General Discussion

Quiet Em

(2,490 posts)

20. I want to address this part of your post

Wed Nov 12, 2025, 08:11 PM

Wednesday

But I also have a hard time thinking that if &quot Name of Victim) " was the original words, and Biden's DoJ didn't find a way to get this content out there via a leak, or something, before the 2024 election? I'd just be really severely disappointed

This "why didn't Biden leak it" excuse in defending the con artist is getting old and is a pathetic defense of the con.

Do you not see how much effort the con is putting into stopping the files from being released? If the con artist had nothing to hide, why put so much effort into quashing it? That fact that the con artist is desperately trying to suppress this information is extremely distrubing and suspicous.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

W_HAMILTON kcoates BeerBarrelPolka Boomerproud

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sorry to annoy everyone yet again, but much about that Epstein email hangs on the accuracy of one word [View all] AZJonnie Wednesday OP

you seem very vested in all of this Skittles Wednesday #1

to be honest every day I see dozens here incredibly vested in this. WarGamer Wednesday #3

I have two answers for you AZJonnie Wednesday #4

Is that email in question from the estate? OneGrassRoot Wednesday #6

I cannot possibly imagine that the DoJ does/did not have everything the Estate has in this regard, long ago AZJonnie Wednesday #8

Well, not just Biden's DOJ. Sorry to burst the bubble you'd prefer to exist in, but it is true. RockRaven Wednesday #10

I see you as rather a brilliant person so this reply surprises me. AZJonnie Wednesday #11

I believe my last post failed to communicate to you what I intended. RockRaven Wednesday #18

Thanks for clarification. This is exactly the sort of cogent argument I always see from RockRaven AZJonnie Thursday #33

I don't think BeerBarrelPolka Thursday #34

yeah OK Skittles Wednesday #12

Because Biden wanted to protect others. Sadly. Bluesaph Thursday #32

I am one KentuckyWoman Wednesday #19

The White House released the name Abnredleg Wednesday #2

Well, that's very convenient since Giuffre REPEATEDLY exonerated Trump of any wrongdoing including in her book AZJonnie Wednesday #7

do you admit that Trump is one vile, disgusting POS??? Skittles Wednesday #13

Do you not see what I post, all day and every day? I mean obviously not everything, but generally? AZJonnie Wednesday #15

The premise of this post is wrong, from what I've read. The ID is known, from multiple RockRaven Wednesday #5

See my post #7 above this one. AZJonnie Wednesday #9

and how do you know she wasn't under duress? Skittles Wednesday #14

Because it was in her 2025 memoir that she just wrote, and her estate released posthumously AZJonnie Wednesday #17

speak for yourself Skittles Wednesday #21

We are making the same point. Yes, she is gone, having exonerated him (to her knowledge) on her way out. AZJonnie Wednesday #23

It doesn't matter Boo1 Wednesday #16

I want to address this part of your post Quiet Em Wednesday #20

I get what you mean, but I was asked why *I* am so interested in the case near the top of the thread. AZJonnie Wednesday #24

You are not annoying me and no apology is required. Disaffected Wednesday #22

From what I've read, the "VICTIM" redaction was in the version of the files supplied by the estate, Emrys Wednesday #25

Not suggesting anyone tried to warp the facts, but mistakes can be made on a task like that AZJonnie Wednesday #26

It MIGHT be an inside joke, but to borrow the words of a past US president, "I want to hear him deny it." Emrys Wednesday #28

I've said this like 20 times in various posts over months but not everyone see everything, so again lol AZJonnie Thursday #29

"the 'complete release of DoJ files' for any case is not a normal occurrence" Emrys Thursday #30

Setting aside the details of our particular definitions of "great lengths", the point is we agree AZJonnie Thursday #31

AZJohnny I agree with you that it wasn't Virginia Roberts Giuffre that Chump met at Epstein's house FakeNoose Wednesday #27