Uh huh.
What if trump is one of the names.
We'll see Marjorie, we'll see...
this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2025
494 points (98.8% liked)
politics
25615 readers
2896 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think that's part of the point.
Trump got distracted, as he does, and has stopped doing Putin's bidding as far as Ukraine.
Putin doesn't like that, and has reached out to some of his other assets in US government, of which MTG is one. She got vocal about us needing to not strike Iran, which was wildly out of character for her (she generally doesn't give a shit about the world outside of her weird little fantasy version of it, definitely not about geopolitics).
If she's now making noise about Epstein, in a way that breaks from Trump, then I think the reason is that Russia is telling her to, because they think Trump needs to be punished on this issue.
I have no idea, but that's what I think is going on. Trump has lost sight of rule number one in American politics: You dance with them as brung you.
I mean, not really. She's an isolationist conspiracy theorist QAnon type. Those people are anti-war and think the federal government and Hollywood are inundated with pedophiles. Both of those positions are completely in line with everything she has previously said.
She's performatively anti-war, but if you look a little more closely you can see that her "anti-war" always lines up with Russia's "anti-war." She was very upset that Trump wanted to put new sanctions on Russia if a peace deal wasn't reached, for example. An anti-war person would be in favor of going to bat for peace, right?
She also was pretty much the only person who voted against mourning the victims of a massive earthquake in Turkey and Syria. Why? Because (in my opinion) the resolution also had bad things to say about Russia's guy in Syria.
She's willing to break with Trump, when she gets time amid her busy schedule of various nutty things that her trailer-park schizophrenia has convinced her need to be talked about. When has she ever broken with Russia? (By taking a stand against their aggression in Ukraine for example, the same way she takes a stand against Israel or the US or one particular side in the Syrian civil war or these other geopolitical things she occasionally talks about.)
You make a compelling case. I did a quick check and found this:
https://gopforukraine.com/legislator/marjorie-taylor-greene/?rc_ver=1.05
She has no morals, so it wouldn't surprise me.
Yeah. Broadly speaking, the idea of not funding Ukraine's defense might just be some anti-war populism brainrot, but stuff like "Nazis in Ukraine" and talking about Zelensky as a dictator but being super gung-ho about Assad, things like that, start to cast it in a little bit of a different light.
Full disclosure, I got randomly curious and looked up what she thinks about Maduro, and she's 100% opposed to the Russia point of view: https://www.usasocialite.com/marjorie-taylor-controversial-comments/ ... so who knows, maybe I am wrong.
I don't like it when anonymous social media conspiracies start making sense :/
Would it really make any difference if she did say that someone had accused Trump?
"fake news"
load more comments
(1 replies)
There's zero chance she'll actually recite the list
her list will just be Biden, Obama, Mamdani, a long list of jews, other random democrats, every single person she didn't like...
She might, though. She may think that there are enough members of the Republican leadership on the list that releasing all the names would improve her personal position in the party. She's nuts and a loose cannon. There's nothing she wouldn't do to garner more power, I think.
Now having said that, I rather hope she does release all the names, but I think she'll have an accident before she can. I'm pretty sure that there are some very rich and ruthless people on that list who already have a bunch of buried bodies scattered around the world. They might even take pleasure in having the skeleton of a member of the House in their closet.
I think she's angling for a post-trump republican party.
Oh for sure. He's an 80 year old man who's barely holding it together.
I might be alone on this, but I'd love to see some research in 50 years about the role Roe v. Wade plays in this. The Republican party spent a lot of time, effort, and money turning their base into single issue voters, turning "morality" into a weapon. The party has been trying to twist socialism into the new evil I'm morally obligated to oppose for a long while now, but it lacks the same motivation as abortion. If I were making a case to grandmothers in Kansas, I'd much, much easier to make a case against abortion than ending school lunches.
Most of the people I know who are really angry about the Epstein files are Republicans. They're so used to feeling like they and Republican politicians have the moral high ground, and when that's proving itself false, they're freaking out. I now know a ton of Republican single issue voters with Epstein as their issue. They're angry, they're disappointed, and they don't like being told to forget about it. We'll see if that plays out in the next election though, but living in a very red state, there have been lots of little things I've seen over the past 8ish year that wake up one or two people here and there. But this is a little different, at least to my eyes. So many people are outraged about it and staying outraged about it.
I would imagine that Madam Jewish Space Lasers is more concerned about being on the right side of this long term. The files will come out. They've been in too many hands. But, this will be a purity test for Republicans for years. It's what the Iraq War vote became for Democrats. We're you on the right side of history, or the wrong side? For people who aren't implicated by Epstein, it's easy, for people who are, it's hard.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Absolutely. There’s still an agenda here. These Epstein list victims are an opportunity
She's also the 'true believer' kind of crazy. Since she comes from the Q-anon branch of the MAGA cult, that could absolutely put her at odds with Trump if she no longer sees him as a protected part of that belief system.
Is there a non Q-anon branch of MAGA?
MAGA has five core factions, though they have significant overlap. Qanon folks are one, people wishing for a return to a mythologized golden age are another, then racists, followed by fascists, and then the anti-establishment folks who support Trump because they see him as a political outsider. The racists and fascists are happy, but the others periodically produce disillusioned people who sometimes leave MAGA.
load more comments
(1 replies)
She may also see that her constituents really want a list and that giving them something will be her best odds of reelection.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'll believe it when I see it, but it's crazy that there are Dems getting outflanked on Epstein and Gaza by broken clocks.
It isnt really, if you can take yourself away from opposing the idea that they are both as bad as each other. The dems, IMO, are the main reason we ever saw what a Trump presidency looks like at all. The DNC fucking about to make sure Hilary got the nom, when America was begging for change, was nothing short of a self inflicted gunshot to the head.
Bernie, would have beaten Trump. Even Republicans at the time were saying they would vote for Bernie. Trump won, because he was pushing the "Ill drain the swamp" thing. Hilary was just more of the same, woman or not, she was a card carrying member of everything that people wanted to change.
Just last year, AOC, the young and future Bernie, was up for a committee seat that would have been a great stepping stone to running in 28. But the OAPs led by Nancy Pelosi were having none of it, and forced through getting a 75 year old man who was dying of cancer in the seat instead of a 35 year old woman in her prime. 4 months later, that old dude died. And AOC has said she wont run for the seat again, because nothing has changed in the Democratic caucus and they would still vote in old cunts that only care about themselves.
America needs a third option. Because the state of left and right parties is a joke.
load more comments
(3 replies)
It really does show how fucking useless they are.
load more comments
(2 replies)
She'd skip over Trump even if his name appeared 50 times on different lists.
The only reason she's excited is because she is convinced the names are all Democrats. When they turn out to be mostly Republicans, she'll quiet down.
That's the thing about reading the list out loud. You can just skip over the names of the people you want to protect.
Release the files.
She wants to lead the MAGA movement post Trump
Yeah. She is smart enough to see that Trump is losing popularity quickly and may not survive the midterms. Might as well be in front of the issue.
load more comments
(1 replies)
jeez wild for Greene to be in the right side of history for once
Twice, she's surprisingly pro-palestine and a lot better then most dems on calling it a genocide and for an arms embargo to israel.
Horrible on almost everything else though...
I'd bet it's driven by shame and vengeance. She probably actually thought those old smoky backrooms would open for her, but she's probably already realized she's marginally important at best, and is reaching for another 15 minutes before grassroots efforts pry bar her ass out of that seat.
She's grasping for anything she thinks can hurt the people who "wronged" her.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I don't think she understood well what it means
I've been encouraging everyone to treat this as the wacko conspiracy theory that it probably is, but hear me out.
MTG is one of the least credible people in the US Government right now and everyone knows it. She lies her ass off constantly. This is the woman that heard there was a wildfire burning in California and then went straight onto the national news to tell everyone that the Jews did it with their orbital lasers.
What better person to destroy all credibility of the Epstien files? Everyone keeps talking about them and won't stop, so let's "solve" this by siccing our attack liar on it. Even if MTG came right out and read the files on live TV word for word it won't, and indeed can't, be trusted by anyone. She's the one person on the red team that they can safely let spout off about this without anyone taking her seriously. No other Republican will touch it with a ten foot pole, and everyone else talking about it are Democrats.
I honestly believe this is engineered to have the least amount of credibility possible while still technically "doing something" about the situation.
load more comments
(5 replies)
It's hard go to to jail for defamation. Say the names and start a GoFundMe to cover the fine. I'm sure the public will bail you out.
I'm saying this to one of the victims, not MTG.
It's sad, but it makes sense they'd be hesitant to speak out. One of Trump's known rape victims dropped her case because she was receiving extralegal threats, back when Michael Cohen was still his personal fixer and loyal attack dog. And Trump was just a shady failed businessman back then - he has way more power to hurt people right now, and has spent his entire life publicly trying to crush anyone who crosses him.
And that's not even getting into all the other names that'd be on the list. Their cushy lifestyles are far less likely to survive their names coming out than "Teflon Don", so it's likely they'd be willing to do some extremely shady shit to silence their victims. I doubt pedophile rapists are the sort to shy away from operating outside the legal system, after all.
load more comments
(1 replies)
She only supports it because she thinks it's filled with democrats that have done her wrong.
She may be surprised to hear it's probably a mix of both parties and everyone is a horrible person and needs to be in prison for life.
That and it's part of the game.
Use Trump to push things as far as he can, and when that starts falling apart have "allies" start "fighting" him on things to keep the followers on the designated path.
Not overly impressed. Marge will do, or say anything for attention. Jasmine Crockett, on the other hand ....
.....Jasmine doesn't like bleached blonde basic bitches with bad haircuts.
Yeah, that threat might have been effective if not for the fact that she did basically the same thing before and didn't follow through when it didn't work 🙄
Didn't have MTG ever doing anything remotely useful on my bingo card...
load more comments
(1 replies)
Insert Godzilla meme. “Let them fight.”
She'll say every blue name on the floor, and not Trump or any other republican she agrees Wyeth. This is theater, and it's obvious because she has zero integrity.
woke
Part of me is kinda worried that she's going to jump the gun, read a list with lots of errors on it without vetting anything with anyone - just so she can claim "FRIST!!1" - and might just derail the real reckoning because she wanted to feel relevant.
Release the Trump/Epstein files
…has joined forces with Democrats…
lol okay. There’s still an agenda here
view more: next ›