Google search - interesting results (Page 5/7)
rinselberg JUL 15, 04:58 AM
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).]

williegoat JUL 15, 05:43 AM
Isn't this a bit like debating the number of banks robbed by Willie Sutton?
rinselberg JUL 15, 05:48 AM
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).]

williegoat JUL 15, 05:59 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

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).]

rinselberg JUL 15, 06:16 AM

quote
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.
williegoat JUL 15, 06:24 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

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).]

williegoat JUL 15, 06:43 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

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.
Tony Kania JUL 15, 10:22 AM
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!?


rinselberg JUL 15, 02:40 PM

quote
Originally posted by Tony Kania:

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?


More online at NBC News.
https://www.nbcnews.com/new...referral_taboolafeed
randye JUL 15, 05:07 PM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

it's well to remember the distinction between "flights", VS "travel" or "trips."




Ronald you babble so much psychotic sh*t we don't know whether to offer you a breath mint or a roll of toilet paper.


FLIGHT LOGS : https://archive.org/stream/...ogs#page/n5/mode/2up

[This message has been edited by randye (edited 07-15-2019).]