Ghislaine Maxwell Trial (Epstein’s side piece) (18 Viewers)

[nolaspe]

 

[El Caliente]

Kinda ironic because I could see that Rodgers interview being a sketch from The Man Show.

I never watched the Man Show (though I was certainly of age when it aired). Didn't Kimmel and Adam Carolla have some falling out which killed the show? For the record I don't care for Carolla either.

 

[jayd265]

Thanks a lot Covid-19!

Prior to Covid people just thought that Rodgers was a dbag because he was estranged from his family.

Prior to Covid people just thought that Kimmel that was a dbag because he made political jokes; and wore black face.

Then Covid 19 happened and things changed.

Pre 2019 were such simpler times.

For the record I don’t care for either guy’s sense of humor. It’s Mitch Hedberg or nuthin baby!

This x1000. Covid screwed so much up

 

[Saint Jack]

I never watched the Man Show (though I was certainly of age when it aired). Didn't Kimmel and Adam Carolla have some falling out which killed the show? For the record I don't care for Carolla either.

They didn’t have a falling out. They came back to create Crank Yankers.
And when they left Kimmel got the late show.

 

[Dan in Lafayette]

This thread is about to be closed unless the discussion improves. Several members have already been banned from the thread. Do not bring up bring up the Kimmel vs, Rodgers topic anymore. It's worn out and lame.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Good luck with that
===============

Ghislaine Maxwell should have been protected by “immunity provisions” from a previous non-prosecution agreement in Florida, her attorneys have argued.

The disgraced British socialite, 62, returned to the spotlight this week as lawyers launched an appeal over her 2021 sex trafficking conviction.


During an appeal hearing in New York federal court on Tuesday, Diana Fabi Samson – representing Maxwell – referenced the 2008 non prosecution agreement, made by state prosecutors with late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein in Florida.

Ms Samson said not honouring the terms of the agreement would “strike a dagger in the heart of the trust between the government and its citizens.”

“In the end, Ms. Maxwell was prosecuted for crimes that she as a third party beneficiary to the plea agreement in Florida should not have been prosecuted,” Ms Samson said.

Maxwell’s attorneys had previously argued that a juror failed to disclose that they were a sexual abuse victim.……

Ghislaine Maxwell back in court as she appeals 2021 sex trafficking conviction

Maxwell, 62, was sentenced to 20 years behind bars last year, after being found guilty of five counts of trafficking and abusing young girls over decades

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Madmarsha]

Ms Samson said not honouring the terms of the agreement would “strike a dagger in the heart of the trust between the government and its citizens.”

Golly, that would be awful.

 

[bigdaddysaints]

Jeffrey Epstein files set to be released today: 'This will make you sick', says Pam Bondi​

They will release SOME information.
This is to please certain people. Personally, unless you release EVERY single name, any kind of list wil be irrelevant. If they aren't gonna release all the names, its just theatre.... But chances are, there will be no list, just a lot of stuff we already know what that sick dude was up to...

US Attorney General Pam Bondi has confirmed plans to release fresh information about people associated with Jeffrey Epstein.

The Trump-appointed representative, who assumed the role in February 2025, told reporters that her office will release a number of documents this week, including flight logs and "a lot of names."

"I think tomorrow ... you're going to see SOME Epstein information being released by my office," she reportedly confirmed to Fox News.

"This will make you sick,” she added, stopping short of revealing any further details about what her office will release.

MSN

 

[superchuck500]

Jeffrey Epstein files set to be released today: 'This will make you sick', says Pam Bondi​

They will release SOME information.
This is to please certain people. Personally, unless you release EVERY single name, any kind of list wil be irrelevant. If they aren't gonna release all the names, its just theatre.... But chances are, there will be no list, just a lot of stuff we already know what that sick dude was up to...

Agree - they have to release it all or else there's no way to know how selective they have been with it.

 

[Infoman]

I just want whomever partook in this to be held responsible... And I don't care who they are or what "team" they are on...

That said, I am sure no matter what gets released - There will be the typical spin-doctoring, excuses, denial, and rationalizations that come with everything like this for damage control and self preservation purposes...

Personally - I never thought any of this would ever fully come to light due strictly to the mutually assured destruction implications I am sure a full disclosure would have...

Guess it's time to get the popcorn ready...

 

[bigdaddysaints]

i have high doubts names get released.

 

[DavidM]

Agree - they have to release it all or else there's no way to know how selective they have been with it.

What are the legal contraints / consequences for anybody with previous knowledge of the files to reveal anything about information that might be withheld, or to even address the public if they know that any released information appears selectively incomplete?

 

[Saintman2884]

Agree - they have to release it all or else there's no way to know how selective they have been with it.

It would be nice if they did release all of the files and not selectively convenient files related to mostly only certain celebrities or people and not certain select "other people" who knew, were longtime friends of Epstein and not only were likely aware of his past sexual transgressions, but may have participated in some of them. Exposing everyone else's sins or connections to really bad people while "covering up" your own and acting all indignant and morally outraged does fall into a select category of hypocrisy. I hope I'm wrong but why do I get this subconscious feeling that's probably going to be something along the lines here.

 

[Saintman2884]

People actually think Trump was on the list of wrongdoing. If that were the case, the FBI would have already leaked that, years ago.

The FBI can't release or leak information on select celebrities or politicians possible illegal activities or actions with now-disgraced billionaire sexual predators or criminals if their not 100% sure their interactions weren't just platonic or strictly business-related or prove they ever occured. The FBI isn't the National Enquirer that it should engage in gossip-mongering.

Maybe their are long-standing rumors, hearsay and contradictory information on certain celebrities dealing with Epstein that infer some sneeky sheet went on but nothing definitive and when you can't categorically prove any criminal wrongdoing--even if there was at one point---it still doesn't convict anyone except in the court of public opinion and some powerful celebrities, politicians on both sides were very adept over 7 years ago distancing themselves from whatever previous ties they once had to Epstein. Even if a good portion of the American public privately mumbled amongst themselves that they were lying their arses off, Ozzy and gave distinct impressions of being frightfully concerned a few of them just might end up being tied back to him in a negative light.

 

[Optimistic Ozzy]

The FBI can't release or leak information on select celebrities or politicians possible illegal activities or actions with now-disgraced billionaire sexual predators or criminals if their not 100% sure their interactions weren't just platonic or strictly business-related or prove they ever occured. The FBI isn't the National Enquirer that it should engage in gossip-mongering.

Maybe their are long-standing rumors, hearsay and contradictory information on certain celebrities dealing with Epstein that infer some sneeky sheet went on but nothing definitive and when you can't categorically prove any criminal wrongdoing--even if there was at one point---it still doesn't convict anyone except in the court of public opinion and some powerful celebrities, politicians on both sides were very adept over 7 years ago distancing themselves from whatever previous ties they once had to Epstein. Even if a good portion of the American public privately mumbled amongst themselves that they were lying their arses off, Ozzy and gave distinct impressions of being frightfully concerned a few of them just might end up being tied back to him in a negative light.

You'd be surprised what the FBI can do. Like lie to the FISA courts and coverup what ever they want to.