Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

aaaaaa5a

(4,686 posts)
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:20 PM Nov 16

Honest Question. What if David Shuster is right?

David Shuster has been reporting the Epstein Files contain pictures of Trump with topless underaged girls. Another picture allegedly shows Trump with a stain in the front of his pants. This is just some of the information about Trump allegedly in the DOJ/FBI files.

If this is true. And it becomes public, what happens next? How does the country proceed? Is Trump impeached? Is he just a lame duck? What does MAGA and the GOP do? Do we wait until he leaves office to file charges? Etc. Etc. Etc.

And why is this topic only coming to light now! After Trump has already run for President 3 times!!!!

Oh, and I’m nonpartisan. Clearly Trump and his crony justice department are trying to protect him. But If Merck Garland had this for years, why didn’t he do anything? Where is his accountability to the country and the victims?

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Honest Question. What if David Shuster is right? (Original Post) aaaaaa5a Nov 16 OP
Maga won't care, corruption and criminality is rampant with t-rump and his administration and supporters... wcmagumba Nov 16 #1
But...just maybe enough people will care to make a difference in our upcoming election, and go from there. electric_blue68 Nov 16 #2
This has become the default response but I don't think people should let them off that easy. BannonsLiver Nov 16 #14
The same David Shuster who got kicked off of MSNBC WarGamer Nov 16 #3
Yes. He has been reporting aaaaaa5a Nov 16 #6
He was a fixture on Keith's MSNBC show during Fitzmas, "reporting inside information" UTUSN Nov 16 #13
I can answer aaaaaa5a Nov 17 #17
"fair questions" usually have an implied, desired answer. Mine to those/here, I'm with "D" upper case, UTUSN Nov 17 #21
He is right mercuryblues Nov 16 #4
It wasn't released because maxwell Lifeafter70 Nov 16 #5
I expect redactions, but I also expect new sources of information from usonian Nov 16 #7
Fawk him.......kinda forgot what he said about Hillary and Bill Clinton's daughter..... a kennedy Nov 16 #8
I think it would depend on how long ago and how young she was Polybius Nov 16 #9
"If" is a very Big word. gab13by13 Nov 16 #10
not wasting any time on David Shuster stopdiggin Nov 16 #11
I think that would sway a small, yet noticeable, percentage of trump voters, especially those who swung late to trump. Silent Type Nov 16 #12
The journalist Michael Wolff says he has seen these pictures. Intractable Nov 16 #15
I am worried they are destroying the evidence. Nt aaaaaa5a Nov 17 #16
Schuster got that from Michael Wolf, who is taking no end of shit right now, maybe rightfully, Scrivener7 Nov 17 #18
Literally nothing will happen to him Orrex Nov 17 #19
Hmmmmmmmm malaise Nov 17 #20

wcmagumba

(5,513 posts)
1. Maga won't care, corruption and criminality is rampant with t-rump and his administration and supporters...
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:22 PM
Nov 16

electric_blue68

(25,557 posts)
2. But...just maybe enough people will care to make a difference in our upcoming election, and go from there.
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:26 PM
Nov 16

Or maybe even before, sonehow.

BannonsLiver

(20,189 posts)
14. This has become the default response but I don't think people should let them off that easy.
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 11:28 PM
Nov 16

WarGamer

(18,216 posts)
3. The same David Shuster who got kicked off of MSNBC
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:26 PM
Nov 16

for making extremely derogatory comments about Hillary and Chelsea Clinton?

aaaaaa5a

(4,686 posts)
6. Yes. He has been reporting
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:31 PM
Nov 16

A lot of inside info about what is really happening on Capitol Hill. To my knowledge, he was the first to report that the GOP would have a jail break on the Epstein files if the resolution passed.

UTUSN

(76,657 posts)
13. He was a fixture on Keith's MSNBC show during Fitzmas, "reporting inside information"
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 11:17 PM
Nov 16

from the Grand Jury (yeah-right), nightly assuring that KKKarl ROVE was going to be indicted any time soon. When the predicted apocalypse date got into the "imminently" range set by one Jason LEOPOLD from "Truthout" and passed by one and another day, LEOPOLD covered by something like a discrepancy between "calendar days or working days" but neither method of divination worked. And we had a Fitzmas of coals.

When it was over SHUSTER was pressed on how/who his "inside information" could be so wrong. He was burned and peevishly said his sources were (paraphrasing: ) "experts on grand juries, attorneys with extensive experience presenting cases to grand juries."

Get it? We lay people learned, got drilled, that grand juries don't spew "inside information." So SHUSTER's experts turned out to be attorneys without actual information, but rather acting as PUNDITS giving their opinions based on what was known outside the grand jury.

*** So, he's still pushing inside information, eh.

*** And just curious, answer not demanded: Is "non-partisan" literal or intended loosely as "impartial"?





aaaaaa5a

(4,686 posts)
17. I can answer
Mon Nov 17, 2025, 08:15 AM
Nov 17

I of course side with the democratic view most often. Not because of party but because they are usually right. Impartial, in this case means I try to see both sides. I DO WONDER why this couldn’t be released earlier, when Dems had control, and we could have ensured impartiality and fair play with regard to the Epstein files. I am worried about information being scrubbed or tampered.

I think those are fair questions. You?

UTUSN

(76,657 posts)
21. "fair questions" usually have an implied, desired answer. Mine to those/here, I'm with "D" upper case,
Mon Nov 17, 2025, 02:03 PM
Nov 17

D"emocratic view ... is usually (correct)."




mercuryblues

(16,140 posts)
4. He is right
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:27 PM
Nov 16

Much of this info has been out there. His voters don't give a shit. It.is. a. cult.

Trump will never leave the White house willingly, even if he is impeached. He will fight it all the way to the Supreme court. The way they rule in his favor, Epstein just may have tapes on a few of them.

IMO Trump has done a lot worse than what has been made public. Much of the info being released this past week comes from Epstein's brother.

Lifeafter70

(751 posts)
5. It wasn't released because maxwell
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:29 PM
Nov 16

Was on trial at the time. After her conviction and appeal ended, trump had already been elected.
In fact trump ran on releasing the files and tacoed out.

usonian

(23,220 posts)
7. I expect redactions, but I also expect new sources of information from
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:34 PM
Nov 16

Outside the DOJ, "Defenders of Jeffrey".

Info is coming forward and there will be investigations, especially of money and money laundering. (Does the name Al Capone sound familiar?)

Giuffre's posthumously published book took down the Andrew formerly known as Prince. Others will step forward and initiate investigations (It's global)

The problem is not just Trump. It's worldwide oligarchs. Possibly heads of state, royalty, business tycoons, tech billionaires, legislators, and (ahem) judges.

That will disrupt a world of oligarchs. Be prepared to rebuild better.

I've estimated the impact in terms of players only

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=20809929

a kennedy

(35,176 posts)
8. Fawk him.......kinda forgot what he said about Hillary and Bill Clinton's daughter.....
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:34 PM
Nov 16

MSNBC’s David Shuster has been suspended in the wake of his suggestion on air Thursday that Sen. Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign might have “pimped out” daughter Chelsea Clinton by having her call celebrities and super-delegates on her mother’s behalf.

Mr. Shuster was guest-hosting “Tucker” when he made the remark.
Mr. Shuster apologized on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and was scheduled to apologize again during the 6 p.m. hour Friday on the cable chanel.

A spokesman for MSNBC and NBC News issued a statement that the comment about Chelsea Clinton “was irresponsible and inappropriate.”

It said Mr. Shuster “has been suspended from appearing on all NBC News broadcasts, other than to make his apology. He has also extended an apology to the Clinton family. NBC News takes these matters seriously, and offers our sincere regrets to the Clintons for the remarks.”

Howard Wolfson, the communications director for Sen. Clinton’s campaign, said the remark “is beneath contempt. It is the kind of thing that should never be said on a national news network.”

https://www.tvweek.com/in-depth/2008/02/msnbc-suspends-shuster-over-ch/

Polybius

(21,372 posts)
9. I think it would depend on how long ago and how young she was
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 09:39 PM
Nov 16

If it's a 17 year old topless girl from a 1985 pic, it won't matter much. If she's 13, he gets impeached and removed.

stopdiggin

(14,908 posts)
11. not wasting any time on David Shuster
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 10:07 PM
Nov 16

really no matter what he has to say. (there are other, and better sources .. )

In regard to the rest of the post - topic is NOT 'just coming to light now'. There is a drumbeat now - but a lot of this was in the public sphere well back ... The country voted him into office knowing ... As far as public reaction and 'what happens next'. Also - "asked and answered" With that answer being, "not a whole stinking lot."

Silent Type

(12,372 posts)
12. I think that would sway a small, yet noticeable, percentage of trump voters, especially those who swung late to trump.
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 10:37 PM
Nov 16

And it might help solidify Dem support in midterms. GOPers worried about losing might turn on trump like Nixon.

Then, again, maybe 55% of voters are just vile perverts and will applaud trump. Have often thought some GOPers calling for release are just hoping for photos.

Intractable

(1,555 posts)
15. The journalist Michael Wolff says he has seen these pictures.
Sun Nov 16, 2025, 11:29 PM
Nov 16

The pictures exist. Whether they are in the version of the "Epstein Files" that will be released is another matter.

Scrivener7

(58,095 posts)
18. Schuster got that from Michael Wolf, who is taking no end of shit right now, maybe rightfully,
Mon Nov 17, 2025, 08:49 AM
Nov 17

because another email seems to show him telling Epstein how to leverage the information he has on Cankles, both in the event that he loses and in the event that he wins the 2016 election.

I get the squeamishness, but Wolf's defense is that this is how you get close to a subject. You have to interact on their level to open them up so you can get the full story. While I couldn't do it, he does seem to have gotten more on Epstein and Cankles than any of the journalists going about it the traditional way.

Orrex

(66,584 posts)
19. Literally nothing will happen to him
Mon Nov 17, 2025, 08:54 AM
Nov 17

Except that he'll remain in office until he dies.

He could release live, current-day footage of himself violating children, and MAGA fuckheads would continue to worship him, the GOP would continue to protect him, and the media would continue to sane-wash him.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Honest Question. What if ...