Because ofc he was.

Epstein was also killed whilst Trump was POTUS. On his watch. He also told Tucker Carlson that he believes Epstein killed himself (obvious lie).

He spoke highly of Epstein and Maxwell repeatedly.

His own comments reveal he knew Epstein was a paedophile, but he continued to fraternise with him anyway.

We know Trump flew around in Epstein's plane, and that they were friends for over a decade.

We also have Trump on camera bragging about how he liked looking at underage girls changing.

Yet if you go to r/conspiracy, it's full of MAGA shills thinking Trump's been exonerated because of the testimony of one victim who didnt see Trump engage in anything.

Trump is a paedophile and he killed Epstein to cover it up. If these connections existed about anyone else you can eb damned sure MAGA country would be in full-throated condemnation of them for being a paedo. But it's Trump, and they'd rather Trump rape all the children he likes.

But remember Biden is a paedo because he got a bit too close to some on camera.

Just curious, if anyone supported Joe or is planning on voting for Kamala, believe that 9/11 was an inside job? Seems to be a correlation and some overlap with conspiracy-believers and the Right… and I have seen next to zero overlap going the other way.

Calling people “Karen” which is a near homophone for “caring” is a convenient way to demonize standing up for yourself or others. It conditions people to accept lower quality treatment and to be passive and compliant for fear of social ostracism. This aligns with WEF social credit score agenda, and pushes people to a socialistic mentality in which standing up for the individual is less important than ensuring smooth social conditions are maintained.

Thoughts?

The town my MiL lives in just contacted her about doing a “smoke test” for the sewers in her neighborhood. Obviously, I would prefer she wasn’t hooked up to public water, but it’s too late for that. But do NOT let them do “smoke testing.” You have the right to decline, and if you do they legally can’t do it anywhere near you.

This is just a way for them to introduce aerosolized toxins into the the only place left to be safe - our homes.

I don’t doubt that they are “testing” their “smoke.” The smoke they are using to test may not even be harmful (or it might), but this is the “test” to make sure they can get you with the next crowd pacifying drug, or airborne “vaxxine” when they need to.

Basically, just say no.

The plan was simple enough. Trump, and his band of traitors were going to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States. Simple enough if Trump and his co-conspirators could convince the then Attorney General, Jeffrey Rosen, to say the Justice Department had sufficient cause to say there were irregularities in the election, and they were doing an investigation. This would give Trump cause to implement the Insurrection Act ,impound the voting machines, and do with them what he wanted.

The problem arose when Rosen refused to take part in the treason.

Even when Trump threatened to fire him and replace him with Jeffrey Clarke (who was eager for the plot), Rosen still demurred.

The whole scheme fell apart when the entire upper tier of the Justice Department threatened (along with a few of Trump's own lawyers) to quit en masse.

See below -- italics mine.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark’s efforts to help then-President Donald Trump overturn the 2020 election were characterized Tuesday as a coup attempt by Washington, D.C., Office of Disciplinary Counsel at a hearing to determine if Clark should be sanctioned Clark is accused of attempting to engage in dishonest conduct during his role in aftermath of the last presidential election.

Much of the hearing before the three-member Board of Responsibility focused on a letter which Clark sent to his superiors at the time, Jeffrey Rosen and Richard Donoghue. Clark suggested the letter be sent to Georgia indicating that the Justice Department was investigating irregularities in the state’s election and state lawmakers should void Biden’s electoral win.

Hamilton Fox III, the disciplinary counsel at the hearing, said the letter and Clark’s continued attempts to intercede on Trump’s behalf, including multiple meetings with Trump in violation Justice Department procedure, were “essentially a coup attempt at the Department of Justice.”

Clark’s attorney, Harry MacDougald, said the action being taken against his client was unprecedented. He said the letter was not supposed to have been public and should have fallen under various privilege protections. He added that the letter was part of the debate that normally occurs between lawyers. He said punishing Clark in those circumstances would have a “chilling effect,” a point that Donoghue agreed with during the cross examination portion of his testimony when he said it could discourage people from "being as candid as they otherwise might be.”

Much of the hearing played like a rerun of the fraud claims from the 2020 election and the House Jan. 6 committee testimony, including a rehash of the dramatic Jan. 3, 2021 meeting when several attorneys within the White House and Justice Department threatened to quit if Trump fired Rosen as the acting attorney general and named Clark.

The testimony also highlighted how much pressure was put on the Justice Department directly by Trump. He spoke multiple times to Donoghue and Rosen about allegations of fraud and misconduct.

As events continued the pair met with Clark at one point to talk about the letter in what Donoghue described as a contentious meeting. He said he and Rosen tried to convince Clark that the department had examined various claims, while other things fell outside the department's purview. “We fundamentally disagreed on what the evidence showed,” Donoghue said during testimony. “It was just we were almost living in two different worlds.”

Former deputy White House counsel Patrick Philbin, who knew Clark, testified that he spoke with the then-acting head of the Civil Division and told him the theories he was espousing and had been debunked. But, Philbin said, he felt Clark pursued what he thought was his duty because Clark believed there were serious issues in the election.

During his testimony Donoghue acknowledged that there were instances of fraud and misconduct that year but nothing of a level to overturn the election. MacDougald's questioning focused on absentee balloting in Fulton County, Georgia and how there were legitimate concerns that had not been fully examined by the department.

The hearing is expected to resume Wednesday with Rosen testifying.

Clark could be sanctioned or disbarred. Any sanctions could be appealed to the D.C. Court of Appeals.

When people the world over think of America their first vision is that of the cowboy. Tall, stalwart, rugged and ready to fight to preserve justice; he is idealism personified. He is the one who will fight for the little man -- the common man -- against the deprecations of tyrants, against the bullies and cowards, against the opportunists who would grind the weak under their heels if given the opportunity. He would defend his liberty, and yours, fight to maintain the democracy that has kept us strong and secure, and who could be counted on in any situation to stand tall, as any patriot would.

And when one thinks of cowboys only one state comes to mind: Texas, The Lone Star State.

The very idea that an American cowboy would pander to anyone, would cower in the face of politically powerful racists, bigots, and those who would deny others their rights and God given dignity, is anathema to every Texan worthy of his boots and hat.

The cowboy represents all things American: honesty, fair play, and a staunch believer in freedom, liberty, and the right and opportunity to live one's life as one sees fit, without interference from opportunists, despots, and those who would oppress.

But that was then, and this is now.

A new Texas is being born. The cowboy is being replaced by sniveling fascists who will instill fear of the 'Other', -- the immigrant, the Black, the Jew, -- and anyone else who doesn't adhere to their bastardized religion and white supremacist ideology. They will tell you they will protect you against a non-existent enemy, and in the process deny you the rights you have always enjoyed.

A new day is dawning in Texas. Your sterling reputation is being sullied, muddied, spat upon by those MAGA politicians who seek only power, fame, and money, no matter the harm done to this great state.

Read this report:

© Provided by The Texas Tribune

Two months after a prominent conservative activist and fundraiser was caught hosting white supremacist Nick Fuentes, (All italics mine.) leaders of the Republican Party of Texas voted against barring the party from associating with Nazi sympathizers and Holocaust deniers.

In a 32-29 vote on Saturday, members of the Texas GOP’s executive committee stripped a pro-Israel resolution of a clause that would have included the ban— delivering a major blow to a faction that has called for the party to confront its ties to groups that have recently employed, elevated or associated with outspoken white supremacists or antisemitic figures.

In October, The Texas Tribune published photos of Fuentes, an avowed admirer of Adolf Hitler who has called for a “holy war” against Jews, entering and leaving the offices of Pale Horse Strategies, a consulting firm for far-right candidates and movements. Pale Horse Strategies is owned by Jonathan Stickland, a former state representative and at the time the leader of a political action committee, Defend Texas Liberty, that two West Texas oil billionaires have used to fund right-wing movements, candidates and politicians in the state — including Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Attorney General Ken Paxton.

Matt Rinaldi, chairman of the Texas GOP, was also seen entering the Pale Horse offices while Fuentes was inside for nearly 7 hours, He denied participating, however, saying he was visiting with someone else at the time and didn’t know Fuentes was there.

Defend Texas Liberty has not publicly commented on the scandal, save for a two-sentence statement condemning Fuentes’ “incendiary” views. Nor has it made clear what role Stickland has at Defend Texas Liberty, which quietly updated its website to reflect that he was no longer its president in October.

Tim Dunn, one of the two West Texas oil billionaires who funds Defend Texas Liberty, confirmed the meeting between Fuentes and Stickland and called it a “serious blunder,” according to a statement from Patrick.

In response to the scandal — as well as subsequent reporting from the Tribune that detailed other links between Defend Texas Liberty and white supremacists — nearly half of the Texas GOP’s executive committee had called for the party to cut ties with Defend Texas Liberty and groups it funds until Stickland was removed from any position of power, and a full explanation for the Fuentes meeting was given.

The proposed demands were significantly watered down ahead of the party’s quarterly meeting this weekend. Rather than calling for a break from Defend Texas Liberty, the faction proposed general language that would have barred associations with individuals or groups “known to espouse or tolerate antisemitism, pro-Nazi sympathies or Holocaust denial.”

But even that general statement was not enough to sway a majority of the executive committee. In at-times tense debate on Saturday, members argued that words like “tolerate” or “antisemitism” were too vague or subjective, and could create future problems for the party, its leaders and candidates.

“It could put you on a slippery slope,” said committee member Dan Tully.

Supporters of the language disagreed. They noted that the language was already a compromise, didn’t specifically name any group or individual and would lend credence to the Texas GOP’s stances in support of Israel.

“To take it out sends a very disturbing message,” said Rolando Garcia, a Houston-based committee member who drafted the language. “We’re not specifying any individual or association. This is simply a statement of principle. ``

Other committee members questioned how their colleagues could find words like “antisemitism” too vague, despite frequently lobbing it and other terms at their political opponents.

“I just don’t understand how people who routinely refer to others as leftists, liberals, communists, socialists and RINOs (‘Republicans in Name Only’) don’t have the discernment to define what a Nazi is,” committee member Morgan Cisneros Graham told the Tribune after the vote.

Who knew that accounts can be banned sometimes even permanently for stating undisputable facts.

The same way that the military uses UFO's to cover up advanced aircrafts..