So release the Epstein files?
8d 11h ago by discuss.online/u/VetOfTheSeas in politicalmemes from discuss.online
Is this real
It's at the 19min45sec mark.
Shooters manifesto about the secret service:
This level of incompetence is insane.
Trump:
Well he was pretty incompetent, too, because he got caught.
LOL
I heard that too, and chuckled.
Why chuckle? It’s the world’s biggest moron making anything up at our expense on live tv. It’s the worst possible thing, with the worst possibly price tag being paraded in front of our faces at the worst possible time. I got no chuckle
Because chuckling is free and Trump tacitly agreeing that he's incompetent is funny.
Catastrophizing doesn't help the situation either, at least a chuckle doesn't blow up your own mental health for no reason.
Sometimes I laugh because otherwise I’d cry.
https://media1.tenor.com/m/-l5LchUOJEwAAAAd/in-the-mouth-of-madness-sam-neil.gif
I chuckle because otherwise I’d cry. I feel you.
I think it's pretty funny that he basically said that any competently planned attempt on his life would have been successful as the secret service is so incompetent.
What is funny to me specifically about this is that while intending to undermine him, Trump did the exact opposite.
“So what about this statement someone else made?”
“You’re a shitty person for repeating words and I assumed you were shit and so now I’m calling you shit to deflect…”
“Yes well uh gosh Mr president okay…”
Fucking incompetence…
That’s O’Donnel which means CBS right? Which is basically Trump little bitch propaganda network now. Since he can fire Colbert because he’s Ass hurt, and he can fine 60 Munutes, also because he’s ass hurt.
He'll just sue again to steal more money from the taxpayer
It's shocking how awful journalists are in this country. They NEVER follow up when politicians blatantly lie to their face. It's fucking shameful.
Link for Canadians: https://www.cbsnews.com/video/60minutes-2026-04-26/
Transcript: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-white-house-correspondents-dinner-shooting-60-minutes-transcript/
It’s been real since at least the 80s. Imagine the busses full of execs and millionaires and collaborators who stayed quiet all this time to make sure he got where he is today. None of whom we will talk about once the chief pedo is dead.
Isn't he a convicted rapist? Surely that means he's in fact a rapist
Edit: thanks to all the people pointing out that he wasn’t convicted
He wasn't convicted of the crime of rape because he hasn't, to date, been criminally charged with rape. He was sued civilly by E. Jean Carroll for sexual abuse and defamation, and found by a jury liable for both acts. Which means the jury found that sufficient evidence existed that he did sexually abuse her even without a criminal conviction for rape.
The judge later clarified that the acts that the the jury found him liable for, forcible penetration of the vagina with his fingers, do constitute first degree rape under New York law. And first degree rape in New York has no statute of limitations. Were he to be tried for rape, the evidence in the civil suit would be admissible and he would almost certainly be convicted of rape. Weird that hasn't happened, but here we are.
So technically, he is not a convicted rapist as he has yet to be criminally charged and tried for rape. But he has also been determined by a court and a jury to have absolutely sexually abused E. Jean Carroll in a manner that constitutes rape under New York law. "Rapist love this one weird loophole."
He paid her 78 million dollars specifically so that he wouldn’t have to take a DNA test to prove his innocence.
Hmmmm
I missed something. What dna were they going to test that could influence a case for a crime that occurred 30 years ago?
E. Jean Carroll requested a DNA sample from Donald Trump in 2020 to compare with unidentified male DNA found on the dress she allegedly wore during a 1990s sexual assault.
Well there you go.
EDIT: added some googling.
Civil court is a much lower bar of proof. But yeah he received a civil liability judgement.
He was found civily liable for sexual assault by a jury. It means a jury said he did it, but it's not actually a conviction because civil suits are between private parties whereas criminal cases are between the defendant and society. They also have very different methods of punishment, as they pursue different goals.
In criminal court, the prosecutors seek punitive damages. It usually takes the form of a fine or a prison sentence. In civil court, the plaintiff (who can also be the government) seeks relief in the form of compensation for damages or an order to do something, undo something, or stop doing something. You can't
This makes sense when you think about it. Let's say you get pulled over for speeding. You didn't actually cause any damage, you can't undo having sped, and since you were pulled over you've already stopped speeding. So the state's options are pretty much limited to punishment for having committed the crime. And once you've paid the ticket, the matter is resolved.
But what if instead of speeding, you build a building that extends beyond your property line and into a public street? Criminal statues allow for a fine, but that's about it. Cities can even do daily fines, but rich people can just pay the fine and effectively take control of public land.
For that, you need to go through the Civil process, because in the civil system the goal isn't justice or punishment, but relief. Instead of getting fines, the government can get an order from a judge requiring the building to be removed, and even to allow the government to bulldoze the building and bill the landowner for the expense of the demo and remediation.
This is why, unless you're looking at a felony, you'd rather have the government take you to criminal court than civil.
Yes. Ahhh, yes, but, see, right...ok, at that exact moment of recording the orange rapist of women and little girls (and probably boys) was -probably- not raping a thing...probably. {taps temple}
Well, the usa passed a law that makes a tomato a vegetable instead of a fruit, so labels don't mean much there (neither does law anymore), so who knows? I agree though because of the "walks like a duck" logic.
"Vegetable" isn't a real scientific term. Nothing is stopping a fruit from also being a vegetable
There is a definition of a fruit though, and it is understood that vegetables are not fruit. As I understand it.
Sure, but tomatoes are a fruit botanically (more precisely, a berry). "Vegetable" is a culinary term, and has no real strict definition beyond "a plant grown to be eaten", so a tomato falls squarely into being a berry, a fruit, and a vegetable.
As far as I'm aware, the supreme court made a ruling on that, but that's not the same as passing a law. Are you conflating the two or do you have additional sources? Because I can't find any evidence that was made a law.
No, just something I heard or read a long time ago. If not a law, some sort of official status or recognition anyway.
Which is not remotely the same thing as passing a law.
Thanks for the confirmation!
Dude LITERALLY raped his ex wife.
Dude was convicted of sexual assault.
Sexual assault that the presiding judge said would have been legally rape if not for New York's strict definition of "rape" as involving penile-vaginal penetration.
That's a pretty shitty definition New York.
Yes, it was. They changed the legal definition shortly after Mango Mussolini’s trial. If convicted today, what he did would legally be called rape.
Let's give them some slack -- at least they fucking hate trump.
He was determined by a jury in court to have sexually abused E. Jean Carroll too. While the case was a civil suit for sexual abuse (and defamation), not a criminal charge for rape, he was still determined to have committed specific acts that do constitute first degree rape under New York law, a crime for which there is no statute of limitations. In other words, he's not a convicted rapist, but still definitely a rapist, just an as yet unconvicted one.
*pedophile
*rapist
*rapist
*rape
*pedophile
uNaLiVe*
seriously... we're talking about global elites who are raping and killing people. just say the words.... ;-;
How the FUCK, is there already a 60 Minutes interview about this?
They had weeks to prepare for it.
Doesn't make sense. If O’Donnell is in league with Trump, then why would she be butchering Trump like this?
Ever seen good old Babylon 5? When the corrupt president seizes the media and uses it for propaganda etc. There are still good people in the media, but they can't be openly critical or they will be removed. Subtle jabs like this are pretty much all they'll be willing to risk.
But if this is all a plot by the US government, and the assassin is presumably in on it, then why would the manifest be talking about pedophiles at all? That is not the kind of fake manifest Team Trump would have written.
I was joking, I don't think it was staged because they looked like idiots.
But if they were to stage it, what do you think they would put on the manifesto? They hate him for having too nice hair? They would want to associate the people who criticizes them with madness and violence.
I guess they hate enough people they could have used Muslims, trans, black... Hell even greenlandish as scapegoats.
But if they were to stage it, what do you think they would put on the manifesto? They hate him for having too nice hair?
Fox News demonizes a caricature of Democrats every single day. I don't watch Fox News, but surely Fox News would be able to write such a "manifest". It would probably include mentions of stuff like "antifa".
Antifa is not hot right now. They could use it to try to shift focus, but if the war didn't make it I don't think that would.
"You have Epstein derangement syndrom" is something they might want.
Again, I don't think it's staged, I just think they might want to change the perception with that of it was.
The topic was "White House Correspondents Dinner" and was planned way ahead of time. The reporters were just quick to adapt to the real story of the dinner.
Thank you for the actual answer.
The white house booked it last week as part of the planned shooting /s
You don't really need the '/s'.
Adjudicated rapist.
Openly speaks about sexually assaulting women.
Has made many very creepy remarks about his daughter as well as other people's daughters.
Is the single most prominently featured individual in the Epstein Files.
So it's 100% accurate to call him a rapist and reasonably implicated pedophile.
He doesn't think he is. He paid for it, so it's a fair transaction.
That's why he had a break with Epstein, because Epstein "stole" some of "his people".
one other notable daughter he made is toward a young paris hilton.
Thank you, miss O'Donnell. Not all heroes wear capes.
It's ok to say "rape" and "pedophile" on the internet.
Not on the majority of platforms nowadays. AI Moderation and content-aware automated filters before that ensure that the nasty people that say things like rape or shit or cum or Scunthorpe get censored, shadow banned, banned, then HWID/IP range banned in that order, in order to ensure the safety of everyone online.
Pity they can't do anything about the CSAM, grooming, or nazis though.
Lol I'm here because reddit banned me because I mentioned a murder-suicide case that was another commenter was trying to recall. Apparently I "threatened violence" 🤷♀️ is lemmy as as easily triggered? 🤔
Just certain instances. There is no 'one' lemmy.' which is the entire point of federated services (despite what .world admins think).
Most Lemmy instances are fine for most discussions of most things. .World is by far the most restrictive and most like reddit and other zionist-owned and ran services. Because it is owned and run by zionists. See !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com for wide ranging examples and reasons why .world is insane.
In general this is the only reason you need to pay attention to the instance you're on. If you, as a .world user, frequently start posting anti-zionist rhetoric like 'Maybe we shouldn't kill children or use literal fucking rape-trained dogs on prisoners' you might find yourself banned or shadow banned pretty quickly.
Just like if you're too right-wing to understand why capitalism is bad, and you repeat neoliberal propaganda against socialism as a .ml user, you'd be banned.
The only really universal rules for commonly federated lemmy instances is no CSAM (ignore ani.social) and don't send death threats/hate speech (unless you're a .world admin and the target is palestinians, I cannot stress enough how much the entire lemmy.world admin team hates brown people native to the land of Palestine that are currently being genocided by the terrorist settler state of Israel and it's dog the United States.)
Ah yeah I'm still getting my head around the whole instances thing but good to know so thanks for that. I'd honestly never even heard the term of federated in regards to socials/forums etc before looking up alternatives to reddit 😅
Also what the actual fuck with those military dogs, sickening stuff. Very disturbing when humans are using other animals to humiliate and assault people like that. The dogs don't have the same understanding of what they're doing as humans would so, to me, that lays entirely on the people who are training and encouraging dogs to engage in that kind of stuff - the intention comes from the human. Ugh, that was a disturbing read!
But they are saying it. Everyone knows what's being said. It's understood what's being meant.
However that's not the point. The point is Companies, when brought into say, the Pennsylvania supreme court on Obscenity charges, can say they do everything technically possible to filter out these words, so we are not liable for whatever law -- this usually makes prosecutors fail at trial, or reconsider bringing charges.
If you let anyone say the no no words, and someone sends a rape threat to Nancy Pelosi on your platform you could be liable for harassment, hosting obscenity (real charge in multiple US states), and other such financial annoyances.
So it is cheaper to just have a set of policies and procedures in place, even if it objectively makes your platform worse, even if it objectively is not effective, simply because it looks better in court and gets you out of more fines. See: The New Zealand law spurred on by the Christchurch shooter, which essentially requires every website to censor violent images and manifestos or pay some ridiculous $5mil NZD fine a DAY that it is kept up after being reported. If they can AI things breaking that law away, even if it harms other users, they're going to do so.
Companies, like all parasites, will actively shy away from poisonous food sources and pick other directions to go in.
Is a veiled threat not a threat that would hold up in (American ) court ?
It is but it takes the blame off of the platform entirely.
To word it a different way - if I made a service where no matter what you wanted to say I would write down your words, read them, and run through town shouting them until I found the person it was directed to and then shout it at them... I would be liable for the words being said as much as the person paying me to say it.
If, however, I have a strict policy where I will only do the above after I strictly review and moderate your words, and you managed to sneak in a tongue twister that says something dirty that I didn't realize until after I shouted it... I am no longer liable. I did everything a reasonable person could expect, you are the only one liable.
When people sue in the US (and when companies really fuck up) people sue the person liable and all possible parties that could be included. The parties then shift blame around pretrial and try to prove they are not liable by xyz to get dismissed off the case. If this fails then each party sued essentially has a trial for their specific liability, which needs to be separately proved in court; and if it makes it that far, in front of a jury (or panel of judges, or a single judge, depending on which state and what kind of action).
Donald Trump is an adjudicated rapist, so he's definitely lying there with that denial.
That doesn't make the entire statement true, but if it were false I suspect the Epstein files would have been released in full unredacted by now, as the law requires. It would completely exonerate him, if he had nothing to hide.
The moron doth protest too much
Hey, he didn't deny he was a traitor.
"So you deny being a rapist and pedophile, but agree that you're a Traitor, moving on..."
Fucker talks too much in general
Perhaps he simply breathes too much. Or at all would be too much
"I'm not a rapist. I didn't rape anybody." -- Donald Trump, Convicted Rapist
Whether comical, sad, or outrageous, nearly everything he says is a lie.
Why the fuck wouldn't he think the manifesto is referring to him?
To be fair, he thinks everything is about him.
Intense biblical narcicism + heavy dementia.
I don't understand.
In his criminal mind, they can't prove it so he can lie about it but EVERYBODY knows exactly who they are referring to when they mention pedophile and rapist. Releasing the unredacted Epstein files is his greatest fear - people will die before he allows it.
People have already died
In his criminal mind, they can't prove it
It has already been proven in court.
It's not he can lie about it, it's he cannot admit any other version. You could have him found guilty, release the Epstein files, have him raping someone on video, he will claim over and over that everything is fake and he's not guilty. Dude is not cabled to admit any wrong doing.
He never said he is not a traitor?
I mean, I don't think the shooter was talking about the mentalist.
Shooter is Red John confirmed
at the grand ballroom opening. Epstein memorial exhibits
This dude is such a damn joke.
That last line hit like a plot twist you saw coming 😅
“Oh, do you think he was referring to you?” is now one of my all-time favorite burns. As maddening and inadequate as the press can be, at least they’ve figured out that Trump is easy to bait.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations
Just gonna leave this here...
uh oh
It’s a reasonable defence for the suspect if they can identify another rapist, pedophile, traitor as the intended target; an equally trivial and challenging task given the attendees.
Do we have bits of the the full version of the shooter's manifesto yet? Trying to understand why he did it and perhaps why strike that location.
That's what the journalist is reading from in the meme. You can find the interview online and you can find people discussing the contents of the accused shooter's alleged message. Apparently it's about 1000 words long and I haven't found it in its entirety but that's probably out there. Most folks are just discussing the part in the meme here and also the parts where he talks about who he considers a legitimate target (essentially just Trump admin officials and people who shoot at him; no one else).
Source https://nypost.com/2026/04/26/us-news/read-whcd-gunman-cole-allens-full-anti-trump-manifesto/
Disclaimer: comment is not intended to promote terrorism, just to make an already public article more readable for those curious to read it. Understanding the mentality of such people helps us to avoid these situations in the future (e.g don't allow pedos to rule any nation).
Cole Allen’s manifesto in full:
(opening comments)
Hello everybody!
So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today. Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused.
I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for “Most Wanted.”
I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.)
I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near.
I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure.
I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it. Again, my sincere apologies.
On to why I did any of this:
I am a citizen of the United States of America.
What my representatives do reflects on me.
And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.
(Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I’ve had to do something about it.)
While I’m discussing this, I’ll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I’m not military so too bad.)
Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest
Secret Service: they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible (aka, I hope they’re wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who aren’t
Hotel Security: not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me)
Capitol Police: same as Hotel Security
National Guard: same as Hotel Security
Hotel Employees: not targets at all
Guests: not targets at all
In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls)
I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people chose to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn’t come to that.
Rebuttals to objections:
Objection 1: As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek.
Rebuttal: Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed. I’m not the person raped in a detention camp. I’m not the fisherman executed without trial. I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration.
Turning the other cheek when someone else is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.
Objection 2: This is not a convenient time for you to do this.
Rebuttal: I need whoever thinks this way to take a couple minutes and realize that the world isn’t about them. Do you think that when I see someone raped or murdered or abused, I should walk on by because it would be “inconvenient” for people who aren’t the victim?
This was the best timing and chance of success I could come up with
Objection 3: You didn’t get them all.
Rebuttal: Gotta start somewhere.
Objection 4: As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this.
Rebuttal: I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack
Objection 5: Yield unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.
Rebuttal: The United States of America are ruled by the law, not by any one or several people. In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered.
I would also like to extend my appreciation to a great many people since I will not be likely to be able to talk with them again (unless the Secret Service is astoundingly incompetent.)
Thank you to the many acquaintances I’ve met, in person and online, for short interactions and long-term relationships, for your perspectives and inspiration.
Thank you all for everything.
Sincerely,
Cole “coldForce” “Friendly Federal Assassin” Allen
(Closing comments)
PS: Ok now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the Secret Service doing? Sorry, gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone.
Like, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10 feet, metal detectors out the wazoo.
What I got (who knows, maybe they’re pranking me!) is nothing.
No damn security.
Not in transport.
Not in the hotel.
Not in the event.
Like, the one thing that I immediately noticed walking into the hotel is the sense of arrogance.
I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat.
The security at the event is all outside, focused on protestors and current arrivals, because apparently no one thought about what happens if someone checks in the day before.
Like, this level of incompetence is insane, and I very sincerely hope it’s corrected by the time this country gets actually competent leadership again.
Like, if I was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen, I could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed s–t.
Actually insane.
Oh and if anyone is curious is how doing something like feels: it’s awful. I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done.
Can’t really recommend it! Stay in school, kids
I'll tag on my personal thoughts about this:
- devoutly christian schoolteachers are trying to kill donald trump now. Maybe he should pack it in, resign, take a prison plea.
- Don't think iran has agents, at least not ones they're sending as far as USA and Britain for the purposes of sabotage. They'd probably prioritise monitoring instead, if they have any.
Thanks! ♥
The guy who tried to shoot you was referring to you when he said why. Not really a gotcha
The current information is that he wasn't their to shoot the president, but to attack certain politicians.
So this assumption on his part indicates guilt. That is how a detective investigating a crime would see it.