this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
434 points (98.9% liked)

politics

24617 readers
2258 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Elon Musk has said an Axios report that the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had concluded there was no evidence of a Jeffrey Epstein client list was the "final straw".

The report also said the agencies had concluded there was no credible evidence the disgraced financier and pedophile blackmailed high-profile and prominent individuals, and confirmed that surveillance footage showed Epstein had killed himself in prison.

"So... umm... then what is Ghislaine Maxwell in prison for?" Musk posted to his X platform, referring to Epstein's former girlfriend and associate who procured underage girls for him to abuse.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz 98 points 1 day ago (4 children)

As a Republican this Leaves me ANGRY because I THOUGHT the CLINTONS were on that List but if Trump, who was Epstein's Best Friend, says there is No List then that means the CLINTONS never Raped kids either!

[–] nolannice@lemmy.world 50 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Honestly I think it's kind of funny the administration is trying to bury this, because there is already very public information on Trump being a rapist and making creepy remarks towards young girls.

If it releases with him on it his supporters would absolutely do the mental gymnastics required to use it as proof the liberal elite are an evil cabal, while also insisting that dear leader is blameless.

[–] TheCleric@lemmy.org 22 points 23 hours ago

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/trump-epstein-2016-complaint.pdf

This court filing is horrific and names both trump and Epstein as defendants. The victim withdrew after the deposition, if I’m remembering correctly.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 20 hours ago

an evil cabal

There’s that word, which Marjorie TG mispronounced as cable in a Qanon promotional video years ago. Fucking dumbass.

[–] MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They would do mental gymnastics to wave off dear leader fucking little girls, yes.

Would they forgive him for fucking little boys though?

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 16 hours ago

Is he a Catholic priest? Survey sayyys...

[–] AmidFuror@fedia.io 3 points 1 day ago

Trump infiltrated the pedo ring to bring it down, naturally.

[–] Manalith@midwest.social 1 points 5 hours ago

Really wouldn't be that hard, they could point to several passages in the Bible that could justify him being a rapist and paedophile because they took it wildly out of context. IIRC Mary was something like 13 when she's was betrothed to Joseph.

The Bible contradicts a lot about how these guys handle stuff while invoking it, but that's one area where, because of the times in which it's referencing, there are examples that fit their narrative. Honestly I'm surprised they haven't used that already, but it's probably because none of them have actually read it.

[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 32 points 1 day ago

I know the /s is there (mentally) but the idea that someone is mad that kids weren't raped is abhorrent.

[–] lukaro@lemmy.zip 8 points 7 hours ago

Only a republican could be upset that kids weren't raped.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world -1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Bro he's good friends with the Clinton's too

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

You don't need an apostrophe to make something plural.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

He's is a conjunction of "he" and "is", so what the devil are you on about.

[–] SpaceShort@feddit.uk 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

He's referring to "Clinton's"

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It's not plural it's possessive.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 34 minutes ago (1 children)
[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 28 minutes ago (1 children)

Yes, it's basic English. 's after a pronoun generally doesn't denote plural but rather possession in this case implying the Clintons have been purchased.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to be fuckin weird about it but yes, I am in fact sure.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 minutes ago

So, if it's possessive, you can replace it with a possessive pronoun right?

"It was John's friend" -> "It was his friend"

"The Hamilton's house is white" -> "Their house is white"

"We could all smell The Rock's cooking" -> "We could all smell his cooking"

"The motorcade was because of the Clintons' visit" -> "The motorcade was because of their visit."

Note, that when it's a couple it's both plural and possessive, and the rule in that case is to add the apostrophe after the s.

So, for your sentence:

"Bro he's good friends with the Clinton's too" -> "Bro, he's good friends with theirs too"

Are you sure it's not just a plural:

"Bro he's good friends with the Clintons too" -> "Bro, he's good friends with them too"

If it's just plural, you could replace "the Clintons" with "the Clinton family" which is clearly not possessive and it wouldn't change the sentence:

"Bro he's good friends with the Clinton family"

Also, if you insist it's possessive and not plural, are you saying it's the possessive form of "The Clinton"? Is that how you refer to Bill?