So I’m not surprised.

Remember "my generals"? "My African-American"? When he claimed Epstein was poaching "his" employees, he may or may not have been talking about Epstein (via Maxwell) grooming girls for sex trafficking, although shouldn't he have wondered why a guy who doesn't own a resort needs to lure away his resort employees? Irrespective of whether Trump thought or knew why Epstein was so interested in Trump's employees, the reason he now claims he broke with Epstein (and this is a new excuse, not previously raised) was that Epstein was taking people who belonged to him, not that he was offering them better jobs that they could accept if they wanted to. Those were his people. He owned them. That's how he thinks.

Exactly. It surprises me that most people don't immediately understand this. I suppose it may be something that is difficult to understand if you have not experienced it.

Growing up in a remote area in Texas a half century ago where opportunity was slim and the better the opportunity the more closely it was doled out, it was very obvious. If an employee was fired or quit other employers would not hire them. They usually would have to move hundreds of miles away to get a job. The exceptions were the few big business or government jobs available. Obviously this produced a class of poorly paid workers who didn’t make trouble for the employers, only for
each other. Also, anecdotally, I found that employers really considered the money that they paid their workers to be their (the employer's) money. Employers would say "I don't like what you spend the money I give you on".
Growing up in that system Trump's behavior is intuitively comprehensable. It is interesting to me that his behavior is so opaque to others.

as potential sex toys for himself. There's no evidence so far that he was messing with his own staff; he didn't need to because he had Epstein to supply him, and he had his so-called beauty pageants where he could barge in on naked teenagers in their dressing room. He owned them, too. If Epstein really was "poaching" employees from MAL as Trump now claims, it's not likely that those employees were groundskeepers or waiters, but Trump probably thought he owned those employees, too.

Somehow with trump, I just intuited his nature. His boasts about sexual conquest and physically hurting women (getting grabbed by the genitals would really hurt) . He boasts about — well, ugh, he’s disgusting, and his whole life is about inflicting pain and humiliation on other people. Dominance. The way he stalked Hillary around the debate stage made my skin crawl.

He wants to own human beings. He’d be really happy if he could sell us on the open market instead of the black market the way he’s always done. Altho black market deals add that extra frisson to the transaction.

He is trying to stay ahead of this story. He can’t.

Where would he be right now if he was born in poverty

Or dead if he was born poor

In his demented mind, this sounds completely reasonable and normal as a cover story for something even darker that led to the rift. If there was an actual rift at all, that is. Perhaps the two head pedos decided it was best to put some distance between them while investigation was just commencing.

the first time. Also Trump didn't break it off with Epstein until a full 4 years after Virginia Giuffre was hired. In other words, Trump was LYING when he made that statement, and it was one of his most obvious lies ever.

The term 'stole' is hardly exclusive to real theft or larceny. And in fact is fairly commonly used to describe other situations. "The Warriors stole three places in the division race with an ugly, and improbable , win last night .. " "Janey absolutely stole the show on opening night .. " And, yes, 'other usage' would include (and is almost universally understood) as common reference to poaching talent or employees.

Sorry. The indisputable fact of Trump's ugly character to one side ... But the efforts to conflate 'ownership' (or implied belief) are fumbling, awkward and seemingly overwrought . Even with the convicted rapist.

For Trump it is a mindset. He does not consider multiple meanings of words. He is not a subtle man.

where the same does not hold for others using similar or same wording and expression. Shaky ground. But - OK.

Edit: But, on second thought, No. You (and others) are attempting to build this case up around (and by highlighting) the word 'stole' - implying a unique turn of phrase, and implication. And - given the same word or phrase in common usage - it is not.

And no, I'm not doing that.

and you very clearly are. Assigning a particular meaning here - that would clearly not apply in all, or even most context.

But I think we should be aware that the same 'word' or utterance in another mouth - would almost certainly not draw the same inference. Yes?

It doesn't have so much to do with 'being fair' to Donald - as it does just being sloppy argument and weak analogy

A reporter asked him point blank if "Virginia Giuffre" was one of the employees Epstein hired and Trump's immediate response was "I don't know". This along with Trump continuing his friendship with Epstein 4 4 more years after this happened and the fact he never mentioned it once in 25 years since until this week should make it clear that TRUMP IS LYING and using this as a bullshit excuse!

When someone says that another person "stole their girl" they generally mean a girlfriend or significant other. The woman in question isn't just a girlfriend, they are someone's girlfriend.

If I hear that usage I don't interpret it as ownership of the woman. The "thief" didn't break into the house, bundle the woman into a duffel bag, and then scuttle into the night, or at least we must hope not. The meaning is that the thief stole the relationship or connection, not the actual person.

It's a common turn of phrase used equally by men and women. Would anyone have this reaction to a woman using the same phrase with regard to a man? Or to another woman, for that matter? Or a man referring to another man? I rather doubt it.

Trying to attach some kind of sinister meaning to such a common phrase seems more than a little overwrought from where I'm standing.

appealing to TSF to release the Epstein files and for him not to pardon G. Maxwell.
It was reported on cable TV this morning that the family sent a letter to trump, with carefully chosen words so as not to insinuate any wrong doing on his part, asking him for help.

I don't know who's advising them, but they have to know from all the reporting on this issue that trump's name is all over that list and he won't do anything but mouth his intentions to get 'pertinent' info released. He of course won't help.

They have to know he won't.

He thinks he owned her. And he knew what happened was illegal or he would have reported a kidnapping.

Knots with his lies.

And I also got the chills hearing him say Epstein stole this girl from him ! It’s as if he almost admitted he sex trafficked young girls. If we keep at him ( especially since we know he has dementia) he might actually admit what he has done to young girls.

I’d ask any maga are you ok with your orange Hitler grabbing your daughter, wife, or sister by the pussy and having sex with your 13 year old daughter or niece?

or already using her.

that we add the Beatles. Otherwise, this can be so depressing.

So owning people just makes sense.

Trump was mad because he got out-groomed by Epstein.

I have been avoiding the news lately, other than my news app...

haven't seen a new story that would have provoked your op... as far as I know

Not new. What's new is Trump's claim that Epstein "stole" her. That Trump saw a young girl a property is the story.

If you're avoiding the news, it's not surprising that you didn't know that.you

Other than that, uh, no.

Or Harem wars. Their stashes of females. It’s so disgusting, but everything about him is disturbing and vile.