The Epstein story is proof that everything the GOP says is them blowing out of their asses

[ificandream]

This CNN analysis piece by Aaron Blake really exposes the GOP for a bunch of blowhards. The "reasoning" given by the various GOPers over time proves, as Sgt. Schultz used to say, they "know nothing."

Back in February, for example, Attorney General Pam Bondi, hyped soon-to-be-released documents and suggested she had the so-called client list on her desk when asked about it in an interview. (She has since suggested she was referring to other documents.)

And then there's this:

In 2021, JD Vance accused the government of hiding a Jeffrey Epstein “client list” that the Trump-Vance administration now says doesn’t exist. “If you’re a journalist and you’re not asking questions about this case,” Vance said, “you should be ashamed of yourself.”

When he was a loudmouth podcaster and before Dan Bongino became part of the Trump Administration, he said,

“Listen, that Jeffrey Epstein story is a big deal,” now-Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino said the same year. “Please do not let that story go. Keep your eye on this.” “Who’s on those tapes?” Bongino added in February shortly before joining the administration. “Who’s in those black books? Why have they been hiding it?”

More recently, though ....

Bongino told Fox News last month: “I’m not paid for my opinions anymore. I work for the taxpayer now. I’m paid on evidence.”

The story relates that so much of what GOPers said in the past about the Epstein files has been denied or is just plain b.s. Of course, they won't admit that now.

And then there's this little thing from Trump that seems to have been trampled by all the other stupid things he has said. Talking about Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's cohort in crime, he said,

“I’m not looking for anything bad for her. I’m not looking bad for anybody.”

Sorry, Donnie, this thing ain't going away anytime soon.

[chouchou]

1. Where there's smoke (in this case) ..There's a God-Damn Forest fire.

[usonian]

2. With abusive people, words are only weapons, used for effect (hurt). They bear no relation to truth or reality.

That's why they double-talk all the time.

Sad when it's overthinking to imagine that anything they're saying is more than duckspeak.

Orwell explained it:

https://www.orwelltoday.com/duckspeak.shtml
excerpt from 1984, Appendix, The Principles of Newspeak, page 241-251:

...What was required, above all for political purposes, was short clipped words of unmistakable meaning which could be uttered rapidly and which roused the minimum of echoes in the speaker’s mind. The words of the B vocabulary even gained in force from the fact that nearly all of them were very much alike. Almost invariably these words — goodthink, Minipax, prolefeed, sexcrime, joycamp, Ingsoc, bellyfeel, thinkpol, and countless others — were words of two or three syllables, with the stress distributed equally between the first syllable and the last. The use of them encouraged a gabbling style of speech, at once staccato and monotonous. And this was exactly what was aimed at. The intention was to make speech, and especially speech on any subject not ideologically neutral, as nearly as possible independent of consciousness. For the purposes of everyday life it was no doubt necessary, or sometimes necessary, to reflect before speaking, but a Party member called upon to make a political or ethical judgement should be able to spray forth the correct opinions as automatically as a machine gun spraying forth bullets. His training fitted him to do this, the language gave him an almost foolproof instrument, and the texture of the words, with their harsh sound and a certain wilful ugliness which was in accord with the spirit of Ingsoc, assisted the process still further.

So did the fact of having very few words to choose from. Relative to our own, the Newspeak vocabulary was tiny, and new ways of reducing it were constantly being devised. Newspeak, indeed, differed from most all other languages in that its vocabulary grew smaller instead of larger every year. Each reduction was a gain, since the smaller the area of choice, the smaller the temptation to take thought. Ultimately it was hoped to make articulate speech issue from the larynx without involving the higher brain centres at all. This aim was frankly admitted in the Newspeak word duckspeak, meaning "to quack like a duck". Like various other words in the B vocabulary, duckspeak was ambivalent in meaning. Provided that the opinions which were quacked out were orthodox ones, it implied nothing but praise, and when the Times referred to one of the orators of the Party as a doubleplusgood duckspeaker it was paying a warm and valued compliment.

"There is a word in Newspeak" said Syme, "I don't know whether you know it: duckspeak, to quack like a duck. It is one of those interesting words that have two contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it is abuse: applied to someone you agree with, it is praise.

Of course, with instant communications today, the proper duckspeak can pull a 180 in minutes.

Will Stephen Miller copyright CuckSpeak?

[Torchlight]

3. Mr. trump burnt his fingers badly fanning the flames of this little fire

he thought the fire was put out, but embers still float.

[Blue Full Moon]

4. The more he says it should go away is proof he's on that list.

So who's on that list he is protecting?