There's a new report of some length in the Washington Examiner about Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein and the "Lolita Express."
"Flight manifests reveal Bill Clinton traveled with [Jeffrey] Epstein six times, not the four times he [Bill Clinton] admitted" Jerry Dunleavy for the Washington Examiner; July 10, 2019. https://www.washingtonexami...ur-times-he-admitted
As this new report reminds us, it's well to remember the distinction between "flights", VS "travel" or "trips."
If, after his last day in office, the former president traveled on four (or six) different occasions with Jeffrey Epstein, it could have involved as many as 26 or 27 separately recorded flights on Epstein's private aircraft, as any of the four (or six) "travels" or "trips" could (and apparently did) have intermediate stops or destinations.
So says this report in the Washington Examiner.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-15-2019).]
No. Not for me. I was trying to square the banner or title that appears above the report in the Washington Examiner, about four VS six "travels", and the image that Tony Kania put up on Page 1 of this thread, just after it started, which has the number '26" or 26 times on the "Lolita Express."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-15-2019).]
No. Not for me. I was trying to square the banner or title that appears above the report in the Washington Examiner, about four VS six "travels", and the image that Tony Kania put up on Page 1 of this thread, just after it started, which has the number '26" or 26 times on the "Lolita Express."
In other words, it's less about creating an accurate picture than it is about disputing minutia. I guess it all depends on what the meaning of is is.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 07-15-2019).]
Originally posted by williegoat: In other words, it's less about creating an accurate picture than it is about disputing minutia. I guess it all depends on what the meaning of is is.
I don't know about Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein. Or what Bill Clinton (or Jeffrey Epstein, for that matter) did or did not do during these particular travels. Had you already seen everything about this that is presented in this new report in the Washington Examiner?
People in the latter half of the current century may have a new proverb, about "cutting off your nose to spite Bill (and Hillary, and maybe Chelsea) Clinton."
Maybe something new or more definitive about the Clinton-Epstein nexus will emerge as the SDNY, under the leadership of a U.S. District Attorney that was appointed by President Trump, continues with its prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein.
Had you already seen everything about this that is presented in this new report in the Washington Examiner?
The article is already five days old. There is nothing new therein.
edited for accuracy: The article is 4 days, 12 hours and 26 minutes old.
edited for additional accuracy: The article was 4 days, 12 hours and 26 minutes old as of the time stamp on this post.
edited for additional accuracy: Based on the time stamp on the article, the article was 4 days, 12 hours and 26 minutes old as of the time stamp on this post.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 07-15-2019).]
Maybe something new or more definitive about the Clinton-Epstein nexus will emerge as the SDNY, under the leadership of a U.S. District Attorney that was appointed by President Trump, continues with its prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein.
I expect that some things beyond the Clinton-Epstein nexus will emerge.
I post truths. You deflect Ronald. If you are going to ruin a card game with your antics Ronald, then at least be quick about it. Your endless drivel really kills your pulpit. Just lays it flat.
A picture was posted by me of a board deflecting early on in the Obama Administration. Four months in to be precise. "Transparency" my azz!?
I post truths. You deflect Ronald. If you are going to ruin a card game with your antics Ronald, then at least be quick about it. Your endless drivel really kills your pulpit. Just lays it flat.
A picture was posted by me of a board deflecting early on in the Obama Administration. Four months in to be precise. "Transparency" my azz!?
indeed.
I'm trying to think of a logical response. How about this?
quote
Manta Ray seemed to want to interact with snorkel divers. Was the animal actually looking for "First Aid" because it had been impaled by fish hooks near one of its eyes?
Likely within days, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will release almost 2,000 pages of documents that could reveal sexual abuse by “numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known prime minister, and other world leaders,” according to the three-judge panel's ruling.
quote
The Jeffrey Epstein case is an asteroid poised to strike the elite world in which he moved. No one can yet say precisely how large it is. But as the number of women who’ve accused the financier (at least, that’s what he claimed to be) of sexual assault grows to grotesque levels—there are said to be more than 50 women who are potential victims—a wave of panic is rippling through Manhattan, DC, and Palm Beach, as Epstein’s former friends and associates rush to distance themselves, while gossiping about who might be ensnared.
quote
The questions about Epstein are metastasizing much faster than they can be answered: Who knew what about Epstein’s alleged abuse? How, and from whom, did Epstein get his supposed $500 million fortune? Why did [newly resigned Secretary of Labor, Alexander] Acosta grant Epstein an outrageously lenient non-prosecution agreement? And what does it mean that Acosta was reportedly told Epstein “belonged to intelligence”?
But among the most pressing queries is which other famous people might be exposed for committing sex crimes. “There were other business associates of Mr. Epstein’s who engaged in improper sexual misconduct at one or more of his homes. We do know that,” said Brad Edwards, a lawyer for Courtney Wild, one of the Epstein accusers who gave emotional testimony at Epstein’s bail hearing. “In due time the names are going to start coming out.”
I guess it's all over for Trump. They finally got him. Yesterday, they released video of Trump being hospitable to a wealthy guest at one of his fancy hotels. It was speculated that he might have even commented on the attractiveness of an NFL cheerleader. I say, "Impeach the bastard!"
I guess it's all over for Trump. They finally got him. Yesterday, they released video of Trump being hospitable to a wealthy guest at one of his fancy hotels. It was speculated that he might have even commented on the attractiveness of an NFL cheerleader. I say, "Impeach the bastard!"
This turned me Demoncrat instantly. I knew at that very moment being reported that they finally nabbed the racist, misogynistic, imperialist bastard. The light shone down and it revealed an angel. With wings.
That's "cool." Forum members can be "read in" on what's being reported on certain media venues (Vanity Fair being one), or just aware of the kinds of things that are being reported on those media venues.
"A Daily Beast investigation has uncovered ties between [Jeffrey] Epstein and the Clinton administration that date back to [President Clinton's] earliest days in the White House." Emily Shugerman and Suzi Parker for Daily Beast; July 25, 2019. https://www.thedailybeast.c...n-early-90s?ref=home
Motivation for posting: "Duty to Report." Additional comments: "Random encounter. Title of report appeared within my field of view as I was casually browsing the front page."
Caution: "Wingers" and "Clinton conspiracy fetishists" could get a "woody" from reading this.
