So if you came in possession of the Epstein list…

gantry25 wrote:

You have lost all ability of any kind of critical thinking. You are so far left that it doesn't matter what the truth is you will...

You have lost all ability of any kind of critical thinking. You are so far left that it doesn't matter what the truth is you will find a way to blame president Trump. Wild guess here but, I would imagine you believe that the nuclear treaty with Iran signed in 2015 was effective and that we had no need to bomb them.

ns503 wrote:

Some are so far right they cannot say one word of criticism of POTUS or his administration. Not being able to say one critical word of a...

Some are so far right they cannot say one word of criticism of POTUS or his administration. 

Not being able to say one critical word of a government or politician is absolutely ludicrous, quite frankly.

ns503 wrote:

Some are so far right they cannot say one word of criticism of POTUS or his administration. Not being able to say one critical word of a...

Some are so far right they cannot say one word of criticism of POTUS or his administration. 

Not being able to say one critical word of a government or politician is absolutely ludicrous, quite frankly.

gantry25 wrote:

Hate the way President Trump speaks to other world leaders as if they were children. Can't stand the way he has dealt with Greenland, it's embarrassing...

Hate the way President Trump speaks to other world leaders as if they were children. Can't stand the way he has dealt with Greenland, it's embarrassing. Do not like the childish manner in the way that he gives others nicknames like a seventh grader. Do not like the way he tends to interfere with the federal reserve. I could go on, there are a lot of things I do not like about president Trump. 

gantry25 wrote:

You have lost all ability of any kind of critical thinking. You are so far left that it doesn't matter what the truth is you will...

You have lost all ability of any kind of critical thinking. You are so far left that it doesn't matter what the truth is you will find a way to blame president Trump. Wild guess here but, I would imagine you believe that the nuclear treaty with Iran signed in 2015 was effective and that we had no need to bomb them.

APLMAN99 wrote:

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes...

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes that he needed to, it’s actually because he pulled out of the treaty. 

ns503 wrote:

Some are so far right they cannot say one word of criticism of POTUS or his administration. Not being able to say one critical word of a...

Some are so far right they cannot say one word of criticism of POTUS or his administration. 

Not being able to say one critical word of a government or politician is absolutely ludicrous, quite frankly.

gantry25 wrote:

Hate the way President Trump speaks to other world leaders as if they were children. Can't stand the way he has dealt with Greenland, it's embarrassing...

Hate the way President Trump speaks to other world leaders as if they were children. Can't stand the way he has dealt with Greenland, it's embarrassing. Do not like the childish manner in the way that he gives others nicknames like a seventh grader. Do not like the way he tends to interfere with the federal reserve. I could go on, there are a lot of things I do not like about president Trump. 

The real Sasquatch wrote:

Than what's wrong with others criticizing him then?  A lot of the complaints people have about what he is doing is the precedents he is setting...

Than what's wrong with others criticizing him then?  A lot of the complaints people have about what he is doing is the precedents he is setting that other Presidents can use to be able to do things in the same improper ways.

If You like some of the things Trump has done that  were not done the correct way as far as congress approving if that is how its been, and how its described as how it should be done in the constitution .   Trump doing these things sets the precedent for a future Democrat to go in and undo everything  the same way Trump has done it. And swing things harder the other way.  When things get done the right way its much harder for  a future president to undo them.  

Example , the tariff's .   It takes a good amount of time to build and setup a totally new factory. By the time a totally new factory is built a new President will be in office and they could undo the tariffs with a stroke of an autopen, that were meant to help bring those factories back to the US.  If a company knows they can just wait things out until the next admin is in place it takes away that incentive and the tariff that was supposed to bring jobs and manufacturing back, just jacks up prices and makes everything cost more.  If Trump went through the proper process they would be much harder to undo. As it is , a new president could remove every tariff he has put in place. 

 

The other thing being the lawsuits that will eat up millions of dollars  as a result of the tariffs he had in place that were ruled to be illegal. Again just sucking down that sweet sweet tax payer money. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes...

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes that he needed to, it’s actually because he pulled out of the treaty. 

gantry25 wrote:

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all...

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all that treaty did was stall to allow the north Koreans enough time to finish developing their own bomb..

 Of course the Iranians were trying to build nuclear weapons. How else do you explain the lack of access for inspection to the nuclear facilities for the IAEA inspections. It was a total joke. Further, why did the Iranians feel the need to hide so much of the manufacturing deep underground, inside mountains if they were just enriching uranium for nuclear power?. The IAEA  has already stated that the Iranians have uranium enriched to 60% when energy producing nuclear reactors only need enrichment of 3% to 5%. Most of this was accomplished well before president Trump abandoned  the 2015 treaty. The 60% is close to weapons grade uranium and it has already been stated that they would need only weeks to get the uranium to 90%. Once again this is the IAEA not the Trump administration. Finally, ask yourself; Why are the Iranians even developing nuclear power when they have such vast oil reserves that are so easily and cheaply accessed?

APLMAN99 wrote:

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes...

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes that he needed to, it’s actually because he pulled out of the treaty. 

gantry25 wrote:

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all...

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all that treaty did was stall to allow the north Koreans enough time to finish developing their own bomb..

 Of course the Iranians were trying to build nuclear weapons. How else do you explain the lack of access for inspection to the nuclear facilities for the IAEA inspections. It was a total joke. Further, why did the Iranians feel the need to hide so much of the manufacturing deep underground, inside mountains if they were just enriching uranium for nuclear power?. The IAEA  has already stated that the Iranians have uranium enriched to 60% when energy producing nuclear reactors only need enrichment of 3% to 5%. Most of this was accomplished well before president Trump abandoned  the 2015 treaty. The 60% is close to weapons grade uranium and it has already been stated that they would need only weeks to get the uranium to 90%. Once again this is the IAEA not the Trump administration. Finally, ask yourself; Why are the Iranians even developing nuclear power when they have such vast oil reserves that are so easily and cheaply accessed?

APLMAN99 wrote:

The IAEA had access until the treaty was basically torn up.  The access issues began after Trump unilaterally voided the treaty.  

APLMAN99 wrote:

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes...

The treaty was effective in relation to Iran building nuclear weapons. Trump didn’t ‘need to bomb Iran’ because of the 2015 treaty. If one truly believes that he needed to, it’s actually because he pulled out of the treaty. 

gantry25 wrote:

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all...

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all that treaty did was stall to allow the north Koreans enough time to finish developing their own bomb..

 Of course the Iranians were trying to build nuclear weapons. How else do you explain the lack of access for inspection to the nuclear facilities for the IAEA inspections. It was a total joke. Further, why did the Iranians feel the need to hide so much of the manufacturing deep underground, inside mountains if they were just enriching uranium for nuclear power?. The IAEA  has already stated that the Iranians have uranium enriched to 60% when energy producing nuclear reactors only need enrichment of 3% to 5%. Most of this was accomplished well before president Trump abandoned  the 2015 treaty. The 60% is close to weapons grade uranium and it has already been stated that they would need only weeks to get the uranium to 90%. Once again this is the IAEA not the Trump administration. Finally, ask yourself; Why are the Iranians even developing nuclear power when they have such vast oil reserves that are so easily and cheaply accessed?

APLMAN99 wrote:

The IAEA had access until the treaty was basically torn up.  The access issues began after Trump unilaterally voided the treaty.  

gantry25 wrote:

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all...

This is the type of thinking that allowed North Korea to have nuclear weapons. We had a nuclear treaty with the North Koreans as well, all that treaty did was stall to allow the north Koreans enough time to finish developing their own bomb..

 Of course the Iranians were trying to build nuclear weapons. How else do you explain the lack of access for inspection to the nuclear facilities for the IAEA inspections. It was a total joke. Further, why did the Iranians feel the need to hide so much of the manufacturing deep underground, inside mountains if they were just enriching uranium for nuclear power?. The IAEA  has already stated that the Iranians have uranium enriched to 60% when energy producing nuclear reactors only need enrichment of 3% to 5%. Most of this was accomplished well before president Trump abandoned  the 2015 treaty. The 60% is close to weapons grade uranium and it has already been stated that they would need only weeks to get the uranium to 90%. Once again this is the IAEA not the Trump administration. Finally, ask yourself; Why are the Iranians even developing nuclear power when they have such vast oil reserves that are so easily and cheaply accessed?

APLMAN99 wrote:

The IAEA had access until the treaty was basically torn up.  The access issues began after Trump unilaterally voided the treaty.  

Kenny Banyan wrote:

Ya know , I just don’t remember it that way. I thought they were denying inspection access before Trump 45.

APLMAN99 wrote:

I think your memory may be faulty.

There are a few legitimate critiques of the JCPOA, but compliance with inspections wasn't one of them. 

Loam Ranger wrote:

Bottom of page 8...https://www.vitalmx.com/forums/non-moto/so-if-you-came-possession-epstein-list?page=8The fact you guys think Merrick Garland - one of the meekest, cautious (to a fault!) and by the book Attorney...

Bottom of page 8...

https://www.vitalmx.com/forums/non-moto/so-if-you-came-possession-epstein-list?page=8

The fact you guys think Merrick Garland - one of the meekest, cautious (to a fault!) and by the book Attorney Generals America has probably ever had - would have exploited it for political gain, is ridiculous.

gantry25 wrote:

Oh good lord, you can't be serious. Garland was about as dirty as they come in the way he protected Biden and prosecuted Trump. You are...

Oh good lord, you can't be serious. Garland was about as dirty as they come in the way he protected Biden and prosecuted Trump. You are delusional.

The real Sasquatch wrote:

Trump's DOJ had already set a precedent by not charging Trump with the crimes  discovered while he was president.  If Biden was not the current president...

Trump's DOJ had already set a precedent by not charging Trump with the crimes  discovered while he was president.  If Biden was not the current president, that would be different. Barr covered for Trump if Garland covered for Biden.  If You take the time to read through the Muller report You can see they found things that a private citizen would have been charged for doing, laws that were broken. But because a current president can not be charged, there is no way for them to clear their name so the DOJ doesn't make that info public. 

 The law passed to make the Epstein files public goes against that DOJ policy but its a law and one of the only exceptions You'll see with the DOJ saying somebody committed a crime without them ever charging them for one.  I may not have worded it exactly the way they did, but that's the gist of it. 

 

 Trump was never exonerated , it just was not possible for them to charge him because of the way the laws are.   Its like somebody with diplomatic immunity commiting a crime  that is covered by their immunity. Whatever crime it was ,was committed by the person. They just can not be punished by the US . But they could face charges in their home country for the crimes.  A president could murder somebody and as long as they are president, there is nothing that can happen except impeachment as long as the DOJ has the policy they have.   

The only way a President can be punished is impeachment. Then after he is a private citizen things change. 

gantry25 wrote:

This took me about 5 minutes to find.Prior to 2018, Iran frequently restricted access to suspected nuclear sites, particularly military locations, arguing they were off-limits to...

This took me about 5 minutes to find.

Prior to 2018, Iran frequently restricted access to suspected nuclear sites, particularly military locations, arguing they were off-limits to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors on grounds of national sovereignty, often sparking international disputes over compliance. Key instances included holding inspectors at bay to evade inspection of suspected undeclared facilities or past military-related activities.

Actually there are a lot of critiques regarding the JCPOA treaty. You need to re-evaluate how you are getting your information. Confirmation bias is a real thing.

The reality is that the Iranians were obviously trying to develop a nuclear weapon. Not sure why you are so engaged in supporting Iran's peaceful development of Uranium. There was nothing peaceful about it.

gantry25 wrote:

This took me about 5 minutes to find.Prior to 2018, Iran frequently restricted access to suspected nuclear sites, particularly military locations, arguing they were off-limits to...

This took me about 5 minutes to find.

Prior to 2018, Iran frequently restricted access to suspected nuclear sites, particularly military locations, arguing they were off-limits to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors on grounds of national sovereignty, often sparking international disputes over compliance. Key instances included holding inspectors at bay to evade inspection of suspected undeclared facilities or past military-related activities.

Actually there are a lot of critiques regarding the JCPOA treaty. You need to re-evaluate how you are getting your information. Confirmation bias is a real thing.

The reality is that the Iranians were obviously trying to develop a nuclear weapon. Not sure why you are so engaged in supporting Iran's peaceful development of Uranium. There was nothing peaceful about it.

gt80rider wrote:

No such thing as a nuclear weapon..  they do not exist, period... they want you to think they exist... they want you to pay billions for...

No such thing as a nuclear weapon..  they do not exist, period... they want you to think they exist... they want you to pay billions for something that doesn't even exist... 

Why did over a thousand people survive both Nagasaki and Hiroshima??? Why did they start rebuilding on ground zero the very next day????? They got hit with some big bombs... but they weren't nukes... 

Stop beLIEving all the bullchit that the baal pedo cannibal run media want you to beLIEve.... if you don't know it to be true first hand, you then know it's iffy at best... they've lied to us about everything... our history is a lie... paid science is a lie... space is a lie... our societal structure is a lie.... religion is a lie... nearly everything,  if not every single thing you have to beLIEve in, is a lie... and why would it not be when baal worshipping pedo cannibals control everything....?

gantry25 wrote:

This took me about 5 minutes to find.Prior to 2018, Iran frequently restricted access to suspected nuclear sites, particularly military locations, arguing they were off-limits to...

This took me about 5 minutes to find.

Prior to 2018, Iran frequently restricted access to suspected nuclear sites, particularly military locations, arguing they were off-limits to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors on grounds of national sovereignty, often sparking international disputes over compliance. Key instances included holding inspectors at bay to evade inspection of suspected undeclared facilities or past military-related activities.

Actually there are a lot of critiques regarding the JCPOA treaty. You need to re-evaluate how you are getting your information. Confirmation bias is a real thing.

The reality is that the Iranians were obviously trying to develop a nuclear weapon. Not sure why you are so engaged in supporting Iran's peaceful development of Uranium. There was nothing peaceful about it.

gt80rider wrote:

No such thing as a nuclear weapon..  they do not exist, period... they want you to think they exist... they want you to pay billions for...

No such thing as a nuclear weapon..  they do not exist, period... they want you to think they exist... they want you to pay billions for something that doesn't even exist... 

Why did over a thousand people survive both Nagasaki and Hiroshima??? Why did they start rebuilding on ground zero the very next day????? They got hit with some big bombs... but they weren't nukes... 

Stop beLIEving all the bullchit that the baal pedo cannibal run media want you to beLIEve.... if you don't know it to be true first hand, you then know it's iffy at best... they've lied to us about everything... our history is a lie... paid science is a lie... space is a lie... our societal structure is a lie.... religion is a lie... nearly everything,  if not every single thing you have to beLIEve in, is a lie... and why would it not be when baal worshipping pedo cannibals control everything....?

Loam Ranger wrote:

Sounds like Trump could be about to fire Pam Bondi.

Just before her deposition arranged for 14th April.

Spooner wrote:

Absolute bullshit. She committed crimes, it doesn’t matter that she no longer has the job. 

Spooner wrote:

Absolute bullshit. She committed crimes, it doesn’t matter that she no longer has the job. 

SKlein wrote:

What crimes? The Transparency act was followed to perfection and they definitely didn't release CSAM to the masses. I'd say if anything she should get blanket...

What crimes? The Transparency act was followed to perfection and they definitely didn't release CSAM to the masses. I'd say if anything she should get blanket immunity for her heroic work.

White Feather wrote:

This thread is satire correct?

White Feather wrote:

This thread is satire correct?

Last2Stroke wrote:

US politics is satire!

US politics is satire!

Spooner wrote:

Absolute bullshit. She committed crimes, it doesn’t matter that she no longer has the job. 

gantry25 wrote:

What crimes did she commit? 

umagumadog wrote:

Judging by you sad sack’s the only name on the list is Trump. 

umagumadog wrote:

Judging by you sad sack’s the only name on the list is Trump. 

White Feather wrote:

It's not their fault, it's their upbringing.