.

The pedo apologists are still at it   

Leroy wrote on Jan 5^th, 2026 at 6:10pm:


My claim was, in response to OP highlighting a CNN post about how Trump and Epstein had a falling out:

ProudKangaroo wrote on Jan 5^th, 2026 at 10:40am:


We've gone from you deflecting to the age of the worker, accusing me of making it up, to insisting she wasn't underage, to arguing what underage means and now landing on "so what if she was underage".

That progression alone tells its own story.

The point was always this, the narrative about Trump and Epstein falling out comes from Trump himself. By his own account, it wasn't some principled stand against abuse, it was about Epstein poaching Trump's underage spa workers. Not that Epstein later abused or trafficked her, but that he took her, and others, from Trump.

CNN spins a different tale, one about Trump protecting staff from unwanted advances. That version does not align with Trump's own words, nor does it align with his long, well-documented history as the one who makes the unwanted advances, not stops them.

When I asked the very simple question of who we're meant to believe, Trump or CNN, you dodged it entirely and launched into a tangent you've now quietly abandoned, capped off with a limp "so what" backdown.

I'm still waiting for the apology for falsely accusing me of making things up, dear.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 6^th, 2026 at 12:30am:


Nobody is defending Clinton, nor is anyone even talking about him in this context.  He has nothing to do with Trump and Epstein's falling out.

If he has been caught with underage girls as well, then he should face the courts and justice like anyone else.

Deflecting to Clinton is not a defence of Trump. It is a textbook dodge, and only people suffering from genuine TDS think it passes as an argument.

Nobody is walking around in Clinton merch, hats, flags, shoes, watches, phones, or treating him like a messianic figure. That level of obsession exists only among people like you when it comes to Trump.  There is nobody to defend Clinton, no matter what he's done, like those who have adopted Trump as their lord and saviour.

And between Trump and Clinton, only one of them is publicly advocating for the full release of the Epstein files to clear their name.

Here's a hint: it isn't Trump.

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 6^th, 2026 at 12:32am:


And let's not forget Hilary's emails, Sad.

They all do it, no?

Baronvonrort wrote on Jan 6^th, 2026 at 10:18pm:


sadroo has found a way to put Trump and underage into the same sentence and thinks that proves Trump is a pedophile and anyone who disputes her warped tangled theory supports pedophiles and child abuse.

TDS on steriods.

Leroy wrote on Jan 6^th, 2026 at 10:35pm:


This has been clear from my very first post, which I can quote again if needed. I'm questioning CNN's version of events.

Trump himself has said the falling out happened because Epstein kept poaching his staff, including underage girls, from his Mar-a-Lago spa. That is Trump's account.

If CNN's story is that the split occurred because Trump was bravely protecting people from unwanted advances, it directly contradicts Trump's own explanation, and his long, well documented history of being the perpetrator of unwanted advances. Acting as a moral sentry against predatory behaviour is not, and has never been, on brand for him.

So the question is simple, and it's the one you've all been frantically dodging.

Do we believe CNN, or do we believe Trump?

That single question is what triggered pages of distraction, deflection and procedural noise from you lot, because answering it forces you into an uncomfortable corner.

First I was accused of making it up.
Then we descended into semantic bullshit over what "underage" means.
That eventually collapsed into a limp "so what if she was underage" retreat.
And now you're calling in reinforcements to keep the distraction machine running.

I mentioned, accurately, that she was underage while working at the spa. You're the ones who fixated on that, not me.

You want to talk about TDS? Fine. How about the fact that merely clarifying the age of the person at the centre of the Trump–Epstein falling out sends you into an immediate scramble to defend Trump. No analysis, no curiosity, just reflex.

It's genuinely revealing. The moment "underage" is stated, even as a factual clarification, the discussion derails into excuses, minimisation, and deflection. That isn't scepticism, it's a conditioned response.

At this point it looks less like critical thinking and more like a baked-in, reflexive, pedo-adjacent defence mechanism hardwired into MAGA discourse.

So I'll ask it again, slowly, since you keep running from it.

Who are we meant to believe, CNN or Trump?

And if their accounts conflict, who is lying, or who is so cognitively compromised they can't keep their own story straight anymore?