AG Bondi has Epstein client list sitting on her desk

Morons I say

 

The credibility of this source has been questioned

 

Robert Barnes makes a lot of great points in this video. Trump is letting Netanyahu destroy his presidency.

 

Very cool. As long as some of those incompetent conspiracy theory kooks quit because the other ones were allowed to stay. Who cares which ones stay or go at the moment. If they keep doing it, we may end up with a government that cares about serving the people.

Now what do we have to do to get that incompetent reality TV guy criminal to threaten to resign?

 

The great Mike Benz thinks Jeffrey Epstein's connections to Intel agencies needs to be investigated. Tonight he'll put out a video showing how to do that. Don't watch the video vaxcardinal, unless you're ready to collapse to the drawing room floor like a Victorian maiden with a case of the vapors

 

Actually looks like we've got the real answer to this question.

It's really weird how these MAGA people tolerate being so repeatedly lied to, and worship the people who lie to them.


Earlier this year, for instance, the Attorney General helped organize a “scoop” for MAGA social media influencers, who were called to the White House and presented with binders of Epstein-related documents. But as it turned out, those binders contained hundreds of pages that mostly had been public for years.

FBI No. 2 'Flees' After West Wing Screaming Match Over Epstein

 

I am not weighing in on the merits of any IC connection, but they were even talking about it on Pod Save America. Since Vegas mentioned Grok, I thought it would be interesting to ask his same question to my ChatGPT. I take it with a grain of salt, but it’s not a completely wacky thing to question IMO.

Only Prompt: Pretend you are a bettor. Would you bet that Epstein had worked with the CIA or Mossad or that he had never worked for either?

Response:

If I had to put money on it, I’d bet—cautiously—on the idea that Epstein had at least some intelligence ties, though not necessarily as a formal agent of the CIA or Mossad. Here’s how I’d think through the wager:

Betting on

Yes, he worked with intelligence (in some capacity)

Odds I’d give: ~60-65%

Why I might put money on this:

• The 2007 plea deal was stunningly lenient—far beyond typical prosecutorial discretion. Multiple former federal prosecutors, defense attorneys, and journalists have said it looked like a cover or protection.
• Alex Acosta, who approved that deal, reportedly told the Trump transition team that Epstein “belonged to intelligence” and that he was told to back off. That’s secondhand and unconfirmed—but not nothing.
• Behavioral profile: Epstein lived like someone with leverage. His access to high-level figures across politics, finance, and science—including former presidents, royals, and billionaires—implies a usefulness beyond finance.
• Classic intelligence tradecraft: Some of what Epstein reportedly did—recording compromising situations, using shell companies and front properties, frequenting jurisdictions with weak extradition—looks very compatible with espionage tradecraft, especially for blackmail operations.
• Ghislaine Maxwell’s background: Her father, Robert Maxwell, had well-documented ties to Mossad, MI6, and possibly KGB. It would not be a huge leap to suspect she continued in some capacity, or that Epstein may have acted as a facilitator.

❌ Betting on

No, he never worked with intelligence

Odds I’d give: ~35-40%

Why someone might bet this way:

• Lack of hard evidence: There’s still no definitive proof linking him to any intelligence agency. Most of the claims are circumstantial or speculative.
• Alternative explanation: Epstein may have simply been a wealthy, manipulative predator who used blackmail to secure protection. Not all corruption requires the CIA or Mossad—sometimes it’s just rich people covering for each other.
• Some accounts suggest he exaggerated his intelligence or financial connections. The man was a fraud in other areas—so maybe this was more of the same.

Final Verdict as a Bettor:

I’d hedge, but lean toward betting that Epstein had at least some relationship—formal or informal—with an intelligence agency, probably more in the Mossad/foreign intelligence world than directly employed by the CIA. He may have been an asset, informant, or used for operations requiring “deniability.”

It wouldn’t shock me if we find out in 20 years that he was running a classic honey trap operation, and multiple agencies were happy to let him do it—as long as he shared what he found.

Want me to break this down like a betting line (e.g., +140 vs -110), or dig into what sort of intelligence role he might’ve had?

 

Bondi has been Trump’s parrot since taking office. Do you really believe she is doing anything regarding Epstein without ensuring Trump is ok with it?

 

Trump is an amazing, great reality TV host criminal, and it is very sad and unfortunate that the people he appoints keep doing bad things, totally of their own volition.

He needs to distance himself from these bad people, and continue doing great things and appointing great people.

 

Exactly. It's been four or five months since Bondi said the Espstein list was on her desk. It's taken this long to come back and say there is no list. So, what are the options:
- There is no list. Bondi simply made it up and that crew is so dysfunctional that no one bothered to check on something that big, to see if there was a list?
- There is no list, but Bondi thought there was a list and is too dimwitted to actually check the files to see if there really was before making her announcement. And, again, the administration is too disconnected and out of it to check.
- There is a list, but it's taken the administration this long to figure out how to make it disappear? "Uh, why don't we just say there isn't one? That should work?" Of course, that means they had a very big reason to make it disappear.
- The original announcement and eventual correction were all just usual off-the-cuff pingpong ball from Trump. And we don't have a clue if there's a list or not.

 

Newsweek July 11, 2025 : "Speaking on The Sean Spicer Show in March, Alan Dershowitz, a longtime criminal defense attorney, said he knew the names of individuals referenced in confidential Epstein files and claimed those names are being deliberately withheld."

So dear leader's defense lawyer states he know names that are on a list that WH says didn't exist. Lots of lying going on here.

 

Tucker Carlson bringing the antisemitism? Or is this just how a sane, normal person thinks about Jeffrey Epstein and whether he might have worked with the Mossad? I guess Tucker doesn't care what the vaccardinals of the world think

 

Questions for the lawyers… If the AG has a list, isn’t it her job to take to evidence to a Grand Jury? Wouldn’t publishing a list of people potentially harm ongoing investigations? Public opinion has already put anyone on the lists as guilty until proven innocent.

Why not just bury the entire details in a continual “we’re working on the case and it is massive.” They could have bled this out for the remainder of Trump’s term. Seems like they lost the thread.

 

Because you keep saying Epstein was working with the CIA or the Mossad. You need to explain yourself. Are you suggesting that this whole thing was a CIA or Mossad operation for 30 years? How exactly was Epstein working with them? In what capacity? Was he a W-2 employee there? For someone who thinks they are so smart about things like this, you should be able to provide a much more detailed account of how you think Epstein would have been working with either organization.

And please explain how anyone at the CIA would be able to get an operation with Epstein through legal since it would involve sexual activities with underage American citizens which would break US laws.

 

Trump doesn't listen to 90% of what is offered to him.

I've known this for a loooooong time. She had trump university evidence on her "desk" here in FL and after taking a $25,000 donation from trump's non profit, she dropped the case.

 

Not a lawyer but here is some info that might help answer your questions:
1. No the AG does not have to take the list to a Grand Jury if she or the DoJ do not think they have the evidence to prove that the people on "the list" engaged in illegal activities.
2. I'm not sure there is any ongoing investigation into Epstein at this point.
3. The DoJ is tasked to protect people who they do not charge from having their public reputation being smeared in a way they can never rebut. You cannot have a prosecutor say at a PC, "We think Mr. Jim Smith killed his wife but we cannot prove it, so we are not going to charge him." So the DoJ should not release any names that would then make those people be, as you say, "guilty until proven innocent."
4. If they try to bury the story with the "we are working it" then everyone is going to think there is an investigation and the results are going to have to be made public at some point.

 

That is interesting and thanks for replying. This implies the Director of the FBI would then be at odds with the AG if he believes there is enough evidence to go to a grand jury. That sounds very strange. “You can indict a ham sandwich”.

Not Epstein, but why not his “clients”?

exactly. So why would any competent AG even tease the possibility of a list? It’s almost like there was a group of people who capitulated in the shadows to a criminal shakedown.

not necessarily. Could take years of investigation. Politically, it could have just been “2 weeks away”.

 

Seeing a lot on Twitter that there is a power struggle between Bongino vs Bondi over this. Apparently Bongino is threatening to resign if the list is not released.

I think the issue is what made someone an Epstein "client"? If you were on his plane, does that cross the line? If you went to the island? I think the challenge is that they cannot prove that just because someone went to the island, they engaged in illegal activities. For an example, if Epstein had a lawyer that traveled to the island to consulting with him on legal issues for a couple days, would that guy be "a client"?

If you say there is an investigation, it has to end at some point. The fascination with this case is not going to end as long as there is still an investigation in to it.

 

The original post in this thread didn't age very well. I still believe that the list is real and that Blondi (misspelling intended) isn't releasing the list because Trump's name or the names of other high profile Republicans are on the list.