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

bigtree

(94,690 posts)
11. I'll try to post this again... I'm older than I'm young these days
Fri Aug 22, 2025, 08:08 PM
Aug 2025

I think I said essentially that in the op.

But yours and my own consumption of this interview isn't going to necessarily be shared by those who will likely tout her words as an exoneration.

As I said above, for what it's worth, ignoring her words about Clinton and others while her accounts of Trump are presented as relevant just leaves an ambiguity about the charges that doesn't need to exist.

If and when cultish republicans feel they want to advance her denials about Trump as the truth, they should be reminded of the similar denials about the 'big dog' whose relationship they've been pointing to deflect from Trump.

Moreover, her account of the plane trips is right in line with what Clinton has been saying about the flights and the relationship; especially the flights which people like to reporesent as a series of trips, rather than just the one that Maxwell confirmed.

I really don't get any impulse to not talk about or refuse to point to what she said about Clinton, as if the only political takes on this are going to come from our like minds; or as if there isn't potential political advantage that will be gained by this.

Like I said, any attempt to make political hay out of her denials by people who are inclined to believe her will need to reconcile all of that Trump love with all of their Clinton hate and accept that the denials came out of the same mouth.

Not all politics that's relevant, or necessary to counter is about what we believe; or assuaged by our beliefs.

Recommendations

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

Not yet anyway, they will do almost anything including Eliot Rosewater Aug 2025 #1
Her denials also cover herself, and yet she was convicted on evidence which RockRaven Aug 2025 #2
I don't think it's worth a damn, but if there are going to be denials issued about Trump on her behalf bigtree Aug 2025 #4
A woman in prison with everything to gain being interviewed by Trump's attorney Prairie Gates Aug 2025 #3
Why, she wouldn't even harm a fly taxi Aug 2025 #5
She's careful not to implicate herself. C_U_L8R Aug 2025 #6
Yes she cannot implicate someone else without implicating herself. Irish_Dem Aug 2025 #13
and she'll need friends when she busts out of the minimum security prison escapes to France. bigtree Aug 2025 #19
Good point. If she id's the johns, she will be Epsteined. Irish_Dem Aug 2025 #20
Have to disagree with the premise of this thread EarlG Aug 2025 #7
This message was self-deleted by its author bigtree Aug 2025 #10
I'll try to post this again... I'm older than I'm young these days bigtree Aug 2025 #11
Okay EarlG Aug 2025 #16
look at the news reports telling viewers what she said about Trump bigtree Aug 2025 #17
Great! That means- misanthrope Aug 2025 #8
that's exactly what I'm getting at bigtree Aug 2025 #12
They transferred her to a luxury prison Johnny2X2X Aug 2025 #9
Why did Todd Blanche bring up Clinton's name when he knew what GM would say? Irish_Dem Aug 2025 #14
he likely knew from the proffer bigtree Aug 2025 #18
Or maybe he is making a deal. Irish_Dem Aug 2025 #21
better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. nt BootinUp Aug 2025 #15
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»FWIW, Maxwell didn't impl...»Reply #11