Latest Breaking News

AZJonnie

(2,299 posts)

50. Ummm, well, you are the one who brought up "other reports" which I took to mean NOT the OP

Fri Nov 7, 2025, 01:45 AM

Nov 7

Which I in fact read quite closely.

My point is, the source of the information about these incriminating pictures is Michael Wolff, who is the one Epstein showed them to. The venue he made that claim is in a Daily Beast interview. Wolff does NOT say "very young girls" in that interview So what are these "other reports" that characterized the photos in the way that you are claiming. What is their source?

I also read it closely enough to notice that the article implies, but does NOT say that the "bad news" in the Epstein files is (at least in part) the same photos that Wolff mentioned in the article. But, in fact, for all we know, Epstein burned those photos in 2015 after he showed them to Wolff. Likely? NO. But we don't even know, from this article, that the DoJ has those photos.

But it seems as though nearly everyone here read that they DO have them, although the article claims no such thing

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

67 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DOJ tells Republicans that Epstein files even worse for Trump than they thought: report [View all] BumRushDaShow Nov 6 OP

it's going to take something substantially more 'damaging' than topless photos ... stopdiggin Nov 6 #1

Photos of obviously very young topless girls sitting on leeringly smiling Donald Trump's lap is ho-hum? KPN Nov 6 #2

The story says "several topless young women on his lap" AZJonnie Nov 6 #3

There are numerous reports out on this. Some say KPN Nov 6 #22

TTBOMK, there is one source of this information, and that is what Wolff said in the Daily Beast interview AZJonnie Nov 7 #46

Maybe read the OP. KPN Nov 7 #49

Ummm, well, you are the one who brought up "other reports" which I took to mean NOT the OP AZJonnie Nov 7 #50

That was one of the main things that jumped out at me, too... slightlv Nov 6 #34

Do you see the needle moving on this .. ? stopdiggin Nov 6 #11

There must be some degree of angst or this issue would have disappeared long ago. Ilikepurple Nov 6 #24

couple things 1) the article does not mention 'photos' as the 'worse for Trump' additional material/info stopdiggin Nov 6 #30

SD, thanks for the thoughtful exposition of your opinions on this matter. It is helpful. Ilikepurple Nov 6 #35

the man's crimes are real and manifold - and we grapple with sad realization that we may never see .. stopdiggin Nov 6 #38

Have you ever been to a no kings march? Read the signs bro, every other one says release the Epstein files Blues Heron Nov 6 #29

yes, I have. and I saw literally thousands of signs stopdiggin Nov 6 #32

Just because I don't have a sign doesn't mean I am indifferent to his abuses, or it isn't an issue. 58Sunliner Nov 7 #45

careful, my friend. you run pretty close to smearing and 'personal attack' there stopdiggin Nov 7 #65

Compared to a photo of him with his dick in a 15 year old, yeah kinda. Volaris Nov 6 #13

I'd agree w/ you on that. KPN Nov 6 #18

Nude teenage girls on Trump's lap? kstewart33 Nov 6 #20

The guy was elected the first time after his grab 'em by the p**** comments AND 20 some women AZJonnie Nov 7 #41

I wondered. Thanks for asking the question. yellow dahlia Nov 6 #25

I guess it would depend how young they were Polybius Nov 6 #6

Yes, I agree ... and based on other stuff that has leaked KPN Nov 6 #19

Trump could abuse an infant and the media would still sane-wash it Orrex Nov 6 #21

"...worse for Trump than they thought." OF COURSE THEY ARE! That's what his F-ing persistent dance is about! mpcamb Nov 6 #4

Remember when those Repukes couldn't wait to talk about Bill Clinton's blowjob in the Oval Office? FakeNoose Nov 6 #5

There's 3 unfortunate problems in terms of something actually coming of the existence of said pics AZJonnie Nov 6 #7

what if Trump recruited these girls Skittles Nov 6 #15

Okay, that would be another case AZJonnie Nov 6 #27

think about it Skittles Nov 6 #40

Probably you've seen my theory on this? AZJonnie Nov 7 #42

I think they both had sex with minors Skittles Nov 7 #47

As of now we've heard from about 15 known victims, either in deposition or interview AZJonnie Nov 7 #48

the way he is around young girls Skittles Nov 7 #55

I know a bunch of people who knows what all is in there ... everyone who prosecuted Maxwell AZJonnie Nov 7 #66

Perhaps... 2naSalit Nov 7 #53

it has to be something truly awful Skittles Nov 7 #54

Pretty sure... 2naSalit Nov 7 #57

I think you're 100 percent right BlueKota Nov 7 #63

You're right on all three points however ... FakeNoose Nov 6 #17

Who would this class action suit be "against"? AZJonnie Nov 7 #43

There was going to be a lawsuit against Epstein, but then he died FakeNoose Nov 7 #61

The estate has paid them out to the tune of $125 million to about 150 victims AZJonnie Nov 7 #67

I bet it shows the orange asshole willfully trafficking kids. Javaman Nov 6 #8

now IF in fact - that could be demonstrated ... - - - but there has been no hint ... - - -(nt) stopdiggin Nov 6 #33

as I said, "I bet". nt Javaman Nov 7 #60

Kick and recommend. bronxiteforever Nov 6 #9

It seems increasingly likely NewEnglandAutumn Nov 6 #10

This is the point, not just the photos flamingdem Nov 6 #12

Trump recruited the girls (via the beauty pageants), Ghislaine groomed them, and Epstein trafficked them. TheRickles Nov 6 #14

Melania is implicated too flamingdem Nov 6 #31

Not one known victims is associated with the pageants except for 1, and that was years after the fact AZJonnie Nov 7 #44

most likely he was BOTH Skittles Nov 6 #16

Wait until MAGA finds out that Trump COL Mustard Nov 6 #23

Wait "worse than they thought?" Or worse than Wolffs description? GusBob Nov 6 #26

There may be video of Trump with the 13 year old 'Katie Johnson' as in the lawsuit, mackdaddy Nov 6 #28

I tend to think there's no video, but there were witnesses FakeNoose Nov 6 #36

Pointing and laughing..... Bayard Nov 6 #37

David Shuster doesn't work for Fox News. choie Nov 6 #39

They did use the qualifier "former" in front of the list of networks BumRushDaShow Nov 7 #52

K&R ck4829 Nov 7 #51

Really people Snoopy 7 Nov 7 #56

"There is no more evidence that we can see" BumRushDaShow Nov 7 #59

So let's see the damn files already. mwb970 Nov 7 #58

Open Secrets.... CapnSteve Nov 7 #62

SO LONG AS THE FILES REMAIN SECRET, snot Nov 7 #64