By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Senator Lummis has publicly stated a shift in her perspective regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case, acknowledging the gravity of the situation, particularly concerning the young victims. She now recognizes the importance of the investigations and affirms that those members of Congress who pursued the matter were correct in their efforts. This change in stance follows years where Lummis, like many other Republicans, prioritized loyalty to then-President Trump and remained largely silent on the well-documented sex crimes committed by Epstein against minors. Her belated acknowledgment is framed by some as opportunism, especially in light of her upcoming retirement from Congress.
Read the original article here
Representative Jamie Raskin has brought a startling revelation to light regarding the unredacted files pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein. He has asserted that Donald Trump’s name appears in these documents an astonishing number of times, exceeding one million mentions. Raskin, after having had the opportunity to review these files himself, expressed the sheer volume of information, suggesting that even a cursory examination of a “meaningful fraction” of them is practically impossible. He emphasized that Trump’s name is “all over the place,” leading him to believe the count surpasses a million.
The implication of this staggering number is profound, especially when considering the extent to which these documents have been redacted. Reports suggest that if Raskin’s assessment holds true, it would mean the Department of Justice has deliberately withheld over 96% of the mentions involving Trump. This raises serious questions about the transparency and completeness of the information being released to the public, with Raskin himself characterizing the limited access and staggered release as part of a potential “coverup.”
One particular exchange that has drawn attention involves an email chain between Epstein and his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell. In this communication, Epstein reportedly recounts a conversation with his lawyers regarding Trump. According to Raskin’s account, Trump is quoted as stating that while Epstein was not a member of Mar-a-Lago, he was indeed a guest and was never asked to leave. This particular detail is significant because it dates back to 2009, a time when Trump had purportedly already expelled Epstein from his Florida resort. The discrepancy here fuels further speculation about the nature of their relationship and any potential complicity.
The sheer magnitude of Trump’s presence in the Epstein files, as reported by Raskin, has understandably led to widespread disbelief and outrage. Many are struggling to comprehend how an individual could be so extensively implicated in documents related to such a notorious figure, and how this information has not led to more significant consequences. The feeling of a “circus of no accountability” and a sense of national disgrace permeates the reactions to this news.
The call for greater media scrutiny and direct questioning of the former President is strong, with many believing it is long overdue. The comparison to the protests under the “No Kings” banner highlights a perceived disparity in public outrage, with some arguing that the accusations against Trump, if true, warrant an even greater societal response. There’s a sentiment that the media has been too hesitant to report on the full extent of the allegations, leading to accusations of complicity in a broader cover-up.
The persistent defense of Trump, even in the face of such revelations, is a point of frustration for many. The notion that these files, so heavily laden with Trump’s involvement, are simply “fake news” is met with disbelief and a deep sense of disillusionment. The idea that a former President could be so entangled with Epstein and yet maintain a significant level of public support is seen by some as indicative of a profound societal rot.
The question of how much of Epstein himself is actually detailed within the “Epstein files” is also being raised, underscoring the belief that the documents are, in essence, becoming “The Trump Files.” This perspective suggests an equal partnership in illicit activities, with individuals like Bondi and Patel also being implicated in alleged cover-ups and lies. The demand is for everyone involved in such a perceived cover-up to be held accountable and face consequences.
The history of Trump’s public statements regarding the Epstein case, including his past dismissals of it as a “Democrat hoax,” further complicates the narrative and fuels skepticism about his current stance. The idea of renaming these files the “Epstein-Trump files” reflects a common sentiment that their connection is inseparable and fundamental to understanding the full scope of the scandal.
For those who continue to deny Trump’s involvement, citing “fake news,” the revelation of his overwhelming presence in these documents is deeply disheartening. The disconnect between the evidence and the continued support for Trump leads to profound disappointment and a questioning of the state of the world. The notion that a President’s name could appear so frequently in such a context is almost unfathomable to many.
The number itself, “more than a million times,” is so immense that it strains credibility for some, yet the source, an interview with Representative Raskin conducted by Axios, lends it weight. The sheer proportion of Trump’s mentions relative to the total volume of documents is staggering, implying he is present on a significant percentage of the pages.
The contrast is made with how often God is mentioned in the Bible, highlighting the unprecedented nature of this accusation. There’s a palpable frustration with the slow pace of information release and a strong desire for the full, unredacted files to be made public so individuals can draw their own conclusions. The demand for justice is clear: either accountability is delivered, or the credibility of the U.S. justice system is irrevocably damaged.
The sheer number of communications attributed to individuals involved raises logistical questions about the feasibility of such a volume of messages. The ongoing debate over “fake news” versus undeniable evidence persists, with many expressing disbelief that a figure like Trump could still hold the position of President given these allegations. The pattern of accusations emerging when public access is limited fuels a sense of suspicion and distrust.
Ultimately, the core of the issue, as articulated by many, is the alleged pedophilia of a former President and the widespread support he continues to receive. The number of times Trump’s name appears in the Epstein files, as reported by Representative Raskin, serves as a stark indicator of the deep entanglement and raises critical questions about accountability, transparency, and the integrity of the justice system.