General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm not sure who (Victim) in the email was, but I think the GQP's claim it was Virginia Guiffre is BS!
And here is why:
She recanted earlier public statements implying Trump was present with girls at Epsteins.
She stated: I do not believe [Trump] had any knowledge of Epsteins misconduct with underage girls.
She denied seeing Trump act inappropriately or with any of Epsteins victims.
So far so good for the regime, right? This all makes saying " (Victim) was Virginia Guiffre" sound like a brilliant strategy for them. Like yeah, he spent hours with her there, but it was sunshine and rainbows! And conveniently for them, she cannot be contacted to confirm nor deny this assertion
Here's the problem for these liars, though, from the same deposition:
These excerpts are from her court deposition during the 2015 Maxwell defamation trial, and represent her sworn account on the record
She cannot simultaneously have "spent hours at (Epstein's) place with (Trump) ", per the email, yet "never see him at any of Epstein's properties" per her testimony. These are mutually exclusive.
I think House Republicans were quick to blurt out Guiffre's name because they knew she had said exonerating things about Trump under oath. Leadership probably knew of the existence of these emails a long time ago, and had this angle prepared if they did come out.
But I bet they thought we'd all miss the part where she also testified, explicitly, under oath, and even in the very same sitting, that she was NEVER WITH TRUMP at Epstein's place!
Which leads to the question ... WHO IS (VICTIM), in actuality? Perhaps someone who could still be spoken to? Someone who does NOT have such exonerating words to share about him?
This particular enquiring mind wants to know. Why are they LYING about who (Victim) is?
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,106 posts)"She testified under oath:
She recanted earlier public statements implying Trump was present with girls at Epsteins."
So she lied at least once. How do we know what the real truth is with her?
AZJonnie
(2,250 posts)In her deposition and subsequent interviews, Giuffre clarified that some of her earlier statements were either misquoted, taken out of context, or based on rumors rather than personal experience.
She explained:
She was, at the time, recounting what shed heard from others in Epsteins circle, not what she personally witnessed.
Anything I may have said before was hearsay or based on what was going around those circlesI never saw it myself.
She stated she wanted her sworn record to represent her true firsthand knowledge, distancing herself from previous media implications.
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,106 posts)One can believe or not believe her. Sounds more to me that someone got to her.
AZJonnie
(2,250 posts)But she was freaking FEARLESS, man. She's the one that went out and held everyone to account!
The ENTIRE "Epstein List"? That's her list, in fact it is all from this very trial (Maxwell, 2015):
The list of people Virginia Giuffre named, under oath in the 2015 Maxwell defamation lawsuit deposition and subsequent legal filings, as those Epstein ordered her to give massages (which, by her testimony, was a euphemism for sexual acts) includes:
George Mitchell Former U.S. Senate Majority Leader and Special Envoy to the Middle East
Jean-Luc Brunel French modeling agent and scout
Alan Dershowitz Harvard Law professor and attorney (a Trump legal ally at times)
Prince Andrew, Duke of York British royal
Glenn Dubin Billionaire hedge fund owner (Highbridge Capital)
Marvin Minsky MIT computer scientist and AI pioneer
By Description (from Giuffres testimony where she could not recall or did not give a name):
Another prince, whose name she did not know (distinct from Prince Andrew)
A prominent head of state (not specifically identified)
High-profile businessmen and academics (some named, others described generally in testimony)
Prominent figures in fashion and modeling
So these are powerful people, rich people, and she went and named names, so I don't see a strong reason to suspect that in the one particular case of Donald Trump, she turns tail and runs? About even SEEING him there at his place? I judge this to be unlikely. I think she'd have told whoever tried to "get to her" to go pound sand, but I could be wrong.
In the event I am, then we'd take the whole THING to be false, in which case, (Victim) COULD be Guiffre, however, that means she did NOT exonerate Trump under oath, so the GQP has a different problem because Giuffre provides no cover for them.
I thought this all through before I posted
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,106 posts)so it's something I can't argue or even debate over. It's really all conjecture at this point.
TommyT139
(2,071 posts)...but cannot testify, of course.
mgardener
(2,221 posts)Hugin
(37,115 posts)Which we've since learned somehow for some reason and very unusually contained a rider allegedly barring the investigation/prosecution of other parties/accomplices. It's probably safe to assume that the testimony was massaged to support the charge Epstein acted alone. So, your caution in the interpretation of anything public drawn from that is a good idea.
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,106 posts)I know she was a victim, but if I was on the jury, I would not consider her testimony credible.
Hugin
(37,115 posts)But, it's not like there aren't plenty of other victims who have yet to have their testimony heard out there.
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,106 posts)Just yesterday, emails were released that state Trump was at Epstein's house. We need more testimony to get a clear picture.
TommyT139
(2,071 posts)...I have heard discussed a few different emails, clearly different victims. In one of them, Giuffre's name was mentioned by people on MSNBC who are very careful about only alluding to names when they are in public material (and/or the victim has discussed them in public or books).
There was another person, in an email and also the anecdote about the "joke" check.
Often in these sorts of things, there is a naming convention: "Person 1," "Person 2" and so on. But that is not happening with these releases.
jmbar2
(7,437 posts)https://www.tarapalmeri.com/p/the-disappearing-epstein-jane-doe
She has since disappeared.
Callie1979
(1,018 posts)BeerBarrelPolka
(2,106 posts)Callie1979
(1,018 posts)Even though she's no longer with us
Thats what CNN said.
But its also not unheard of that she was pressured. It could have contributed to her suicide.
ColoringFool
(73 posts)Victim of the Andrew Formerly Known As Prince.
What are the odds, really, of Andrew and Trump's being at the same Epstein property at the same time? Thus, what are the odds of VIRGINIA and Trump.....? Likely exactly as she testified.
But for one girl out of thousands to not have seen Trump is in no known Universe any kind of blanket exoneration of him.
Only a fool would believe so, and only someone who thought others fools would declare so.
No. There are, or were when they were alive, other victims of the then-bon vivant Bestie of Jeffrey.
live love laugh
(16,079 posts)Prairie Gates
(6,797 posts)Moreover, the email with the redacted name was released by Democrats, who have not disputed the WH claim that the redacted name is Giuffre's.