She's so juvenile Epstein would have trafficked her.
this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2025
365 points (98.9% liked)
Not The Onion
18399 readers
1248 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Maybe mentally but you can’t fuck a brain.
You can absolutely do that. People get abused everyday
Not with that attitude
Nor a college degree. Show me your genitals!
Deepcut man
Well, you could, but it'd be messy.
Oh. I thought I was reading the onion.
So did I. xD
In other words, she had no intention of answering truthfully and forthrightly.
she has aged so much since she was sworn in lol
like a year for each month
this stupid bitch again, cmon lil mama there's gotta be more brain to ya than when you're on your knees with geriatric balls in your face
Why can't she be held in contempt of court for not answering questions? Why did the guy running the meeting not have any consequences prepared for her? She got away with not answering his questions. So what was the point of the hearing at all? The only weapon they had to force her to answer questions was... hoping she'd do it? What the fuck was the point of this?
The "guy running the meeting" is a Republican. And they're all in on the conspiracy to uphold MAGA and Trump at any cost.
The "guy running the meeting" is a Republican.
I meant Durbin not Grassley
Fair. Durbin has the right to chime in on combative/argumentative witnesses and he should have. Maybe just letting her make a fool of herself, but he should have interjected at points.
Contempt charges have to be voted on, so they wouldn't ever happen.
Why hold her in contempt? What's that gonna do? Who cares? Congress and the courts have no teeth, this administration knows that and they've shown us. Hold her in contempt and they won't even slow their stride.
Then what's the point of releasing the epstein files?
There's a neat false equivalence.
No really. If this hearing is an example of what we can expect after the files are released, then what's the point?
Here's a possible scenario:
- files are released
- lots of important people are exposed as having done horrible, illegal things
- trump gets another felony and stays in power
- nothing changes
^^^ what do you see going differently after the epstein files are released?
I'll agree that nothing changes, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be released anyway.
We already have docs from other cases that implicate loosely people in power (all the way to the top)
It's unlikely that they have truly damning things calling out people and acts, those would just have been burned long ago.
What's in there needs to see the light of day and be public knowledge good, bad, change, no change.
The MAGA base does actually care about pedophilia. They've been told it's trans people committing it though. If they see evidence that it's the elite, in particular Trump, then some will flip, or at least lose interest. Assuming we have elections in the future (even local will be useful), this is something we should push.
Don't expect it to lead to immediate consequences. I don't think anyone expects that. Expect it to lead to them losing control of some of their base.
Quite a read. The attorney general acting as attorney for the president.
Am I the only one who thinks she did this on purpose?
She's so edgy.