It seems that someone is putting words in my mouth.
It has been stated that – I want statehood for Washington, D. C. and the fact is – I do not live in that area. Why does it matter – I am not a Democrat.
The DC in “Washington, DC” stands for District of Columbia. It is a federal district, not a state, created to serve as the capital of the United States, independent from any one state’s control. The district was named to honor Christopher Columbus, who is credited as the first European to discover America. Washington DC is surrounded by the states of Maryland and Virginia and serves as the political center of the nation.
Also:
Why is such a big deal being made about words from the past related to Epstein, et al? It seems the folks act like they never heard the word called “sex.”
The question I have is – how long were these young people employed? Were they forced to stay?
As usual they tried again/again to smear President Trump and blame the Republicans for the Epstein debacle and the whole time Democrat Jeffries/and a Democrat Rep were communicating with Epstein and is it true the Democrats have received donations from the Epstein estate?
Remember the ME TOO – Gotcha movement? And the people destroyed?
And, the Democrats’ DOGE exposure?
This is the Democrats next MOVEMENT. They have been trying to destroy our country since the Obama/Biden election and have done a darn good job of it. The Democrats were exposed and now they are trying to take the whole country with them – especially their own folks.
Former Harvard president Larry Summers has now lost virtually every professional association after a House committee released emails of his exchanges with child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. There are around 20,000 pages of them. Many of the correspondences are embarrassing. There’s going to be little, if any, sympathy for a well-known elite who’s angered conservatives and liberals and befriends creeps. And perhaps Summers doesn’t deserve any.
Even so, there isn’t even a hint of illegality in those emails. There’s nothing suggesting that Summers participated in any kind of impropriety or conspiracy. The only purpose of the release was to destroy Summers.
Congress is about to release the so-called “Epstein files,” a trove of documents that were amassed during criminal investigations into the sex offender who committed suicide in 2019. The contents are likely brimming with thousands of names of innocent people, many who have provided alibis or were never under any suspicion of sex trafficking or anything else. A significant portion of any criminal investigation consists of uncorroborated accusations that are floated by people on the periphery of the case, third-hand accounts, theories, and rumors. This is why grand jury files are almost always sealed.
We already know Epstein was a vile and depraved criminal. And no one should belittle the experience of his victims. Anyone, however, can make allegations. Even victims don’t always remember correctly. Even things a braggart such as Epstein might have said may not be true. That’s why we have procedures, the rule of law, statutes of limitations, and trials.
Moreover, the Epstein files will be filled with information obtained by law enforcement using warrants based on probable cause signed off by a judge for a specific reason. The warrants, which allow the use of government coercion, weren’t signed so that the public could have access to the emails of every person he spoke with. Americans caught up in criminal investigations have a presumption of privacy.
Those who continued their relationships with Epstein even after he was convicted of solicitation of prostitution from a minor are detestable. But fraternizing with criminals isn’t criminality itself. What principle stops future congresses from cracking open useful DOJ files and releasing any embarrassing second-hand conversations that involve their political enemies? Perhaps ask the people caught up in the “Russia Collusion” investigations.
There’s apparently a widespread public belief that Epstein was trafficking underage girls to a cabal of powerful people. As of now, there is only evidence that Epstein participated in sexual crimes himself. It is perfectly plausible that the financier befriended celebrities and kingmakers on one hand, and trafficked women for himself on the other. If journalists want to prove that Epstein was the kingpin of the New World Order pedo-ring, go for it. If authorities believe that his prosecution in Florida was corrupt, they should launch an investigation into misconduct. This isn’t an ancient case. Most of the victims are still alive. Most of the powerful people involved with Epstein are still alive. His sidekick is still alive and in prison. Investigate.
But much of this is driven by rank partisanship. Democrats like to act as if Trump is engaged in some cover-up. Well, they had every chance to release the files during Joe Biden’s presidency. I’ve not seen a single Democrat explain why they didn’t. One suspects that if there was anything implicating Trump of genuine wrongdoing, we’d have seen the files leaked long ago. House Democrats couldn’t even muster the votes to censure Democratic Virgin Islands Del. Stacey Plaskett, who exchanged text messages with Epstein during a 2019 congressional hearing. The whole thing is a farce.
Republicans are no better. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s embarrassing press gaggle, featuring some of the world’s most vacuous “influencers” waving empty “Epstein Files: Phase 1” binders around, left the administration with a mess that’s now impossible to fix.
The files, of course, will never be enough. There will be hundreds of ghosts to chase. If conspiracists don’t get what they’re after, they’ll simply claim that other files are being hidden. They’ll demand grand jury files, which are being protected, as they should be by a judge, to be released.
If Americans want to speculate on Epstein, that’s their right. Maybe their theories will be proven correct. But long-standing norms regarding privacy and the presumption of innocence shouldn’t be trashed by cowardly politicians every time the mob howls.
Most Americans now believe Republicans, rather than Democrats, won the government shutdown fight, according to a new poll published Nov. 15.
The CBS News and YouGov poll, conducted between Nov. 13 and 14, found that 55% of Americans believe President Donald Trump and Republicans got more of what they wanted from negotiations that ended the shutdown. Only 6% said Democrats came out on top, and 24% said neither party was victorious.
Most Americans now believe Republicans, rather than Democrats, won the government shutdown fight, according to a new poll published Nov. 15.
The CBS News and YouGov poll, conducted between Nov. 13 and 14, found that 55% of Americans believe President Donald Trump and Republicans got more of what they wanted from negotiations that ended the shutdown. Only 6% said Democrats came out on top, and 24% said neither party was victorious.
The results come weeks after Democrats cited their victories in the 2025 elections as a referendum on Trump and Republican leadership. The survey also stands in stark contrast with polls taken amid the shutdown that showed Republicans shouldering the brunt of voter criticism.
President Donald Trump shakes hands with the Speaker of the House Mike Johnson after signing the bill package to re-open the federal government in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on Nov. 12, 2025. Congress on Wednesday ended the longest government shutdown in US history, 43 days that paralyzed Washington and left hundreds of thousands of workers unpaid while Republicans and Democrats played a high-stakes blame game. The Republican-led House of Representatives voted …See more
After a record-breaking 43 days, the government shutdown ended last week after eight Senate Democrats relented on their health care-related policy demands and voted with Republicans. The Senate compromise quickly passed in the House, and Trump signed it into law hours later.
Democrats agreed to fund the government after Republican Senate leaders promised a future vote to extend Obamacare subsidies that help millions of Americans afford health care. But Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said he would not commit to a similar vote in his chamber, and the health care proposal remains in limbo.
About 70% of Republicans believe their party compromised the “right amount” during negotiations, while 55% of Democrats said their party gave in too much, according to the CBS News survey.
More Americans disapprove of the way Democrats handled the shutdown (60%), compared to Republicans (54%). A majority of those polled (56%) said they disapproved of the way Trump led through the funding fight
The poll was conducted among a sample of 1,288 adults across the nation who were initially surveyed during the shutdown. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 points.
What was in the shutdown deal?
Under the deal, most federal agencies will receive funding through Jan. 30. If the two parties don’t agree to another spending package by then, the government could shut down again.
Lawmakers funded the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program through the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, 2026, and provided additional funding for Veteran’s Affairs medical care.
They also included more than $200 million in funding to increase security measures for members of the House and Senate and additional money for the protection of Supreme Court justices.
Another measure in the package allows a group of Republican senators whose phone records were subpoenaed during the FBI’s 2020 election interference investigation to sue the government for up to $500,000.
USA TODAY
And one of the most controversial measures included in the law closes a loophole that for years has allowed the unregulated sale of certain hemp products nationwide.
Just a reminder to the American people who voted for President Trump and what they wanted him to accomplish:
AMERICA FIRST trade policy Reduce trade deficits Bring back manufacturing jobs Tax cuts Reduce illegal immigration Stronger military Reduce crime Lower drug prices Expand domestic energy production
Trump’s campaign was built around economic nationalism, immigration control, deregulation, national security, and an AMERICA FIRST approach to international policies. So which one of his policies are you against? Putting America first? Tax cuts? Lower drug prices? Secure borders? Deporting illegal immigrants and criminals?
There is such a hatred of a politician, who stated what he was going to do and is doing it and was elected by the popular vote and the electoral college.
If only the left would help us in this endeavor. Why is that? They never want to help our country and anything to benefit the people – just like this shutdown – they continue to want the people to suffer.
The Democrats had the story for 12 years and were a part of this gang of thieves, DOGE proved what they are. If Mr. Epstein was working for the Democrats as the MADAM and that is why it will be thrown back into their lap. The question is – weren’t they in charge when he died?
The Democrats are always talking about “taking people out.”
The story of Epstein reminds me of The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares
24 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. 26 But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. 27 So the servants of the owner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ 28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Do you want us then to go and gather them up?’ 29 But he said, ‘No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.”
How Chummy Is Too Chummy? Epstein Emails Shine Light On Relationships Between Journalists, Sources
The emails to and from Jeffrey Epstein released this week shine a light on the delicate relationship between reporters and their sources. And, as can be the case, bright light isn’t always flattering.
Messages between Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died by suicide in 2019, and journalists Michael Wolff and Landon Thomas Jr. are frequently chummy and, in one case, show Wolff giving Epstein advice on how to deal with the media — a line journalists are taught not to cross. Wolff specializes in the “you are there” inside accounts that are possible with intensive reporting, though some of his work has been questioned.
People frequently see journalists in public settings, conducting an interview or asking questions at a news conference. Private phone calls, texts or messages — where reporters try to ingratiate themselves with sources who may not otherwise be inclined to give information — are inherently different. But ethical rules remain and are followed by most in American journalism.
Wolff’s advice came in a December 2015 exchange, where the writer said he heard CNN was going to ask then-presidential candidate Donald Trump about his relationship with Epstein. If we could craft an answer for him, Epstein wondered, what would it be?
“I think you should let him hang himself,” Wolff replied. “If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency. You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt.
3 biggest takeaways from thousands of Epstei emails from USA TODAY reporter Josh Meyer
Advice On Media Relations For Convicted Sex Offender
The exchange left some experts aghast.
Independence is vital for a journalist, and Wolff compromised it, said Dan Kennedy, a media writer and professor at Northeastern University.
Kathleen Bartzen Culver’s voice rises in anger just contemplating the example. Culver, director of the Center for Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin, said there are plenty of ethical issues to maneuver every day, like whether a reporter should give $20 after interviewing a poor person who lost benefits during the government shutdown.
“Giving PR advice to a convicted sex offender isn’t one of them,” she said.
Wolff, a two-time National Magazine Award winner, wrote books like “Fire and Fury,” about the opening days of the first Trump administration, and “The Man Who Owns the News,” a biography of Rupert Murdoch. “Historically, one of the problems with Wolff’s omniscience is that while he may know all, he gets some of it wrong,” the late David Carr of The New York Times wrote in a review of the Murdoch book.
Wolff, who did not immediately return a message from The Associated Press, admitted on the “Inside Trump’s Head” podcast that some of the email messages were embarrassing. But he said his knowledge of the media offers “the kind of cachet that gives me a place at the table, which has gotten me the Epstein story, if anybody wanted to pay attention.”
At one point in 2016, Wolff turns the table, seeking counsel from Epstein on what he should ask during an upcoming interview with Trump. That’s a legitimate journalistic exercise, part of the reporting that goes into preparing for an interview.
A 2016 exchange with Epstein mixed a plea for an interview with some advice: “There’s an opportunity to come forward this week and talk about Trump in such a way that could garner you great sympathy and help finish him off. Interested?”
Wolff said on the podcast that part of his role is “play-acting” to get sources to reveal things they would not tell other people. And he took on his critics.
“These are not people that have written the kind of books that I have written,” he said, “and I often make the distinction between journalists who do what they do — daily reporters working for organizations, working within a very prescribed set of rules — and what I do. I’m a writer who manages to make relationships that let me tell a story in the ways that The New York Times or other very reputable journalistic organizations are unable to tell.”
A Distinction That Not Every Reader Makes
Not everyone sees the difference when considering works of nonfiction. Culver cited journalism that took courage and skill to report and said, “I find it heartbreaking when that kind of work is sullied by this kind of garbage.”
Should a journalist act differently in public or private? They’re not supposed to. That explains why Connie Chung had a hard time living down her 1995 exchange with then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s mother. Gingrich initially ducked when Chung asked how her son felt about Hillary Clinton until Chung asked — on camera — “why don’t you just whisper it to me — just between you and me.”
Many of the exchanges between Epstein and the journalists are chatty, gossipy — seemingly harmless, yet not the sort of things one would like to see published years later. Northeastern’s Kennedy read some of the emails between Wolff and Epstein and said “it just seemed like kibbitzing with a child molester for no apparent purpose.”
In one email conversation, the former New York Times reporter Thomas mentions that he’s been getting calls from another journalist who is writing a book on Epstein. “He seems very interested in your relationship with the news media,” Thomas wrote. “I told him you were a hell of a guy :).”
Thomas also didn’t hide his feelings about Trump in one conversation — a personal opinion that most reporters learn to keep to themselves. “I am getting worried,” Thomas wrote in July 2016. “Is he ever going to implode?”
Relations Between Journalist And Source: Step Carefully
Journalists should take care to maintain boundaries, especially when dealing with people who are inexperienced with the media. There’s admittedly a fine line: A reporter needs a source’s trust, but it’s a form of deception if a source begins to think of the journalist as a friend who would never betray them.
People most commonly think of politics when considering bias in journalism. More frequently, bias shows up in relationships, whether a reporter likes or dislikes someone they are dealing with, Culver said.
“I advise my students to be human with their sources,” she said. “Not to be friendly or sweet, but to come at it with respect and understanding.”
Thomas stopped working at The Times in 2019 after editors discovered a violation of its ethical standards. National Public Radio reported that Thomas had solicited a $30,000 contribution from Epstein for a charity the journalist supported.
In one exchange that was widely noticed online, Epstein asked Thomas in 2015 if he would like photos of Trump and girls in bikinis taken in his kitchen. “Yes!!!” the reporter replied.
But The Times said no such photos were forthcoming.
The post How Chummy Is Too Chummy? Epstein Emails Shine Light On Relationships Between Journalists, Sources appeared first on TV News Check.
How Chummy Is Too Chummy? Epstein Emails Shine Light On Relationships Between Journalists, Sources
The emails to and from Jeffrey Epstein released this week shine a light on the delicate relationship between reporters and their sources. And, as can be the case, bright light isn’t always flattering.
Messages between Epstein, the convicted sex offender who died by suicide in 2019, and journalists Michael Wolff and Landon Thomas Jr. are frequently chummy and, in one case, show Wolff giving Epstein advice on how to deal with the media — a line journalists are taught not to cross. Wolff specializes in the “you are there” inside accounts that are possible with intensive reporting, though some of his work has been questioned.
People frequently see journalists in public settings, conducting an interview or asking questions at a news conference. Private phone calls, texts or messages — where reporters try to ingratiate themselves with sources who may not otherwise be inclined to give information — are inherently different. But ethical rules remain and are followed by most in American journalism.
Wolff’s advice came in a December 2015 exchange, where the writer said he heard CNN was going to ask then-presidential candidate Donald Trump about his relationship with Epstein. If we could craft an answer for him, Epstein wondered, what would it be?
“I think you should let him hang himself,” Wolff replied. “If he says he hasn’t been on the plane or to the house, then that gives you a valuable PR and political currency. You can hang him in a way that potentially generates a positive benefit for you, or, if it really looks like he could win, you could save him, generating a debt
Yes, why isn’t Wolff including questions about Bill/Hillary in reference to Epstein – how many times did Bill AND HILLARY ride that plane to the island. Did some report 28 times? Mr. Wolff should interview them. I bet they could tell some brick and mortar stories and even how many bed/bath rooms are available.
Wolf has written four books about the President. They are now trying to hang the whole Epstein business on the President because they have no boundary. They have put themselves in a position that continues to look like “cheaters’ row candidates.
The left is getting nervous or they wouldn’t have drug out Obama/Axelrod/Couric. That is the bottom of the barrel and the actual head of this expedition.
I have a question – Did Epstein work for the FBI during the Democrats 12 years of service? It was during this time that seems to have created Epstein. Just a “pie in the sky.” – Epstein seemed to always have plenty of access to money but never had a real job. Was Epstein working for the Democrats Party/FBI and established his business under cover furnishing Democrats/et al – “ladies of the night.? How could he own an island resort and not even work?
The Democrats had this info for 12 years about Epstein. They know more than they are reporting.
From what I have read in the papers the President and Epstein were not that side by side due to Epstein always stealing the President’s workers in Florida. The lady of the night who took her life was one of the President’s workers and her father worked for the President and both of them spoke highly of the President. Since she was the main frame, I would take her word for it.
Also, how much is Wolff being paid to “hot rod” this topic for the left? Just think of the money he has brought home to momma? And, FOUR books just about Trump. Goodness, he hit a gold mine and now the book that will help him retire.
The lefties are the ones who are ‘rubbing elbows with the devil.” If people continue being interested in the stories of a dead man, I will be surprised; but, as we know the lefties have already proven their lies and deceit with all of the times they tried to convict him of “nothing.” Even two of the prosecutors are now under investigation for fraud. The Democrats need to repay the taxpayers for all of the times they brought the President to court.
Why didn’t Mr. Wolff bring up this subject during the 12 years the Democrats were in charge of the government. Why- because it would have been pigeon-holed until they needed it to blame others.
Now is that time.
I will always say – Epstein was the ‘MADAM” for the GOVERNMENT/Democrats.”
Man at center of Epstein email release claims Trump insiders panicking
Story by David McAfee
President Donald Trump’s insiders are panicking, according to a controversial Trump biographer whose name was heavily included in the recent Jeffrey Epstein email release.
Michael Wolff, a journalist who has written four books about Trump and has had numerous conversations with Epstein, said on a Daily Beast podcast on Saturday that those close to Trump are “frantic.”
When asked how Trump thinks he will “ride this one out,” Wolff says, “This has been enormously frustrating to him for a very long time.”
“The fact that this is all coming home to roost I think is completely freaking him out,” Wolff said. “He doesn’t know what to do… he has no strategy. He feels cornered.”
His sense of the people at the White House is that they are “frantic.” They understand the political perils but Trump is “telling them nothing,” according to Wolff.
“The people in the White House genuinely don’t know what happened with Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump,” he said in the weekend video. “They don’t know because that has been whitewashed out of the Donald Trump political narrative.”
USA TODAY
USA TODAY
kommonsentsjane 