General Discussion

Wiz Imp

(10,696 posts)

42. Weak "evidence"

Sun Sep 7, 2025, 01:54 PM

Sep 2025

1) Why would anyone believe anything Trump says? He lies about everything.
2) Um, No. The "falling out" over the real estate deal happened in 2004. The prosecution of Epstein didn't start until 2006. And the FBI was not involved in the investigation until 2006 when the Palm Beach Police asked them to get involved due to the Palm Beach State Attorney not seeming to take the case seriously enough. The investigation started by the Palm Beach Police in March 2005 when the mother of one of the victims called police. The FBI investigation failed to result in any Federal charges against Epstein.
3) I have found zero evidence that Epstein threatened to sue Trump. Do you have a link for that?
4) This depends on the claim in 3) which I can find no evidence for.

You want circumstantial evidence? This guy nails exactly why the idea of Trump informing on Epstein is a ludicrous idea. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/X3WE9meINu4

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

65 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Onion officially gives up! [View all] True Dough Sep 2025 OP

I understand completely surfered Sep 2025 #1

DEMOCRAT hoax Skittles Sep 2025 #2

Correct. Trump would never call it a Democratic hoax MadameButterfly Sep 2025 #12

I don't think they realize how stupid they sound, all parroting each other Skittles Sep 2025 #19

Doesn't matter. Kablooie Sep 2025 #24

Like a bunch of bobble heads mdbl Sep 2025 #38

kind of.......proving my point Skittles Sep 2025 #50

Pretzel logic FakeNoose Sep 2025 #7

My favorite: PCIntern Sep 2025 #33

So he's part of the hoax IronLionZion Sep 2025 #15

At the time Trump informed on Epstein, the criminals were not Trump's donors yet, so he had no reason to protect them. SunSeeker Sep 2025 #43

Lol BlueWaveNeverEnd Sep 2025 #3

links please. if i forward to others, a worthwhile link Tetrachloride Sep 2025 #4

it will come up quickly in a google search MadameButterfly Sep 2025 #13

not my job to google every rumor Tetrachloride Sep 2025 #17

This was not a rumor MadameButterfly Sep 2025 #26

i skip unsubstantiated claims Tetrachloride Sep 2025 #37

okay Torchlight Sep 2025 #41

I always look up (google) info and have no problem with it. :/ It's not really a job. C Moon Sep 2025 #23

I love googling! brakester Sep 2025 #35

i allow myself excursions into wikipedia Tetrachloride Sep 2025 #49

in the past when i had no life, i had time to spare Tetrachloride Sep 2025 #48

Trump fbi snitch? summer_in_TX Sep 2025 #16

It's a joke Kaleva Sep 2025 #20

Link for which? FBI informant claim? (Fact.) Onion closing claim? (Joke.) n/t thesquanderer Sep 2025 #25

It is satire. Celerity Sep 2025 #34

LOL In It to Win It Sep 2025 #5

Well, actually we do, to maintain our sanity, MadameButterfly Sep 2025 #14

Hey, Johnson's got jokes . . . Good jokes! madashelltoo Sep 2025 #6

That's been the case for a while now. iemanja Sep 2025 #8

They're not serious, are they? calimary Sep 2025 #9

I think they're just having some fun, True Dough Sep 2025 #10

Take a look at "a" fbi informant. .The Onion has better grammar. niyad Sep 2025 #51

Yep, the truth is in the details. calimary Sep 2025 #52

My internal editor has daily fits. A novel that I am currently reading niyad Sep 2025 #56

Spelling was always a thing for me. calimary Sep 2025 #57

Well, you are smart. Between bad grammar, poor spelling, and whatever niyad Sep 2025 #61

Classic, reality is stranger than fiction. Buddyzbuddy Sep 2025 #11

No shit. Solly Mack Sep 2025 #18

Mike Johnson has jumped The Onion Blue Owl Sep 2025 #21

Preferable to jumping the couch. rubbersole Sep 2025 #28

Trump was more a snitch than an informant. He snitched after Epstein threatened to sue him over a land deal. SunSeeker Sep 2025 #22

There is absolutely zero evidence to support this "theory" Wiz Imp Sep 2025 #31

Since when does MAGA need evidence? soldierant Sep 2025 #36

My comment was directed at Josh Marshall who seemed to endorse this theory but should know better. Wiz Imp Sep 2025 #39

Circumstantial evidence is evidence. People get convicted with it all the time. SunSeeker Sep 2025 #40

Weak "evidence" Wiz Imp Sep 2025 #42

The real estate deal was in 2004. The investigation of Epstein began in 2005. SunSeeker Sep 2025 #44

Then why the MorbidButterflyTat Sep 2025 #60

Trump doesn't care about consistency. SunSeeker Sep 2025 #63

OK. I should have said there is zero "hard" evidence Wiz Imp Sep 2025 #64

Tapes are hard evidence. What are the instances where Wolff has contradicted himself? SunSeeker Sep 2025 #65

Hilarious and Terrifying. Never seen this before. FUCKING NEVER. OverBurn Sep 2025 #27

This made me smile LetMyPeopleVote Sep 2025 #29

A vs. an. Pay atterntion "the Onion"! GreenWave Sep 2025 #30

Thank you. niyad Sep 2025 #32

Indeed, indeed. LAS14 Sep 2025 #53

Maybe NOT The Onion -- and YOU should pay "atterntion" (eom) ClickClack Sep 2025 #59

Too good malaise Sep 2025 #45

That's alright, "Onion." Take a few days off. Rest up. Paladin Sep 2025 #46

I forget who did it but a reporter called 2,000 people in the black book JanMichael Sep 2025 #47

The Onion didn't fold. red dog 1 Sep 2025 #54

It was The Onion True Dough Sep 2025 #55

Funny, but not actually on The Onion website? ClickClack Sep 2025 #58

I didn't see it there, either. MorbidButterflyTat Sep 2025 #62