ProudKangaroo wrote on Sep 18^th, 2025 at 6:42pm:


We know Epstein was a pedo who trafficked girls court cases have established this.

Do you want a list of people who knew Epstein or a client list?

If they release anyones name with Epstein they need to have enough evidence to indict them on sex charges they can't just release names that will make them liable for defamation.
If they don't have enough evidence to indict them they would lose defamation case.

Paul Keatings daughter was on video leaving Epsteins house Prince Andrew was also there.
Take note how SMH goes to clear lengths saying they are not implying she is involved with anything wrong.
She refused to comment on this would you take that as an admission of guilt?
https://www.smh.com.au/culture/celebrity/revealed-why-katherine-keating-was-visi...

Here is Paul Keatings daughter again pictured with Maxwell a convicted sex trafficker.
Take note of how Dailymail makes it clear they are not implying she has done anything wrong despite being caught publicly with Maxwell.
The Keating family refused to comment on this would you take that as an admission of guilt since she is clearly associated with Maxwell and Epstein?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7382223/Jeffrey-Epstein-scandal-Katheri...

The FBI and DOJ cannot release names like Paul Keatings daughter and associate them with Epstein if they don't have evidence to charge them with sex crimes.
If they do that they will be liable for defamation as you're considered innocent until proven guilty
Kash Patel told senate inquiry they have released what they can legally release.

If you don't understand the legal ramifications with this then you're a special kind of stupid.

Virginia Guiffre who sued Prince Andrew was asked about Trump her reply was she never saw any inappropriate behaviour from him.

Baronvonrort wrote on Sep 18^th, 2025 at 8:48pm:


Two judges have already given the all clear, dear. There's no legal ramifications for releasing facts. Defamation is when you say stuff that's not true.

Still, such a nice, long post. To think you spent at least two years saying you couldn't wait for your DL to get in and finally burst the juice on Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, and looky looky, who's this?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Sep 18^th, 2025 at 9:36pm:


Kash Patel told senate inquiry they have released what they legally can.

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 18^th, 2025 at 9:20pm:


Yes, release the complete client list.

If it includes people on the left, then let them face justice as well. That shouldn't even be controversial.

The only reason this suddenly becomes a "hot take" is if people like Baron know Trump's name is there and are scrambling to shield him. Why else project the absurd notion that "your side" must be immune from accountability, even in the face of raping children?

There's no defence for that. Lock them all up, I don't care what party they're from.

And if Baron and his ilk can't grasp that basic principle, then we've identified the rot at the core.

Baronvonrort wrote on Sep 19^th, 2025 at 12:30pm:


I don't want convictions on a list alone.

Release the list, then investigate properly, without fear or favour.

I don't care who it is, sitting president or past.

If a sitting president is on the list and there's compelling evidence, then impeach, remove from office, and prosecute.

Child sex abusers must be held to account, no matter their position or power.

Surely you can agree with that?