I should think it unbelievably risky to leave out other trips/interactions because there is likely someone out there who could come forward to contradict. Especially given the very public solicitation for information today with the 1-800 number.

I hope it is the whole truth, too.

been heralded to the world years ago.

Clinton has had 24-hour secret service protection since 1992. So if needed, there would be records.

(I used to think it was ridiculous to protect former presidents forever, but then I think of the bomber and the coast guard guy who were targeting both Obama and Clinton... sad, but necessary, the protection.)

probably starting about the first time epstein made news on this because they wanted to distract from the republican who actually were involved

i will bet limbaugh is leading the same chorus again and for the same reason

be considered worse than rump after sexually assaulting many women, which he clearly has done.

Your turn, mr trump.

That kind of information would be nice to provide.

Don't know why Yashar would get an exclusive.....

I hate it when I do that.

I await Dotard's statement.

Unfortunately, for our current media, that's like the word of God.

They'll send an army of investigative reporters to check Clinton's claim. They'll send one to get Donnie Shit for Brains perspective on what they will call a witch-hunt.

When Dems take back political power in this country, there should be some journalist that go to jail.

and I'm pointing out that "journalist" helped Donnie Dollhands way more than Vladimir Putin did.

Maybe jail is a bit of hyperbole. But at the least, we can work to help make sure that folks like Chuck Todd, Joe Scarborough, Maggie Haberman and some others, spend the rest of their days reporting on the obituaries in some Dumbfuckistan 'Murika shithole.

Preach, brother, preach!

(Or sister, as the case may be.)

Oddly enough, no one on DU has the power to affect or begin the actions you recite (although I get that scolding others often allows us the self-righteousness we may not otherwise be afforded).

And sometimes our visceral reactions are often just that... visceral reactions.

That needs to be challenged whenever it presents itself. Unless of course the poster is doing so facetiously and is a parody of right wing mentality.

Putting journalists in jail is not really a funny or joking matter.

Do I think that people like Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Ingraham, and others should have a platform from which to spread lies? No. Absolutely not. I don't think that it is the government's responsibility however, to silence them.

or asking follow up questions of certain politicians who don't take kindly to journalists who don't simply take dictation, smile and nod.

He said he didn't know anything about that, and to ask Michael Cohen. (the bus had just arrived...the one Trump was throwing Cohen under)

spot of shit on his asshole that their tongues missed.

.... the free press will once again be given the respect that it deserves.

Fore.

They have to conflate Trump's relationship with Epstein with Clinton's. It's literally all they've got to hurl about as this whole child sex trafficking case explodes around them.

There will always be people who believe whatever confirms their biases. Just like the (back in the news today as the conspiracy it was/is) Seth Rich story. People still believe it as true even though it's throughly been debunked.

is about the same as airports in 1776.

I think probably the time machine in Timeless show (great) must have been involved.

Good to hear, but if he engaged in illegal behavior with Trump and his buddies, then he must suffer the same legal consequences.

Which is the difference between liberals and so-called conservatives. We don’t lose our morals when we find out we may be wrong about one of our friends.

but I've already seen trolls in Yahoo News comments saying Clinton has been to the Island dozens of times and that he regularly ditched his SS detail to make such trips. I don't believe any of that, of course, but that's what we're up against. The deplorables will read that crap and believe every word of it.

You just can’t deal with some people. You just have to defeat them and then ignore them to death.

That's pretty much impossible.
If this is Clinton's statement, and it's true, then he may very well be in the clear.
However, I would like to know if there was any interaction with Epstein prior to Clinton's presidency.

but it's easy for the deplorables to believe it. They don't even need any proof.

that is right before their eyes.

in the movies and on TV.

proving Clinton Derangement Syndrome is still alive and kicking.

Internet Trump trolls not liking this at all.

Denials to preempt speculation is not worthy of a former President, imo.

They clearly wanted to. If Bill was involved, he's gotta face the music. But I seriously doubt it: He had enough action from grown women. Pedophiles prefer children because they fear grown-ups. And they're sick.

He didn't punish her or threaten her. There will always be women attracted to powerful men, and he has incredible charisma. I know people who have met him around town. He's irresistible.

He should have kept his pants zipped, but, hey, he didn't use the office to hurt anyone.

you do know that dozens of media outlets are asking him for a statement?

Zip it, indeed. Part II.

of investigative reporters all over it.

right now to get to the bottom of this. "You're not gonna believe what they find."

How's the audit going?

to explain this away, lol.

from the русский

Last edited Mon Jul 8, 2019, 08:02 PM - Edit history (1)

For the most part, pages with multiple valid, reliable sources are pretty solid. The self-filtering aspect is better than most people realize.

That doesn't make it perfect, of course, but few sources are.

But there's no reason to do that, I suppose. Clinton isn't thought to be involved in the criminal activities.

But I think it's unlikely he didn't know about Epstein's "hobby." Word gets around in certain circles. But big donations to his charity may have ruled the day.

Sounds as if he may have found out about his "hobby" and cut him loose.

An interesting read.

Facebook is loaded with the "26 times" nonsense from right-wingers. One of them probably changed the entry.

Clinton says he's never been there.

The RW crap is nonsense, of course. It's deflection.

Seen that several times today alone.

A single trip may consist of multiple flights.

Good to know!

Found Fox was the wiki source.

Link to tweet

you can bet Bill’s narrow association with Epstein in furtherance of his philanthropy was gone over with a forensic fingerprint brush and tweezers.

If there was anything that incriminated Bill Clinton, republicans would have sprung it on Hillary in 2016.

Bill, zip it

That can be visibly verified. But of course, when o comes to the Clintons, they are guilty until proven innocent, and even then, they remain guilty.

I'm not a lawyer. I've left the past in my dustbin of wishes, dreams and failure to act.

heard republicans repeating it a million times by now, in particular to smudge Hillary in 2016.

I guess to soften the public to what we’re seeing now.

We know that Epstein was seeking rich and powerful people to entrap and keep in his back pocket, and for this reason I can’t rule out that Bill knows more than he’s letting on. But his statement in the OP is plausible, so I will not comment further on that without evidence.

But I think the main reason the right didn’t use this in 2016 is Trump’s involvement is far, far worse. He and Epstein go back decades, and Trump is quoted as knowing about the young girls. (There are also rumors on Twitter that Trump was surreptitiously recorded abusing a child.)

So rather than use this case, they made up ridiculous conspiracy theories that their gullible followers bought. Projection, deflection and distraction.

he'd be making anything but a clear factual recounting right now.

ITS FOUR NOT TWENTY SIX.

Nobody has accused him and Republican efforts to bring his name into are nothing more than deflection. Bill has a weakness for women but he would never be dumb enough to involve himself in something like this.

could have shown this.

S*%$ gettin real.

Looks kinda smarmy.

And why bother to have that food on the table behind them for a get together? The women don't eat.

Hey! Melanie's boobs grew since that time, too! Amazing!

so no, it wasn't a double date

That Kos post is about

Quote/disclaimer:

Posting this as I found it following tweets related to the OP. NOT intended as commentary, just something I dug up from down the rabbit hole following the tweet above. I imagine that there will be other examples of those trying to make guilty by association arguments. Gird you loins.

Wasn't Trump there, too?

Perhaps it was just the Clintons showing some gratitude for when they used Epstein's plane?

Epstein's sleaziness wasn't exactly a secret, even if the extent of it wasn't as well known then as it is now.

not being all that aware of it. Either way, it saved the foundation a lot of money.

He didn't give a shit about the Clinton foundation, he obviously has ulterior motives of some kind and there's no way this scumbag ever did anything for anyone out of the goodness of his heart. Now Clinton is paying the real price of those "free" flights.

She's a British socialite who has moved in privileged circles in NY since the very early 90s. It would be strange if she didn't know and socialize with the Clintons.

It was no secret that she rounded up underage girls for Epstein. Why would Clinton associate with her if he wouldn't associate with Epstein? She was every bit as unsavory.

I don't have enough intimate knowledge of the Clintons and New York society to speculate on why they would or would not associate with her. I just don't find it odd that a socialite in that area and in that circle would be at a 500+ guest wedding. It doesn't mark her as a close acquaintance is all I'm saying. I'm just not reading anything into it one way or the other.

Daughter's wedding. But that's just me. I'm not in high society.

It's entirely possible they didn't know her to be a procurer of underage girls.

I have no idea if they knew or not, but her presence at the wedding makes me think they either did not know or if they heard whispers may have thought it was vicious gossip. Or she was a plus one. No idea. Haven't seen the guest list and don't know where they drew the line on whom to invite. With 500+ guests I gather they went outside a circle of close friends on that one.

Just think it's stretching it to implicate the Clintons simply because of a society wedding. I'll wait until more information comes out before I pass judgment. But that's just me.

Facts will come out in this case, that's all that matters. I certainly hope nothing is found on Bill, but the chips will fall where they may.

There was absolutely no reason for him to publish one, so why did he? I think it's quite likely there is nothing to find so he's safe in drawing attention, and it makes the men who don't get out in front and explain their relationships with Epstein look like they have something to fear. I think it's a definite shot across the Trump bow. Could be a savvy play in the long run or fade into irrelevance. Guess we'll see.

The right wing noise machine was blaring at full volume. Some of their talking points were even being gleefully reported here at DU.

What I said after watching his, "I didn't have sexual relations with that woman" speech. I guess time will tell unless Epstein's friends Trump and Barr do everything they can to obstruct justice again.