The Epstein Files have been released

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
This is not difficult: wiki

2023, Trump was found liable in civil cases for sexual abuse and defamation and for business fraud.

He was found guilty in 34 counts of falsifying business records in 2024, making him the first U.S. president convicted of a felony

For the felonies he received a jury trial; and the same laws and procedures applied to him in court as they do us.

After becoming Presicent he remained a felon but he avoided prison time by receiving a discharge meaning he is still guilty. There are no point in attempting anything but a discharge as he can pardon himself out of prison
That was presented well, with good information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
. TDS is displayed here with regularity.
As is wilful repeated sin as the afflicted plumb to new depths to assail America and Trump.
Criticizing the flaws of a leader's character, words and actions is not a sin.
Trump's flaws are obvious to many Americans and the rest of world.
But MAGA supporters are oblivious to them. Why is that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
He is very compromised (under blackmail) just like all the others, that is what Ep***n was all about.
I reserve my opinion on this. He's clearly done an about-face since becoming President, but I don't think blackmail makes sense for that. If it were about blackmail material on Trump, he could've been stopped from even running. I believe the reason for this will come out eventually, but I'm equally sure it won't be about blackmail for Satanic rituals or child sexual abuse (i.e. post trials), as it has been for some of the compromised leaders thus far.

Follow the money trail, QAnon just part of the psyops to get the Trojan horse in office.
Q is a psyop, but I see its push to get people to think rather than believe a certain position. Easier ways to get someone elected than Q (such was done for decades - Joe Biden being the most obvious example), so more to it than just getting someone into office, in my opinion. "QAnon" is the movement the LSM push to try to tie Q with particular individuals who promote their given straw man agendas, but in reality, there is no QAnon. Just Q, and individual "Anons".
 
Criticizing the flaws of a leader's character, words and actions is not a sin.
Trump's flaws are obvious to many Americans and the rest of world.
But MAGA supporters are oblivious to them. Why is that?

Because you're blind that's why.
 
I reserve my opinion on this. He's clearly done an about-face since becoming President, but I don't think blackmail makes sense for that. If it were about blackmail material on Trump, he could've been stopped from even running. I believe the reason for this will come out eventually, but I'm equally sure it won't be about blackmail for Satanic rituals or child sexual abuse (i.e. post trials), as it has been for some of the compromised leaders thus far.

Q is a psyop, but I see its push to get people to think rather than believe a certain position. Easier ways to get someone elected than Q (such was done for decades - Joe Biden being the most obvious example), so more to it than just getting someone into office, in my opinion. "QAnon" is the movement the LSM push to try to tie Q with particular individuals who promote their given straw man agendas, but in reality, there is no QAnon. Just Q, and individual "Anons".

The blackmail is taking money with strings attached.
Read the released docs and the affidavits that were dropped under death threats.
The key is understanding narcissist psychology.

QAnon only a part of a bigger picture, radicalize people, make people fanatical, false hope etc.,.. at one point it had a huge following.
Believe as you will, but he does not have clean hands by any stretch of the imagination.
You have a little left on the red pill, lol. ;)
 
Criticizing the flaws of a leader's character, words and actions is not a sin.
Trump's flaws are obvious to many Americans and the rest of world.
But MAGA supporters are oblivious to them. Why is that?

I doubt we will ever understand their mentality, count that as a very good thing!!
It is purely the effect of psychological manipulation and brainwashing, propaganda works and they have studied this for years, covertly I might add even at places like McGill, MIT etc., they know that a large portion of the populace is susceptible to programming under the right circumstances.

You know I have been watching that pastor you used to post, while I do not always agree with his take he really makes a good point of DT being like a groomer. Renee Good is exceptional in conversation with him in case you have not seen his latest videos.

 
  • Like
Reactions: true_believer
I doubt we will ever understand their mentality, count that as a very good thing!!
It is purely the effect of psychological manipulation and brainwashing, propaganda works and they have studied this for years, covertly I might add even at places like McGill, MIT etc., they know that a large portion of the populace is susceptible to programming under the right circumstances.

You know I have been watching that pastor you used to post, while I do not always agree with his take he really makes a good point of DT being like a groomer. Renee Good is exceptional in conversation with him in case you have not seen his latest videos.

I'm listening to this while I'm working. Pastors like himself and others that share his views need more exposure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
Donald said he had one of his staffers post the video. Kinda makes you wonder if he really did know what was on it and just wanted to have someone to blame it on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
Nonsense, everyone has bias. Especially the way this country is going.

Yes, how is that relevant to Wikipedia? You know wikipedia is not written by a single person, but a community of people around the world with various biases.

You imagine that it is like news. It is not. News stories are generally done by one person and then reviewed by an editor, both parties are pressured to present or not present material in a way biased to the audience.

Wiki articles are written by multiple people, reviewed by multiple people, and none of them has an incentive to bias as they are not paid. I once did an experiment, a joke about someone I knew in the article about a band without an relevance today, including some harmless few sentences you would not think twice about. I still got caught.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
Yep they DO react like that.

Makes me think of the Nazis and no, I am not calling them that, but it is an easy thing for people to get their head around. People could tune into the BBC. That was illegal. If you shared real news, that'd get you locked up or killed by a mob. They could hear Russian tanks firing from outside of Berlin and they lived in a reality-free zone.

Fake News = Reality Free
 
You omitted the full policy in that regard.

Google AI,does Wikipedia lock sensitive topics:

Yes, Wikipedia restricts (or "locks") editing on sensitive, controversial, or highly targeted subjects to prevent vandalism and edit wars. While anyone can typically edit, these articles may be temporarily or permanently protected, requiring users to have established accounts, high edit counts, or administrative status to make changes

I believe I brought that up. You are purposely being misleading, as if outside opinions are locked out and being on an internet forum you should know better and I believe you do. First you said anyone can edit articles. That is not true in terms of at any given time. I can not edit an article on Trump this second. The reason should be obvious, people would provide false information and vandalize it. If you want something added or altered, it would need to be submitted and get approval. This is not a difficult concept on AN INTERNET FORUM. Many forums require approval before you can post. Others have a probationary period. Some have such hot areas it requires approval. The articles are never permanently "closed." I can edit this second an article on Superbowl X. No one generally messes with obscure articles and contributions are needed.




Google AI question: can the public edit wikipedia

Yes, anyone can edit Wikipedia, as it's built on the principle of open collaboration, allowing registered users and anonymous editors (using their IP address) to add or change content, but edits must follow strict policies on neutrality, verifiability, and avoiding original research, with systems in place to combat vandalism and ensure quality.
How it works
    • Anyone can edit:
      You don't need an account to make changes, though creating one offers more privacy (your IP is hidden from most users).
    • Community oversight:
      A large community of volunteer editors, some with special administrator privileges, monitors changes, reverting vandalism and ensuring articles meet standards.
    • Policies:
      Edits must adhere to key rules, including:
        • Neutral Point of View (NPOV): Summarize differing views proportionally, don't take sides.
        • Verifiability: Use reliable published sources; no original research or personal opinions.
        • No Conflict of Interest (COI): Avoid editing articles about yourself, family, or employers.
    • Protection:
      Highly vandalized or controversial pages (like those for celebrities or major events) are often "protected," requiring logged-in users or administrators to edit them.
    • Dispute Resolution:
      If you disagree with an edit, you discuss it on the article's Talk Page, using the {{Edit COI}} template if you have a conflict of interest, explains Wikipedia:Editing a page about you.
What to do if you want to contribute
    • Find an article: Look for a topic you know about.
    • Use the edit link: Click the "Edit" tab on the page.
    • Follow the rules: Ensure your changes are neutral, cited with reliable sources, and not personal opinion or promotion.
    • Use the Teahouse: For help, visit the Wikipedia:The Teahouse for guidance from experienced editors.
You do not seem to have basic grasp of something so simple.

This second anyone can edit an article on Superbowl X. It will immediately appear.
This second no one can edit an article on Trump. It must be submitted for approval before it can appear.

I didn't try anything. But you did.
Your presumption regarding fake news is a red herring so to avoid the fact that you didn't read the article I linked. You avoid that matter repeatedly. Which is odd.

It is not a presumption and I have no idea what you are talking about. I showed that he was convicted on two different occasions. I showed a wiki article on a huge subject with countless contributors and editors. You stated you needed a news article and then you hypocritically go on about bias. Proving once again, you'd simply call it biased and it was fake news.
 
JUST IN: 🇺🇸 Multiple members of Congress are on their way to the DOJ to view the unredacted Epstein Files.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
BREAKING: 🇺🇸 Ghislaine Maxwell has refused to answer House committee questions about Jeffrey Epstein.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
NEW:

🇺🇸🇦🇪A UAE diplomat, who now directs the UAE Permanent Committee for Human Rights appears in 469 Epstein emails scheduling girls:

January 2012 email from Hind Alowais to Epstein: "Getting one girl ready is difficult enough, two girls, you can certainly call a challenge."
 
For those that do not know, a common tactic of truth-haters is to misuse AI and make it appear AI knows all things.

If I did a regular search of Donald Trump, I would get untold links of information. I cannot read all that, but AI can and within seconds give me a summary of a search on "Donald Trump." If I type "Donald Trump is gay" or "Prove Donald Trump is gay" you know what the search engine will pop up with. Type that into AI and it will summarize those results and these sleaze bags treat it like it came down from an oracle without admitting what search criteria that used.