? What was the purpose of his organization?
Ask YOURSELF, ann, based on the limited religious and ethical training your received in the home and via your education: What do you think of people who pay for sex with underage minors? Is it a "win"? Hey, look what these guys pulled off, out of jurisdiction! Seems like you admire those type of victories by men... or, is it a shame? Do women and children especially deserves something better? Do you know any men who instinctually retch at harm done to innocent harmless unarmed women and children incapable of defending themselves?
Are you confused on the concept, or you just keep on putting Jewish people in the latter category so there's no room to take in present-day facts? Either way, I hope your readers, or your family, in time can help you sort out these moral quandries. You're the old lady that's going to cuss out a minority kid on the street some day, I suspect that's why you never go out and "mingle" with the commoners anymore...
Wise move given how your mind and mouth work here.
We are optimists, even about scurrilous ugly things.
---------
SPeak for yourself, boomer.
American optimism was based on American innocence which at your ages has become American ignorance...
Classrooms full of Sandy Hook aged children. Being killed everyday with American weapons in Gaza. Little living children. How long has it been that your heart can turn away from the dying little ones, ann?
Even for a scattered mind like yours, you are going to run out of ways to entertain/distract yourselves while the killings of innocent women and children rage...
Do you believe the Palestinian people have this coming to them, ann? Do you believe God promised all the land from the river to the sea to the Jewish people? Do you believe the New Covenant and "gift" of Jesus Christ negated the "special relationship" between God and "his people" and all Believers are now heirs to the kingdom too?
Do you believe Life> Land. Do you believe in freedom and justice for all? Do you think your husband might talk to you and help you formulate an opinion about the military effectiveness of Israel's current campaign? Do Jonny and Chrissy ever visit, or are they too busy? You should sit in silence with an international newspaper and learn about what's going on in the world... Epstein is a distration, ma'am. No protecting those "children", they're grown and the danger has passed. hth
There's something noble about Trump refusing to release the Epstein files because it may hurt innocent pedophiles.
Ann Althouse said...
It's possible that Trump is withholding the files with an intent to release them at a time that is strategic, perhaps to affect the midterm elections.
I would not discount the possibility that the Administration is also trying to keep the media's attention divided between Epstein and the Russia Hoax.
Ann Althouse said...
It's possible that Trump is withholding the files with an intent to release them at a time that is strategic, perhaps to affect the midterm elections. I don't know why Democrats are the ones who are most enthusiastic about seeing files when they don't know what is in them. The best answer to that is, I think, that they just want to hurt Trump now and so they are using what they have, his refusal to show us the files. Later, they may want to do something else, but they'll cross that bridge when they come to it.
----------
If this were a school test, we'd just call that a wild guess. A shot in the dark. Something you plucked from your bottom, or made up in your head.
Who benefits from distractions right now? Think like a cowardly law professor and you'll have your answer. Do they tip you much to push these stories? lol
Unless I’m missing something, Biden could not unilaterally release sealed Epstein files, nor can Trump. These court sealed records are under judicial control, not Executive.
Why wasn’t there anything about Trump and Epstein in the Steele dossier? Maybe I missed it.
I think that picture of Trump in a blue dress that Epstein had is cause for...
Wait. What? Bill? Are you sure?
Never mind.
I think Democrats don't really care about what happens to prominent Democratic politicians at the moment because they're generally disgusted with the Democratic party leadership.
I do think they're massively overestimating the likelihood that there's material embarassing to Trump in there. Or perhaps overestimating how ethical government bureaucrats are. DOJ has had all these files for years, and I find it doubtful that not one person with access would leak, if there were information embarassing to Trump.
I think the files were wiped and replaced with bullshit.
We also have some first hand knowledge of what is in the files.
For context one of the investigators said Epstein thought it was Trump that snitched on him.
The investigator said that Trump was the only "associate" of Epstein they interviewed that was open and helped their investigation.
We know that most of the people still in the files are likely innocent and we know Trump is innocent. The Democrats and the corrupt FBI had all of this for years and they wiped everything that would hurt them.
Trump handled this really badly.
Kakistocracy said...
There's something noble about Trump refusing to release the Epstein files because it may hurt innocent pedophiles.
Why didn't Obama release the files?
Why didn't Biden release the files?
These two questions demonstrate what a complete piece of shit Rich is.
There needs to be some reason why the Biden administration didn't release this information when it was so desperate to stop Trump in 2024. But the way of the human mind is not reason. It is wishful thinking.
No, that's the leftist mind, esp. the TDS infected mind, that's incapable of reason. See "trans men are women".
The fact that 0% of Democrats could entertain the notion that "the fact that the Biden Admin didn't release the Epstein files means there's nothing damaging to Trump in there" tells us just how deranged the"Democrats" are
Although I don't believe it, it's weird how the possibility that nothing happened to those girls, or that nobody important is guilty is the least desired truth. Shouldn't we all be hoping for that?
Knowing who had custody and for many years, it's not realistic to expect them to be factual files at this point. Why would those people, who were so obviously prone to lying and corruption, leave them as they were? I think they are useless unless they include reliable video, but why would those people let that exists unless it hurt Trump, and if it did, it would have already been released.
Ann & Greg; “There needs to be some reason why the Biden administration didn't release this information when it was so desperate to stop Trump in 2024. But the way of the human mind is not reason. It is wishful thinking.”
As mentioned, these files were court order sealed and not at the discretion of the Executive Branch. Why didn’t Trump push to unseal them when he had full control of the DOJ, FBI, and executive branch — and a public mandate to do so?
The tools were there. The will was not.
Trump didn’t just oversee the DOJ — he effectively was the DOJ. His relationship with cabinet officials wasn’t built on institutional respect, but on personal loyalty. From Bill Barr to Jeff Sessions (whom he publicly humiliated for not protecting him), Trump demanded obedience, not independence.
So while it’s true that no president can unilaterally unseal court-protected documents, Trump’s DOJ could have filed motions to unseal, reopened cases, pursued high-profile Epstein-linked indictments, or declassified related executive records — if he had wanted that. With a loyalist like Barr at the helm, that kind of legal action could have been coordinated with little internal resistance.
Biden, on the other hand, didn’t build the same kind of political loyalty within the DOJ. Merrick Garland was cautious, institutional, and independent to a fault — a far cry from the “fixer” posture Trump expected from his appointees. So even if Biden wanted to go after Trump with Epstein-related material, he wouldn’t have the same tools — or culture of loyalty — to make it happen behind the scenes.
That’s the real kicker: if Trump had the leverage, the loyalty, and the tools — and still chose not to pursue full exposure of Epstein’s network — it tells us something. Either he had something to hide, or he never intended to deliver the transparency he promised.
And this is even more true today as it’s Bondi et al job, if they want to keep their jobs, to park their brains at the door and once again, make Trump the de facto DOJ, FBI Director, etc.
Trump sought to unseal the grand jury testimony and lost. Any other seal you're talking about, Ronald?
I am not the first to note that Democrats fall in line when needed. The current program to tie Trump to Epstein kicked off several weeks ago, it is an engineered virus.
Wow, Ronald, you give our last name a bad, bad reputation. I don't even know where to start with a critique of your ridiculous comment right now.
It's not so much about who's in the files. It's more about why the files were collected and who got to see them. While there's a lot of sleaze in the files, actual illegal pedophilia may not be as common as people think.
But why aren't they more concerned that there's bad stuff about Democrats in there?
Facts don't affect leftards.
Althouse seeks to corral the Epstein blather to one post today. Hoping it works.
I think one of the fundamental issues is that it seems to be widely believed that Epstein treated his friends/acquaintances/clients like marks in a scam. Another fundamental issue that seems to be widely believed is that wealthy American men are stupid enough to have sex with underaged girls in someone else's home.
The Epstein files will be on par with Al Capone's safe.
Ronald J. Ward said...
Biden, on the other hand, didn’t build the same kind of political loyalty within the DOJ. Merrick Garland was cautious, institutional, and independent to a fault
This is complete and utter bullshit. But it does appear to be the current DNC circulated talking point.
Merrick Garland was and is a complete Democrat political hack without the slightest shred of ethics, and the idea that he wouldn't have used the Epstein files to prosecute Trump if he had ANYTHING is amazingly delusional.
Stop regurgitating Sam Stein talking points, they just make you look stupid.
Merrick Garland illegally appointed Jack Smith to run an utterly BS and illegitimate use against Trump, that had no shred of the law behind it. If they'd had actual crimes, they would have prosecuted them to the full extent of the law, and beyond
The grand jury testimony and proceedings are sealed and are likely to remain sealed unless someone leaks them out. However, the material the DoJ has are the materials or copies of materials that formed the basis of the grand jury proceedings- those are not under court seal- they are solely under the control of the DoJ and they likely contain interviews with many of the victims and Epstein associates- in other words, there is likely not much in the grand jury testimony and presentations that can't be found in the transcripts of Maxwell's trial and the DoJ controlled materials.
Once the DoJ materials are released, we will likely learn that Epstein was running a large-scale brothel for wealthy men and that he bent over backward to protect the reputations of his clients in that business- he kept neither records of transactions or videos (indeed, such videoing of these sorts of clients is extremely dangerous as anyone with an triple digit IQ would realize).
I suspect the DoJs of Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden didn't pursue any such clients because there wasn't any real evidence with which to proceed to trial.
Ronald J. Ward said..."Biden, on the other hand, didn’t build the same kind of political loyalty within the DOJ. Merrick Garland was cautious, institutional, and independent to a fault."
It is to laugh.
Thanks, Ann — that actually proves the point. If Trump sought to unseal grand jury testimony and failed, then that confirms what I said: these records are under judicial seal, not something either Trump or Biden could just release at will.
So if even Trump, with all the loyalty and control he has over his DOJ, can’t get it done — it makes even less sense to imply Biden could, or that his failure to do so means there's nothing damaging in them. The process appears to be bigger than either of them.
Ronald, you are approaching Bich levels of ignorance. There are two sets of records- the grand jury testimony and presentations and the material residing at the DoJ. Those DoJ materials are under the control of whoever the President and Attorney General are- full stop. Those could have been released at any time between 2007 and today, except, possibly any sex tapes.
Yancey, I’m glad you jumped in, because this actually helps clarify the confusion. Yes — there are two broad categories of records:
Court-sealed materials (like grand jury testimony, depositions, and civil case files), which are under judicial control.
DOJ investigative materials, which do fall under executive authority — but not without limits.
But here’s the rub: even DOJ-held records are not simply “up for grabs” by a president or AG. There are long-standing DOJ policies, privacy protections, and sometimes sealed evidence gathered during criminal investigations that cannot be released publicly without legal risk — especially when they involve unindicted individuals, ongoing investigations, or victim identities.
Even if the president technically could order release, it’s not a “full stop” situation — it's a legal and ethical minefield. That’s why Trump didn’t release them either, despite having a deeply loyal DOJ and plenty of time to do so.
So if your argument is that Biden should have forced it out of the DOJ, ask yourself: Why didn’t Trump? He had more loyalists, fewer ethical guardrails, and no hesitation about politicizing the DOJ. He still didn’t do it.
You can call me ignorant if it helps you feel better, but I’m just asking for consistency. If releasing the files is that easy, why didn’t Trump — who promised transparency — do it?
Ronald, now you are back-tracking what you wrote, which is good. Glad to see it. Sure, a district court could try to intervene in the DoJ releasing what they have but, at the end of the day, the President can order it and it would likely be done with some redactions to protect the innocent.
Those charts mainly reveal which party is relying more on projection and denial -- the primary methods people use to cope with major issues they cannot handle.
I'd expect a 50%/50% Republican and Democrat client list (i.e., mostly big money males in NYC, DC, and California), or maybe more Democrats than Republicans because of urban voting patterns. With at least a 25% gap between Democrats and Republicans versus neutral expectations, more Democrats continue to live in fantasyland.
TDS is fading but not gone.
However, what we are saying with regards to Biden is that if there anything damaging to Trump in these files they would have released or, far more likely, leaked it with physical copies. The entire Russian Collusion hoax was done this way with the Mueller prosecutors and anti-Trump DoJ employees leaking repeatedly, and often false information.
I have never once criticized the Biden DoJ, Obama DoJ, or the Bush Jr. Doj for not releasing these files officially.
Yancey, I haven’t backtracked — I’ve clarified the difference between legal authority and practical, ethical action. You’re right that the president can order the release of some DOJ-held material, but there are limits — legal, procedural, and political.
Releasing DOJ investigative records involves:
Privacy concerns for uncharged individuals
Victim protections (especially in sex crimes)
DOJ internal guidelines (which Garland has followed and Trump largely ignored)
And yes, possible court intervention if the material overlaps with sealed evidence
So again — if this was as simple as “the president can order it,” then Trump, with a far more compliant DOJ and no qualms about breaking norms, would have done it. But he didn’t. That speaks volumes.
I’m not arguing it’s impossible — I’m arguing that the same limitations and considerations apply to both administrations, and blaming Biden for something Trump also didn’t do isn’t a serious argument. It’s just partisan misdirection.
Ronald, this is what you wrote in reply to Althouse:
"Thanks, Ann — that actually proves the point. If Trump sought to unseal grand jury testimony and failed, then that confirms what I said: these records are under judicial seal, not something either Trump or Biden could just release at will."
All that Althouse "proved" in regards to your original comment is that grand jury testimony and filings are in the control of the judicial branch. You were seeking to apply this control to materials in the possession of the DoJ which is what was wrong about your first two comments. Your comment to me was definitely you backtracking what you were claiming previously, that the Biden DoJ couldn't have released anything because it was under court seal was not only wrong but I suspect deliberately wrong. I am not the one practicing partisan politics on this issue right now- you were seeking to deceive people into thinking Trump had some greater power to release the DoJ materials than Biden did by both explicitly and implicitly asserting that there is no will Trump's part and no actual authority on Biden's part- read your own fucking comments if you don't really believe me- everyone else in this thread can see what you are attempting to do but you just aren't smart enough to pull it off.
Yancey, I’m not going to match your hostility, but I will clarify, one last time:
You’re arguing with a position I didn’t take. I never said all DOJ materials were under court seal. What I did say — clearly — is that some records are court-sealed and therefore beyond the executive’s unilateral reach, and that other DOJ materials, while technically releasable, come with real legal and ethical constraints that every administration must weigh.
I’ve consistently acknowledged that both Trump and Biden had the authority to push for selective releases — which is why I questioned why Trump, who had far more political loyalty within the DOJ, never chose to do so.
If we’re going to speculate about why Biden didn’t, fairness demands we ask the same of Trump.
You’ve chosen to interpret that as partisan deception. I’d suggest that says more about your approach than mine.
I've avoided talking about them because I don't want to help make them go viral. But they've obviously gone massively viral, so expect more of the same.
Yeah we need to get back to fat ugly people whose sex is hard to determine.
Feminism is not just Karen’s attack on men. It is also Karen tearing down young attractive women.
Your concern is very sincere, yes I'd like to know what William Burns a future CIA director, was doing as were Katy Couric George Stephanopoulos, (funny how that Amy Robach piece that spiked by her network, never came up) Charlie Rose, now an unperson were doing with Epstein, but its more an academic curiousiy, as the 2022 settlement by the DOJ made clear,
“Who thinks what about the Epstein files?”
I think I’m going to take a nap now.
Gigo, the least informed are most erroneous, the more informed are more satisfied,
the least informed chose the least reliable sources, it's an ouroboros,
Biden could not unilaterally release sealed Epstein files...
Yeah. Because they never, ever, ever would've leaked anything had it been damaging to Trump.
Merrick Garland was cautious, institutional, and independent to a fault ...
And with that, we can dismiss any future comments from you as they would be 180 degrees from reality.
Note that Ronald has complete dropped his claim that "Merrick Garland was cautious, institutional, and independent to a fault". He's not honest enough to admit it was total BS, butat least he's no longer peddling that obvious garbage
We all know Trump is not in the files.
We all know that when everything is released, people on both sides will say the files have been modified/destroyed.
Some will actually believe it.
Most understand that have sex with prostitutes provided by Epstein does not equal pedophillia.
More likely, powerful "heterosexual" Democrat politicians and businessmen will be exposed as having homosexual adventures on the island.
And now you are just lying about what you wrote, Ronald. At least you seem to admit that there are two classes of Epstein documents- grand jury testimony that is under court seal in two different circuits and material gathered by the DoJ. Those DoJ documents have been in possession of the DoJ since 2019 and both the Biden DoJ and the Trump DoJ could have released what they wanted from them with certain minor redactions but neither has to date. You literally claimed Biden couldn't have released anything and you did so in reply to Althouse and Greg who pointed out that Biden releasing nothing implicating Trump is strong evidence that Trump wasn't guilty of anything.
It is your 10:06 AM comment that proves you are lying, Ronald, about what you have written and why I am giving you a hard time. You went to ridiculous lengths to try to undermine Greg's argument and failed spectacularly.
Yancey, I’ve been consistent in every comment: court-sealed documents are beyond the unilateral power of the president, and DOJ-controlled materials, while technically releasable, are governed by privacy law, ethical constraints, and prosecutorial discretion.
If you’re reading that as “Biden couldn’t release anything,” then that’s your interpretation — not what I said. I’ve gone out of my way to clarify that both Trump and Biden could have released portions, but the how and why matter. Trump had more internal loyalty and political will to do so — and didn’t. That’s the point.
If you want to call that “lying,” go ahead — but anyone reading the actual thread can see what I wrote. And if you think pointing out double standards and the structure of DOJ authority is “failing spectacularly,” then we clearly have very different standards for debate.
I refuse to hear all this nonsense about Merrick Garland. Garland was very ethical, and only wanted to jail Pro-life, J6ers, and Trump for the right reasons.
Garland hid the Epstein files because it would hurt Trump. That wouldn't be ethical.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.