Something I’d like to hear more about is when and how to expand the message to “if he lied to you about this, what else is lying to you about?” There are so many other lies to choose from, how do we be effective without watering down the message?
I guess I don’t understand why Bondi isn’t just releasing a fake list with all their political targets on it. Nothing they say is true and people believe it anyway (eating pets in Ohio, weather machines in NC, and we’re not cutting social security come to mind) so why should this be any different?
But also, I think we should be wondering aloud which republicans and how many Supreme Court justices are on the list. It would certainly explain their behavior if they were being blackmailed. It would also explain the current unwillingness to release the list bc then they’ll lose all their leverage along with, one would hope, some elections.
My guess is that too many legit people are familiar with the Epstein files. Prosecutors, other DOJ lawyers, investigators (state and federal) and Bondi is rightly nervous to release a fake. If there’s even a list.
Wondering about the SCOTUS Injustices being blackmailed is quite the interesting possibility. At this point, I don't see how the US Supreme Court will ever again be seen as upstanding stalwarts -- whose life work is to carry out the mission & principles of the US Constitution. I don't see it. SMH
It's so funny to me seeing all the bro's doing the "DO u ThINk WeRe STupID!?!" after Trump succesfully made all these sample people believe that Bill Cliton, Obama etc are all involved in some conspiracy to abduct children etc...
Dan, Tony and I, whom I met through long years on here and finally my husb and I met him and his spouse (a remarkable leader in environmental law) finally got to meet, here in Oregon. We talked at length about how to be a "messenger." Tony is a poli sci professor and has a ready audience of young, new voters so his substack is of great value (also to others.) I constantly am asked to write one, but it is mostly by my own people as you put it. I would love to see a Message Box about how to become someone who can reach those not in our circle. I need coaching on that. What I said to Tony was that there is so much content out there I never trust it is worth the energy. But would be glad to do it if could make a difference. It really saddens us that you no longer do your Q and A, as it was of real value to get to ask you questions and you are asking us to take action so it matters. I don't even know if you read your comment section anymore. God knows you are busy. But this is help that would matter. I would also like to see you, Mr. Pollercoaster, take our temp about some topics we really feel the need to have you address. For me, it is the stuffing of judges into every corner, and grooming that asshole for SCOTUS. I am really scared of losing the possibility of voting at all. I see others here hoping you will address this and that. With respect, are you listening to us anymore? Or just writing. At least tell us why you don't respond anymore. We care about you and it would help also to hear that. Anyway, living in a blue state (which are of course never entirely blue) means it is harder to reach people who do need to hear. Though wouldn't trade living in a blue state for red. Also (sorry so long) many of us are not really on social media anymore, that is also something to ponder.
The part of the scandal that may be able to carry through to the mid-terms, and be reinforced by other actions of the Trump administration, is one of trust. If Trump's supporters stop trusting him, and Dems continually point out how he can't be trusted, we may not get their votes, but we might get them to stay home.
Why on earth should Democrats pull punches on an issue (child sex trafficking) that fueled QAnon and helped defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016? Every Dem should hit this issue as hard as they can, and drive the deepest possible wedge between Trump and MAGA.
Let's not forget: Have Fun! Trumpublicans are tied to the whipping post. We should have fun and be seen to be having fun. Were I a university president at yesterday's anti-Semitism show trial I would begin my reply to every GOP question, "I do not believe it is anti-Semitic to want to know what is in the Epstein files."
Many upper-level Dems, especially the white ones, are probably running with this because it's *easy* -- and because (unlike serious talk about wealth/income inequality and economic issues in general) it's not likely to get them called "socialists." Notice how over the years they've often labeled those who do talk about these issues "left" or even "far left" -- a term that back in the day was reserved for the likes of Stalin and Mao.
The advent of Trump II has exposed for all (OK, at least some of us) to see the short-sightedness, cluelessness, and maybe flat-out cowardice in many congressional Democrats and the Democratic Party at the national level. It bugs me to see this attributed to "Democrats" in general. At the same time I'm glad to see state-level Democratic officials taking some initiative, e.g., the secretaries of state (DASS) and the attorneys general (DAGA). Democratic parties in swing states (WI, MI, NC, PA, etc.) seem more on the ball than those in reliably blue states like mine (MA). How to build on that going forward? That's the big question for the party at all levels.
So I'm just checking if I've got this. The RIGHT way to talk to Trump about the Epstein Files, might be to say:
"Mr. President, I was told you have a rather lengthy list of reasons you'd like to recite today, explaining why the Epstein investigation has been closed. And that it should never, ever, under any circumstances, be reopened. That it is a nothing burger. That there is no there, there. We saw your post: "Stop Talking About Epstein!"
So then Pres. Trump, can we move on to your Fear Of Missing Out -- or FOMO?
Because it seems, you have strongly twisted people's arms -- literally a DOZEN times -- to nominate you for the Nobel Peace Prize. That number sounds a tad excessive. And more than a little obsessive. You sir, are relentless to get a Nobel for yourself. But deep down, aren't you extra thirsty for a Nobel -- because Barack Obama already has won it?
I mean seriously Dude, just own it . . . you've got Barack Obama Envy! 🎤
I would think that a fake list would trigger a civil lawsuit of mammoth proportions. It would take a while but there would be depositions under oath. The truth would have to come out and it would cost. Going in TV and saying it’s a hoax without naming names doesn’t have that same risk.
This is an opportunity to take the high ground. The narrative has been that the Epstein files contain information about a Democratic cabal to abuse children. There may be Democrats in the file - IF it exists. Shouldn’t we say that we think that this is not a partisan issue and the if Democrats are named they should be investigated?
Something I’d like to hear more about is when and how to expand the message to “if he lied to you about this, what else is lying to you about?” There are so many other lies to choose from, how do we be effective without watering down the message?
Excellent idea. That's a great pivot to hit, once you have people's attention.
I guess I don’t understand why Bondi isn’t just releasing a fake list with all their political targets on it. Nothing they say is true and people believe it anyway (eating pets in Ohio, weather machines in NC, and we’re not cutting social security come to mind) so why should this be any different?
But also, I think we should be wondering aloud which republicans and how many Supreme Court justices are on the list. It would certainly explain their behavior if they were being blackmailed. It would also explain the current unwillingness to release the list bc then they’ll lose all their leverage along with, one would hope, some elections.
My guess is that too many legit people are familiar with the Epstein files. Prosecutors, other DOJ lawyers, investigators (state and federal) and Bondi is rightly nervous to release a fake. If there’s even a list.
I keep guessing that there are people on it who are either T himself or people in his circle he wants to protect. Ugly biz.
Wondering about the SCOTUS Injustices being blackmailed is quite the interesting possibility. At this point, I don't see how the US Supreme Court will ever again be seen as upstanding stalwarts -- whose life work is to carry out the mission & principles of the US Constitution. I don't see it. SMH
It's so funny to me seeing all the bro's doing the "DO u ThINk WeRe STupID!?!" after Trump succesfully made all these sample people believe that Bill Cliton, Obama etc are all involved in some conspiracy to abduct children etc...
Dan, Tony and I, whom I met through long years on here and finally my husb and I met him and his spouse (a remarkable leader in environmental law) finally got to meet, here in Oregon. We talked at length about how to be a "messenger." Tony is a poli sci professor and has a ready audience of young, new voters so his substack is of great value (also to others.) I constantly am asked to write one, but it is mostly by my own people as you put it. I would love to see a Message Box about how to become someone who can reach those not in our circle. I need coaching on that. What I said to Tony was that there is so much content out there I never trust it is worth the energy. But would be glad to do it if could make a difference. It really saddens us that you no longer do your Q and A, as it was of real value to get to ask you questions and you are asking us to take action so it matters. I don't even know if you read your comment section anymore. God knows you are busy. But this is help that would matter. I would also like to see you, Mr. Pollercoaster, take our temp about some topics we really feel the need to have you address. For me, it is the stuffing of judges into every corner, and grooming that asshole for SCOTUS. I am really scared of losing the possibility of voting at all. I see others here hoping you will address this and that. With respect, are you listening to us anymore? Or just writing. At least tell us why you don't respond anymore. We care about you and it would help also to hear that. Anyway, living in a blue state (which are of course never entirely blue) means it is harder to reach people who do need to hear. Though wouldn't trade living in a blue state for red. Also (sorry so long) many of us are not really on social media anymore, that is also something to ponder.
The part of the scandal that may be able to carry through to the mid-terms, and be reinforced by other actions of the Trump administration, is one of trust. If Trump's supporters stop trusting him, and Dems continually point out how he can't be trusted, we may not get their votes, but we might get them to stay home.
Why on earth should Democrats pull punches on an issue (child sex trafficking) that fueled QAnon and helped defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016? Every Dem should hit this issue as hard as they can, and drive the deepest possible wedge between Trump and MAGA.
Let's not forget: Have Fun! Trumpublicans are tied to the whipping post. We should have fun and be seen to be having fun. Were I a university president at yesterday's anti-Semitism show trial I would begin my reply to every GOP question, "I do not believe it is anti-Semitic to want to know what is in the Epstein files."
Just a dream, but worth enjoying.
Many upper-level Dems, especially the white ones, are probably running with this because it's *easy* -- and because (unlike serious talk about wealth/income inequality and economic issues in general) it's not likely to get them called "socialists." Notice how over the years they've often labeled those who do talk about these issues "left" or even "far left" -- a term that back in the day was reserved for the likes of Stalin and Mao.
The advent of Trump II has exposed for all (OK, at least some of us) to see the short-sightedness, cluelessness, and maybe flat-out cowardice in many congressional Democrats and the Democratic Party at the national level. It bugs me to see this attributed to "Democrats" in general. At the same time I'm glad to see state-level Democratic officials taking some initiative, e.g., the secretaries of state (DASS) and the attorneys general (DAGA). Democratic parties in swing states (WI, MI, NC, PA, etc.) seem more on the ball than those in reliably blue states like mine (MA). How to build on that going forward? That's the big question for the party at all levels.
So I'm just checking if I've got this. The RIGHT way to talk to Trump about the Epstein Files, might be to say:
"Mr. President, I was told you have a rather lengthy list of reasons you'd like to recite today, explaining why the Epstein investigation has been closed. And that it should never, ever, under any circumstances, be reopened. That it is a nothing burger. That there is no there, there. We saw your post: "Stop Talking About Epstein!"
So then Pres. Trump, can we move on to your Fear Of Missing Out -- or FOMO?
Because it seems, you have strongly twisted people's arms -- literally a DOZEN times -- to nominate you for the Nobel Peace Prize. That number sounds a tad excessive. And more than a little obsessive. You sir, are relentless to get a Nobel for yourself. But deep down, aren't you extra thirsty for a Nobel -- because Barack Obama already has won it?
I mean seriously Dude, just own it . . . you've got Barack Obama Envy! 🎤
.
I would think that a fake list would trigger a civil lawsuit of mammoth proportions. It would take a while but there would be depositions under oath. The truth would have to come out and it would cost. Going in TV and saying it’s a hoax without naming names doesn’t have that same risk.
Nailed it. That part of a larger coverup and corruption message weaves beautifully into the perfect narrative
This is an opportunity to take the high ground. The narrative has been that the Epstein files contain information about a Democratic cabal to abuse children. There may be Democrats in the file - IF it exists. Shouldn’t we say that we think that this is not a partisan issue and the if Democrats are named they should be investigated?
Reminds me of Hillary's speeches.