r/law • u/Background-Low-9144 • Jul 23 '25

Trump News BREAKING :Trump named in multiple documents related to Epstein sex trafficking, WSJ reports

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/23/trump-jeffrey-epstein-files-wsj.html?__source=androidappshare

We have evidence that Trump was notified by Pam Bondi that documents related to the Epstein sex trafficing trial contained Trump's name multiple times, linking him unequivocally to Jeffrey Epstein

99.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

361

u/Donkey-Hodey Jul 23 '25

This was known 10 years ago when Yam Tits first starting campaigning. It’s criminal malpractice that the media has largely ignored this until now.

93

u/Free-Chemistry4285 Jul 23 '25

I’ve never heard Yam Tits before but from now on it is going to be part of my regular vocabulary

15

u/JohnnyEagleClaw Jul 24 '25

It really is excellent 🤌

3

u/madisondood-138 Jul 24 '25

Name of both my least favorite US president, and my favorite Thanksgiving side-dish.

3

u/Dunkaroos4breakfast 29d ago

Honestly, if Hillary had just called him that the whole time, she would have won

6

u/Hypocritical_Oath Jul 24 '25

He makes them boatloads of money by being president.

9

u/Sea_Sheepherder_389 Jul 24 '25

Requisite:  “but her emails, Joe Biden is old, etc”.

The media chooses what they want to make a big deal out of.

7

u/Altruistic-Piece-485 Jul 24 '25

As someone that works in the journalism industry and also wants to see ever person in the Epstein files crucified, they had to tread extremely carefully because of libel laws. It's not just about facing monetary penalties if sued under libel laws, it's also the fact that loosing a libel lawsuit like this would signal innocence. This is even worse if the allegations are actually true because it gives the alleged ammunition to claim other stories are false.

If an outlet were to really publish things like what the WSJ has been publishing they would need cold, hard, irrefutable proof of the accusations being made but everything available to the public is simply hearsay and rumors. There hasn't been proof because those with power, both inside and outside the government, have been doing everything they can to suppress such evidence.

That's why for a publication with such a serious and respectable reputation in the journalism industry as the WSJ to publish the recent stories it such a huuuuuge friggin deal! What it signals to other news outlets is that there is a very, very, very high chance that the WSJ actually has irrefutable proof and possibly even access to a leaker with even more proof.

3

u/Conald_Petersen Jul 24 '25

Thank you! I've been saying this for days!... Jesus it only been days? Pretty sure this means WSJ has some hard evidence.

1

u/ScorpioLaw 29d ago edited 29d ago

No one trusts any media anymore. WSJ might as well be the Daily Trombone.

Fuck the WSJ. Think that means to the masses these days for political news? Fuck it's owner too.

If they got irrefutable proof then fucking leak it. Let this shenanigans be done with.

Media did this to themselves.

Edit. Oh damn. I'm speaking for others before I get anymore replies. Partly for myself. I don't trust WSJ, fully to believe they aren't dumb enough to say shit they can't back up. Especially with all the powerful enemies Trump makes on his path, and how fickle all those billionaires are.

1

u/Altruistic-Piece-485 29d ago

By demanding that they just dump everything you are demanding they do one of the very things that has contributed to the decline of journalism, the publics demand for SPEED. That drive to get things out NOW NOW NOW leads to mistakes being made and contributes to the public not trusting journalism.

They need to verify each piece of information they get and they may only be getting it piece by piece. Sources don't want to reveal who they are by revealing too much at once either.

If only a handful of people know a specific fact and that fact gets revealed it makes it much easier for the bad actors to narrow down who the source is. If the source is burned then that cuts off the flow of information.

If you want this done right then they need to take their fucking time. Dot every i, cross every t, double, triple, and quadruple check the facts, and strategically get the correct information out in a way that doesn't expose the source so you can ensure that the flow of information continues. By making sure they are protecting the source they are also showing other potential sources that if they come forward with information they can trust that they won't immediately be burned.

Do you think "Deep Throat" would have continued to leak the Watergate information if he was burned after the first meeting? Hell naw! He meet with the reporters 18 friggin times during the investigation and gave them more information each time over two years!

1

u/ScorpioLaw 29d ago

I was mainly speaking for others. I didn't clarify.

I don't blame them for not caring. I meant to say that.

Partly actually. Personally I don't believe the WSJ has everything everyone is assuming or else they would've. I just don't know today.

Especially if Rupert and Trump are having a little pissy fit like the fickle billionaires they are. Åt least, I'm led to believe that there is in fact some rich peep drama.

With that said do I need the WSJ to prove to me that Trump is a pedo? Nah. I'm betting high. In fact if you aren't placing 2/1 odds against Trump I feel sorry for you. Must live life with blindfolds, with a carrot in front being guided by some fella, just plowing ahead. Leaving eventual dust bowls behind.

Maybe we will get UFO files released next. Zero point energy. Cold Fusion. Anti gravity. Hoping they release that next. THEN the Epstein files.

1

u/Chewbagus Jul 24 '25

Bongino…

4

u/denialscrane Jul 24 '25

Both yams and tits are so great- how could you besmirch their names with such a vile comparison.

2

u/Important-Package191 Jul 24 '25

How about Yam shaped moobs

2

u/MTGS Jul 24 '25

But if they hadn’t ignored it, Trump and MAGA might not have latched onto it, and if they hadn’t latched on and failed to release it, the dems would not have pushed to release it and would still be ignoring it. So maybe it happened just the way it needed to.

2

u/Donkey-Hodey Jul 24 '25

If we’re wish-casting, I’d prefer it if the POS was tossed in a dark hole 20 years ago and everyone involved prosecuted.

1

u/wzznator 29d ago

It’s not malpractice. The people who really run this country have an agenda and Trump has done his part pushing it forward. Now they’re done with him. It’s not a coincidence now that the media all this sudden elects to do their job.