Eh, Trump said that he didn't draw, even though there were other drawings by him at about the same time, and that he doesn't use the word 'enigma'.
On the Epstein issue, Trump's credibility is very low for me, so if it's him vs. the WSJ, I'm going with the WSJ.
This isn't even directly damaging, because the article itself downplays what kind of context it was in. But I can imagine Trump saying: "FAKE!!!! OBAMA WROTE IT! He wrote it in Hunter Biden's bathroom, it's disgusting! No release of this HOAX!" It explains everything about his behavior.
See I'm opposite, even now after the Epstein files release debacle, Trump's credibility is higher than the WSJ.
Then again, I also think my 2 year old nephew that likes to see if he can lick his own toes has more credibility than the WSJ...
I have no doubt in my mind, these media institutions know MORE than they let on about Epstein, I bet a few of the higher execs were INVOLVED in the seedier side, because who better to blackmail than media? But more than anything, I can NEVER trust the kind of people where the only factor in supporting a policy is who's pushing it not the policy in itself.
On the Epstein issue, Trump's credibility is very low for me, so if it's him vs. the WSJ, I'm going with the WSJ.
Well...that's kind of silly.
Trump has shit the bed, but the WSJ has shit the bed a lot more frequently and consistently. I've been very disappointed in Trump on this issue, but that doesn't mean I'm trusting the WSJ.
If you have no credibility on anything else, sorry, no, you don't get credibility just because you're against someone who also has a credibility problem.
I'm not giving them credibility just because Trump has none.
The reason they win the credibility battle is because they at least cited something to back up their claim. Regardless of what that something is, it is more credible than "Trust me bro. This shit's fake and I can prove it, but I'm too busy doing other stuff. Besides, you're a loser and I don't want your support if you even care about this."
Their "trust me bro" included the effort of at least faking a letter. Trump's is that he knows it's a scam but he isn't going to show us a damn thing.
You seem to think I see the WSJ as the bastions of journalism. I don't. They are absolutely terrible. That doesn’t change the fact that they have handled the Epstein story better than Trump has. This isn't saying much at all, because there isn't a single thing Trump could have done to handle this worse. He is doing everything in his power to hand them the win.
I don't believe it because the WSJ says it. I find it somewhat believable because it's consistent with all the other facts, namely Trump sperging out like a madman.
As for Deep State mouthpiece, yes, but Trump has done everything for the Deep State since May. Why?
Trump has shit the bed, but the WSJ has shit the bed a lot more frequently and consistently. I've been very disappointed in Trump on this issue, but that doesn't mean I'm trusting the WSJ.
Both the WSJ and Trump are not trustworthy.
In the Epstein case, Trump is demonstrably lying by the mere fact of the law of non-contradiction (hoax, written by Obama, don't exist). Likelihood of Trump being right: 0.
In the Epstein case, the WSJ is not (yet) demonstrably lying, but its track record is also not great. Likelihood of WSJ being right: somewhere close to 0, but not 0 itself.
But why give any credence to an organization you say has a near zero likelihood of being correct?
If someone has a 1% track record of being honest, and they tell me something...I'm going to bet the other way. Even if the other guy is also being squirrelly. Say what you want about Trump on this, he's still got a better record overall, and was never the most articulate, or honest on some of the details.
There's just no way I'm taking WSJ and anonymous sources as anything of value, when they did this exact same bullshit for a decade.
On the Epstein issue, Trump's credibility is very low for me, so if it's him vs. the WSJ, I'm going with the WSJ.
Those are my feelings as well. He has no leg to stand on with this. At this point, he can release everything or fuck off, because his word doesn't mean shit.
The WSJ isn't the side telling me to ignore my lying eyes and ears
WSJ is asking exactly that since they provide no proof of anything and they're TDS consumed journos. The more WSJ and NYT are saying something the less likely it is to be true.
You can't tell me that you believe that birthday letter? It seems so cartoonish almost like a plot for a Sunday morning cartoon. It just happened to appear now and not during the last 9 years and so perfectly and comically accuses Trump. Also we don't actually have the letter and we need to trust WSJ that has seen the letter and didn't take a picture of it.
The more the left is trying to force the Trump is a pedo angle the more they're going to help Trump.
All they had to do was hammer in that Trump needs to to release the files but they just have to be lying and manipulative in typical leftist fashion. The files was one of the few things both the right and the left can agree upon even if it is for different reasons since the left love their pedos.
Trump wrote a birthday letter drawing a naked woman and saying wink wink we're so naughty like some high school girl with her friends. A letter that no one ever produced or mentioned until now.
We knew the hitpieces were coming. We even had pre-leaks like a week ago or something.
Anything is possible, but this does not make me any more likely to believe Trump is guilty of the big stuff.
Just release the fucking lists, or whatever documentation you have, as well as any reports or memos about why it is or is not genuine. And go after the people that the government believes are genuine. We know there are some. GET THEM.
Government Doesn't Protect Pedophiles Challenge (Impossible.)
At least the Democrats (are pretending to) care about heinous child abuse now. That's something.
Anything is possible, but this does not make me any more likely to believe Trump is guilty of the big stuff.
You have to reconcile this with several other facts.
Biden didn't release it. Why? If it's small stuff (which I think is the case, at least in these documents), then it would make no difference. If it's big stuff, then it's valuable blackmail that they don't want to burn.
WSJ is now reporting on it, if accurate. Why? If it's big stuff, obviously this was not going to happen because it risks the entire Epstein op, if it's a op. On the other hand, if it's small stuff, it damages Trump while there being no impediment to people leaking it.
Trump is sperging out. That is compatible with both big stuff and small stuff. Like I said, I can see someone telling Trump that he's in the files only for him to say: "WRONG! OBAMA WROTE IT! They don't exist! PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!"
"If accurate" is the key here. I have zero reason to believe it is accurate.
It's more likely a bunch of Trump's people are in the files. Lutnick for starters probably, since it's weird he's suddenly hovering around Trump in these meetings.
Also, Trump notoriously sucks at explaining himself. It's actually not as insane as it sounds that the files were modified, to make them more damaging to Trump, so he can't release them. Again, Trump has absolutely shit the bed, but there's so much going on here it's hard to tell what is what, and we won't know until more comes out, if that ever happens.
Core point is, as always, the legacy media saying it has practically zero effect on what I believe. Trump was vulnerable to this angle of attack, because he made a fool of himself, so they're attacking from this angle. It's more anti-Trump hoaxes.
"Biden didn't release it. Why? If it's small stuff (which I think is the case, at least in these documents), then it would make no difference. If it's big stuff, then it's valuable blackmail that they don't want to burn."
This, I think, is why Trump has reacted the way he has to the entire Epstein files thing, he is being told by deep state actors he stupidly surrounds himself with that he is all over the files.
They are fucking lying, like they always do, but Trump, boomer that he is, still consults with TV and print media for his news. I swear, the day the last boomer dies, the cable and TV news networks might as well shut down, because NOBODY but boomers watch them.
First NYT and now WSJ? Articles that are the equivalent of "trust me bro" and could have been filled under opinion pieces from 2 of the most hard core propaganda sources masquerading as journalism?
Why would you even post it? If anything it makes Trump seem innocent.
This has as much credibility as toilet paper, ESPECIALLY after 'Trump's birthday letter'
Get someone willing to blow the whistle or get sued at this point..
Eh, Trump said that he didn't draw, even though there were other drawings by him at about the same time, and that he doesn't use the word 'enigma'.
On the Epstein issue, Trump's credibility is very low for me, so if it's him vs. the WSJ, I'm going with the WSJ.
This isn't even directly damaging, because the article itself downplays what kind of context it was in. But I can imagine Trump saying: "FAKE!!!! OBAMA WROTE IT! He wrote it in Hunter Biden's bathroom, it's disgusting! No release of this HOAX!" It explains everything about his behavior.
See I'm opposite, even now after the Epstein files release debacle, Trump's credibility is higher than the WSJ.
Then again, I also think my 2 year old nephew that likes to see if he can lick his own toes has more credibility than the WSJ...
I have no doubt in my mind, these media institutions know MORE than they let on about Epstein, I bet a few of the higher execs were INVOLVED in the seedier side, because who better to blackmail than media? But more than anything, I can NEVER trust the kind of people where the only factor in supporting a policy is who's pushing it not the policy in itself.
You've got to be kidding me.
Easily one of the dumbest things Antonio has ever said, and the competition is fierce.
Sorry that you're so bad at elementary logic then.
Not at all. Trump says that the Epstein Files don't exist, and then they're written by Obama, and then that's a hoax. He's demonstrably lying.
WSJ may well be lying, but it is not demonstrably lying.
Result: WSJ is more trustworthy on this subject than Trump.
Well...that's kind of silly.
Trump has shit the bed, but the WSJ has shit the bed a lot more frequently and consistently. I've been very disappointed in Trump on this issue, but that doesn't mean I'm trusting the WSJ.
Not on this particular topic.
On all topics.
If you have no credibility on anything else, sorry, no, you don't get credibility just because you're against someone who also has a credibility problem.
Not how it works.
I'm not giving them credibility just because Trump has none.
The reason they win the credibility battle is because they at least cited something to back up their claim. Regardless of what that something is, it is more credible than "Trust me bro. This shit's fake and I can prove it, but I'm too busy doing other stuff. Besides, you're a loser and I don't want your support if you even care about this."
What, what's their citation?
No, it's exactly "Trust me, bro."
Their "trust me bro" included the effort of at least faking a letter. Trump's is that he knows it's a scam but he isn't going to show us a damn thing.
You seem to think I see the WSJ as the bastions of journalism. I don't. They are absolutely terrible. That doesn’t change the fact that they have handled the Epstein story better than Trump has. This isn't saying much at all, because there isn't a single thing Trump could have done to handle this worse. He is doing everything in his power to hand them the win.
Emply Gell Mann Amnesia Effect to your benefit, for once in your life.
WSJ is a media mouthpiece for the Deep State, and nothing they put out is to believed.
NOTHING
I don't believe it because the WSJ says it. I find it somewhat believable because it's consistent with all the other facts, namely Trump sperging out like a madman.
As for Deep State mouthpiece, yes, but Trump has done everything for the Deep State since May. Why?
Both the WSJ and Trump are not trustworthy.
In the Epstein case, Trump is demonstrably lying by the mere fact of the law of non-contradiction (hoax, written by Obama, don't exist). Likelihood of Trump being right: 0.
In the Epstein case, the WSJ is not (yet) demonstrably lying, but its track record is also not great. Likelihood of WSJ being right: somewhere close to 0, but not 0 itself.
Not silly at all.
But why give any credence to an organization you say has a near zero likelihood of being correct?
If someone has a 1% track record of being honest, and they tell me something...I'm going to bet the other way. Even if the other guy is also being squirrelly. Say what you want about Trump on this, he's still got a better record overall, and was never the most articulate, or honest on some of the details.
There's just no way I'm taking WSJ and anonymous sources as anything of value, when they did this exact same bullshit for a decade.
If it's fake then the WSJ just opened themselves up to the biggest fucking lawsuit from Trump, it's a slam-dunk for him.
Except it's all anonymous sources, sources familiar with the matter, etc.
They did it for the last decade, and got away with it nearly every time.
It's wild people here are lending WSJ any credibility whatsoever.
Those are my feelings as well. He has no leg to stand on with this. At this point, he can release everything or fuck off, because his word doesn't mean shit.
neither does wsj. And you support them this time? Hypocrite much?
The WSJ isn't the side telling me to ignore my lying eyes and ears on this one. Trump could easily win me over to his side, but he refuses to.
WSJ is asking exactly that since they provide no proof of anything and they're TDS consumed journos. The more WSJ and NYT are saying something the less likely it is to be true.
You can't tell me that you believe that birthday letter? It seems so cartoonish almost like a plot for a Sunday morning cartoon. It just happened to appear now and not during the last 9 years and so perfectly and comically accuses Trump. Also we don't actually have the letter and we need to trust WSJ that has seen the letter and didn't take a picture of it.
The more the left is trying to force the Trump is a pedo angle the more they're going to help Trump.
All they had to do was hammer in that Trump needs to to release the files but they just have to be lying and manipulative in typical leftist fashion. The files was one of the few things both the right and the left can agree upon even if it is for different reasons since the left love their pedos.
Truth is, I don't know, and neither does anyone here.
Whether it's authentic or not, that's fairly common for authentic documents. That's what sources often set as conditions.
What is more likely:
The TDS consumed WSJ made this up
Trump wrote a birthday letter drawing a naked woman and saying wink wink we're so naughty like some high school girl with her friends. A letter that no one ever produced or mentioned until now.
That birthday letter was so cringe, it seemed that it was done by Team Rocket.
Quite the coincidence, if true. Since May, Trump has bombed Iran, resumed sending weapons to fake Ukraine and suppressed the Epstein Files.
We knew the hitpieces were coming. We even had pre-leaks like a week ago or something.
Anything is possible, but this does not make me any more likely to believe Trump is guilty of the big stuff.
Just release the fucking lists, or whatever documentation you have, as well as any reports or memos about why it is or is not genuine. And go after the people that the government believes are genuine. We know there are some. GET THEM.
Government Doesn't Protect Pedophiles Challenge (Impossible.)
At least the Democrats (are pretending to) care about heinous child abuse now. That's something.
You have to reconcile this with several other facts.
Biden didn't release it. Why? If it's small stuff (which I think is the case, at least in these documents), then it would make no difference. If it's big stuff, then it's valuable blackmail that they don't want to burn.
WSJ is now reporting on it, if accurate. Why? If it's big stuff, obviously this was not going to happen because it risks the entire Epstein op, if it's a op. On the other hand, if it's small stuff, it damages Trump while there being no impediment to people leaking it.
Trump is sperging out. That is compatible with both big stuff and small stuff. Like I said, I can see someone telling Trump that he's in the files only for him to say: "WRONG! OBAMA WROTE IT! They don't exist! PRESIDENTIAL HARASSMENT!"
Conclusion: it's likely small stuff.
"If accurate" is the key here. I have zero reason to believe it is accurate.
It's more likely a bunch of Trump's people are in the files. Lutnick for starters probably, since it's weird he's suddenly hovering around Trump in these meetings.
Also, Trump notoriously sucks at explaining himself. It's actually not as insane as it sounds that the files were modified, to make them more damaging to Trump, so he can't release them. Again, Trump has absolutely shit the bed, but there's so much going on here it's hard to tell what is what, and we won't know until more comes out, if that ever happens.
Core point is, as always, the legacy media saying it has practically zero effect on what I believe. Trump was vulnerable to this angle of attack, because he made a fool of himself, so they're attacking from this angle. It's more anti-Trump hoaxes.
Funny how the Biden administration didn’t use this despite throwing everything and the kitchen sink at Trump.
"Biden didn't release it. Why? If it's small stuff (which I think is the case, at least in these documents), then it would make no difference. If it's big stuff, then it's valuable blackmail that they don't want to burn."
then it must be true! Glad they kept quiet about it forever until just this very moment it became trendy for leftards to request the list
This, I think, is why Trump has reacted the way he has to the entire Epstein files thing, he is being told by deep state actors he stupidly surrounds himself with that he is all over the files.
They are fucking lying, like they always do, but Trump, boomer that he is, still consults with TV and print media for his news. I swear, the day the last boomer dies, the cable and TV news networks might as well shut down, because NOBODY but boomers watch them.
You got it. Probably a threat to manipulate Trump into NOT releasing any more files.
First NYT and now WSJ? Articles that are the equivalent of "trust me bro" and could have been filled under opinion pieces from 2 of the most hard core propaganda sources masquerading as journalism?
Why would you even post it? If anything it makes Trump seem innocent.