Ted Lieu: "allegations of Donald Trump raping children ... of Donald Trump threatening to kill children. "

[sheshe2]

Jon Cooper
‪@joncooper-us.bsky.social‬
Ted Lieu: “Donald Trump is in the Epstein files thousands and thousands of times. In those files, there are highly disturbing allegations of Donald Trump raping children … of Donald Trump threatening to kill children. So I encourage the press to go look at these allegations.”

Ted Lieu: “Donald Trump is in the Epstein files thousands and thousands of times. In those files, there are highly disturbing allegations of Donald Trump raping children … of Donald Trump threatening to kill children. So I encourage the press to go look at these allegations.”

— Jon Cooper (@joncooper-us.bsky.social) 2026-02-18T16:35:03.514Z

[Whyisthisstillclose]

1. Did anyone here ever imagine that we would see the US sink to a level

where a statement like this would have to be made?

[sheshe2]

2. No.

[leftstreet]

8. It's jarring

And each day more of it gets normalized

[bdamomma]

60. That is what

fascist governments count on to have people "normalize" these horrible acts. They want to wear us down, don't let them do it!!!!!! This hate and division must stop!!!!!!! I remember hearing or reading something like look up (metaphorically or figuratively) to that 1% who are manipulating us to look down on other people who are different in culture or their belief systems. I don't see anything wrong in a diverse society, one common bond we have is our blood is red!!!!

[durablend]

9. Did anyone here ever imagine that the media and a large part of the country are okay with it

[ChicagoTeamster]

12. I don't think they're okay with it, just don't believe it either because they're MAGA or can't accept such things happen

in America because they're naive

[Justice matters.]

23. Or they're 'scared' of retaliations.

The US is now run by a Crime Syndicate that has little to no respect of the rule of law.

A 'mafia' runs the state.

[bdamomma]

61. That mafia thug

needs to be knocked down off that wall!!!!!

[wnylib]

88. Naive, yes. But also because people shut out

things that are too hard for them to face. They can't deal with the reality of it; so they deny or ignore it out of fear and feeling helpless.

[fujiyamasan]

98. They're not just ok with it

The people who own the media are part of the same group of elites. They’re all part of Epstein and Trump’s club.

Trump was always right about one thing — the US media is an enemy of the people, but it’s for the opposite reason. They enabled him, normalized him, apologized for him, and carried his water for the past decade.

They never had the reconning they deserved after the Iraq invasion. They said “mah bad” and barely skipped a beat.

[ificandream]

34. What a silly comment to suggest the media is ok with it.

The media has done a lot of reporting on Trump's sexual problems. But the media won't say anything they don't have proof for to keep themselves out of lawsuits, and you can't blame them for that.

[wnylib]

89. What about Besos and his Washington Post?

He caved into Trump before inauguration day.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

103. Bozos wants the same rocket ship money Musk got

That's why he's kissing Trump's ass.

[ificandream]

116. Bezos' was strictly a business decision, as was Paramount/CBS, as was ABC.

I think you have to acknowledge the difference there. Granted, in all three cases the media was unfortunately swept in, but the real motivation was business. I admit I'll side with the media, unless we're talking about Fox and the rest of the right-wing media scum, who report lies daily because that's their job. In the case of the others, at least at the bottom level they try to practice journalism. It's the levels above that make that harder.

[poozwah]

72. no

i have never been shocked by anything trump and his supporters do or advocate doing. how the media has reacted is shocking. the system that made media owners filthy rich is in danger and they are refusing to honestly and accurately report on the causes of that peril.

[MustLoveBeagles]

11. No

[Ol Janx Spirit]

13. Sink to? Sally Hemings might like a word. IMO the real hope was that we had finally risen above...

...this kind of thing.

John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams were the only two of the first twelve presidents who never owned slaves. As such you can rely on there having been all sorts of cruelty condoned--if not directly perpetrated--by those statesmen of the past.

Enslaved people, including children, were subjected to systemic sexual violence, physical abuse, and murder as methods of maintaining a racial hierarchy and generating profit. These acts were not legally considered crimes against the enslaved, as they were legally classified as property.
https://allin.tulane.edu/content/timeline-history-sexual-violence-us#:~:text=Content%20warning:%20sexual%20assault%2C%20anti-Blackness%2C%20racialized%20murder,they%20built%20crumbled%20after%20emancipation.

And, it is not a coincidence that the current Administration is trying to erase this history.

It is sad, but it is not altogether surprising that we would find ourselves under the yoke of cruelty once again. Human nature proves time and again that it is not as kind as I believe we like to think it is.

[Texin]

21. This kind of debauchery and cruelty are not new. All one needs is to remember about the Hellfire Club in England and

Ireland during the 18th century. I believe Ben Franklin wrote about it at one point. History is filled with examples of the wealthy elite and prominently place people across the globe engaging in behaviors akin to those that fill the Trumpstein files.

[obamanut2012]

27. Well, Franklin was a literal pedophile, so... he would know

[La Urraca]

46. I have not kniwn of this?

Is there a link to information?

[Wiz Imp]

67. The only reference I can find to this is an insane conspiracy theory website

Don't be fooled by the articles blasting Trump and Bondi, some of their stuff is truly dangerously insane (Anti-vax, anti-trans, anti-Fed Reserve, believe Tylenol causes autism, etc.). I would believe nothing from such a website.

https://fightingmonarch.com/2022/10/28/benjamin-franklin-was-a-child-molester/

https://fightingmonarch.com/

[Jedi Guy]

99. I've never heard that of him before.

I have read, though, that he wrote a long essay or letter extolling the virtues of older women as lovers and was known to have had several mistresses. It made for pretty cringey reading.

I suppose by modern standards pretty much everyone pre-20th century could be viewed that way since it was common for adult men to marry teenage girls. Once a girl had had her first period she was considered to be an adult and eligible for marriage.

That was the case for pretty much all of human history until the late 20th century and is still the case for some cultures today, unfortunately.

[tavernier]

42. I'm presently reading a book about Hollywood in the early movie industry.

Thousands of young girls were abused, in fact, it was quite well known that no big Hollywood mogul would even speak to an auditioning actress unless the casting coach was part of the deal because there were so many girls who were eager to achieve stardom. Of course, some had a choice and willingly went along with it, but there were thousands of others who were falsely led, often drugged, and became victims of abuse and rape once they found themselves alone with these predators. There are just certain kinds of men that feel that this is their God-given right as a male.

[bdamomma]

63. Insightful post

unfortunately true.

But your comment, got my attention to raise my BP.

There are just certain kinds of men that feel that this is their God-given right as a male.


Fuck that!!!!!!

[wnylib]

90. The battle between good and evil is a perpetuual one.

It is never fought with finality. As JFK said in his inaugural address, each generation is called upon to meet the challenges of its time. That's not a verbatim quote; but as close as I can remember.

[Ol Janx Spirit]

92. It is a much more complicated discussion, but there is good evidence that it is the evil...

...that brought Homo sapiens to the apex of predators.

Only after wiping out all Homo competitors and most of the large fauna on the face of the earth have we begun to see the "good" that is possible.

Unfortunately evil seems be our default position, and good is the struggle and the challenge.

Simply put: we did not get this far by being good.

And as you can see: good must reinvent itself constantly to prevail. We are already past the time where the story and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth are enough to keep evil at bay. A new reason for good must be invented.

[wnylib]

93. Well, you are right that it is complicated

because HS also learned the value of cooperation in survival and also intermated with close competitors.

[Jedi Guy]

100. Your post reminds me of a quote from a character in a Stephen King novel.

Cell, it was called. It starts out as an apocalyptic zombie novel and then veers off in an interestingly weird direction. It was made into a film and despite John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson leading the cast it was a real letdown.

Anyway, the characters are discussing just what we are at our core, our most basic level, and one character opines that while we like to think that we came to dominate the globe because we're smart and we use tools and all that jazz, the truth is much darker.

He says, more or less, "Our core is madness, our basic level is murder. We ended up dominating the world because we're the craziest, most murderous motherfuckers in the jungle and we killed our way to the top."

It's a very interesting if dark take on humanity, that's for sure.

[JustAnotherGen]

16. Yes - It's just no one

Ever had the guts to say things like this in Congress.

Fannie Lou Hamer comes to mind.

[Katinfl]

20. The statement is made but will the media ignore it? Probably.

[ificandream]

36. The media doesn't broadcast what they're investigating.

[Katinfl]

41. Investigating? trump? I doubt it.

[ificandream]

71. You don't know the media.

They are. As I said, they don't broadcast it.

[SheltieLover]

33. No, but I never expected to see a ruskie ASSet in the WH either, ruling like a mob boss.

[Tumbulu]

37. Absolutely yes, all you needed to do was listen to Limbaugh

in the ‘80’s. Which so many of us in rural areas warned constantly about. Where we are no was the obvious trajectory.

But we were ignored, and the effect of the right wing hate propaganda continues to be ignored.

I am pretty sadly sure that we are not going to recover as a nation from this, which of course was the plan by whoever funded this half a century campaign.

[blue_jay]

49. I never knew people in rural areas were warning about it

I first became aware of him on long drives across the country. Who were the deaf ears that didn't listen? Were they neighbors, local politicians or the people that ran the radio broadcasts? Kind of water under the bridge now but understanding what didn't work then might help create better tactics for future.

I tend to think it might link back to monied interests and the inherent lack of communication and understanding amongst all of the people in this country be they rural, suburban, city, etc. I imagine it would behoove us to find a way to bridge that divide, especially among like minded people.

[Tumbulu]

118. the opportunity for that has long passed us, I am afraid

Just look at how Fox News is still the only station playing on military bases, and Limbaugh was the only radio show. The viewpoint of this community is now generational.

To answer your first question nobody that I knew of in urban areas thought that it mattered one whit what the sort of "crazy uncles in podunk land" thought. For decades circular arguments about it persisted. Even here on DU, the predominant view back in the early 2000's was "ignore it and it will go away" or " even hate speech must be protected". Leaving us liberals in rural areas subject to the sort of terrorism that the entire nation is experiencing so visibly now.

Ask anyone who worked in the sciences in agriculture.

Take a look past how the research destroyed by Bundy, etc up in Oregon was utterly forgiven by the powers within the government.

Only right wing rage is taken seriously by media, and politicians.

This is not going to change until the rest of the nation wakes up to the effect of this multigenerational propaganda effort. That has already won.

[yobrault1]

54. ummm, yes.

the first time he was elected after the world heard him say "grab 'em by the pussy" and he still got elected.

[bdamomma]

76. Point taken

I thought we learned our lesson when the rest of the world was perplexed when George Bush was re-elected twice.

Then I thought with Hope & the Yes We Can campaign we were in on a sorta like "Camelot"stage, and when he got re-elected again I said to myself "alleluia, we have seen the light!". But the venom was percolating then.

[KPN]

58. Never ... until the last year. It's been clear for a while

that statements like this are in order .., and necessary frankly. Ted Lieu is a real American hero.

[vapor2]

65. HEAVENS NO

[Playingmantis]

79. Never

[wnylib]

87. Not in my wildest dreams.

[OldBaldy1701E]

110. My question is why did so many think we were living in a freaking Utopia?? (n/t)

[HarryM]

111. Certainly did.

I have been waiting since the days of Ronnie Rat Raygun, when he called AIDS a "gay cancer." And that's within my lifetime.
Read about the trail of tears.

[Kid Berwyn]

3. Rep. Lieu and Congress must do the Press' job...

Otherwise, MAGA will see that nothing happens to the child-abusing rapist and traitor.

[BeyondGeography]

4. I want to give Ted Lieu a heart

He is steady, credible, serious and fearless.

This is a big deal.

[JustAnotherGen]

18. I think he should make a run

At Speaker next January. We are going to need someone with his grit. Jeffries is wonderful - but I don't think he's what we need right now.

[Upthevibe]

43. BeyondGeography........

Ted Lieu is my guy and he's been amazing from the very beginning..........

I wish he was born in the U.S. so that he could be a Presidential contender.

[dalton99a]

5. Kick

[Marcuse]

6. And the worst has already been expunged, redacted and deleted.

[ShazamIam]

7. Ted Lieu is correctly calling the victims children, not young women.

[Bayard]

10. I've been disappointed in Rachel Maddow lately

She spends half her show now covering pictures/video of protests. Believe me--I appreciate the hell out of all the protesters. But I don't she's covered the Epstein files at all.

[generalbetrayus]

14. I think she leaves the Epstein files to other late-night commentators. I'd rather hear Jen Psaki and especially

Lawrence O'Donnell rail against the Pervert of the United States (PotUS). Rachel is easily embarrassed to talk about such matters, at least in public. I appreciate her cheerleading for all the protest rallies - seeing them gives me hope for our future under Orange Julius Caesar.

[sheshe2]

56. Nichole Wallace is on the Epstein files every night

Tonight, she all over the deposition of Wexner at his mansion. I love watching her news hour.

[wnylib]

91. The protests give me hope.

I am in awe of Minneapolis and proud of them.

[Grim Chieftain]

15. I agree

Rachel used to be "must see tv" for me, but now I much prefer Lawrence O'Donnell. He is fearless and calls out the Trump cabal on a nightly basis and doesn't mince words.

If ever there was a time we needed excellence in reporting, it's now.

[maddiemom]

75. DONALD Trump says Lawrence....

Notice how O'Donnell never refers to him as PRESIDENT Trump.?

[SheltieLover]

35. Maybe it makes her physically ill. This has that effect on some people. I'm one of them.

[TBF]

40. That or it could be a trigger for her -

unfortunately, as we saw with the "me too" movement, there is a lot of actual violence in the lives of girls and women in the us (and in the world for that matter). It could be a difficult subject for her to cover for personal reasons.

[SheltieLover]

44. Could be

Or maybe she is assigned to cover other stories

[Multichromatic]

17. U.S. media...

[Submariner]

19. and he just "Exonerated" himself yesterday

thank you Ted.

[RedWhiteBlueIsRacist]

22. Ted is not mincing words! Thank you, sir.

[angrychair]

24. I'm am going to keep saying this

WE. ARE. NOT. MAD. ENOUGH.

The fucking maga crowd have bitched for YEARS about these damn files.
The news media and far right podcasters have bitched about these files for YEARS.

Now that they are at least partially out, all of a sudden they are all pretty much quite and not saying shit or even worse, they are suddenly scrambling to make excuses or trying to redefine what being a pedophile and a baby eater are.

Even those that say they care about it have suddenly become muted or worse try to make excuses or imply it's not that bad.

We have actual government officials saying we can't go after everyone because the whole system would crash. Think about that. They are straight up telling you that they are going to protect people that have kidnapped, raped and murdered children because they need to protect the status que.
This is official government permission for wealthy people to rape and murder children because holding them accountable is inconvenient.

Let me be unequivocally clear: if a person even so much as exchanged emails with Epstein they should be beaten and dragged to a public square and burned alive.
That is where I stand and that should be the moderate, level headed position.

[AZJonnie]

55. Demanding the extrajudicial murder of people over mundane emails to Epstein is not "the moderate, level-headed position"

We have actual government officials saying we can't go after everyone because the whole system would crash

Who is this, and what is the exact quote and context? And why does their experience with the facts exceed that of the DoJ (including 4 years of Biden's DoJ)?

IMHO, people should read the whole of this "Epstein Files Deep Dive" article by the Associated Press (from 9 days ago). I'd also humbly suggest some might consider moderating some extreme positions they may be taking, but to each their own

https://apnews.com/article/jeffrey-epstein-client-list-sex-trafficking-049c96080a2ca2c12c84ac506437e50b

From the 2019 FBI notes in the files, copied from the article:

While one Epstein victim made highly public claims that he “lent her” to his rich friends, agents couldn’t confirm that and found no other victims telling a similar story, the records said. (snip)

“No other victim has described being expressly directed by either Maxwell or Epstein to engage in sexual activity with other men” the memo said. (snip)

I'll add that much of this article may sound familiar if you've seen my many posts urging a degree of moderation on the whole "pedo cabal" conspiracy theory over the last 6 months

[Wiz Imp]

68. "agents couldn't confirm that and found no other victims telling a similar story,"

That may be true of "agents" in 2019, but it's completely false now. Numerous victims (amongst the group who have been pushing to get the files out and get some real accountablity) have made clear they were trafficked to many people.

“No other victim has described being expressly directed by either Maxwell or Epstein to engage in sexual activity with other men” the memo said.

That is blatantly false at this point. Practically all of the victims have claimed that is exactly what Maxwell and Epstein did.

[AZJonnie]

78. Completely False? Okay, friend, I have a proposal for you

First, I hope you read the whole article I linked, not just my blurb

And then I invite you to imagine who you believe said the following (XXXXX in the text below), when they said this, whether they are someone in a position to know from whence they speak, and whether you see why they'd have motivation to downplay the situation?

"Jeffrey Epstein was the pimp and the john. He was his own No. 1 client," XXXXX told ABC News. "Nearly all of the exploitation and abuse of all of the women was intended to benefit only Jeffrey Epstein and Jeffrey Epstein's sexual desires."

XXXXX describes the enigmatic Epstein as living, essentially, two separate lives: one in which he was sexually abusing women and girls "on a daily basis," and another in which he associated with politicians, royalty, and titans of business, academia, and science.

"For the most part, those two worlds did not overlap. And where they overlapped, in the instances they overlapped, it seems to be a very small percentage," XXXXX said. "There were occasions where a select few of these men engaged in sexual acts with a select few of the girls that Jeffrey Epstein was exploiting or abusing -- primarily girls who were over the age of 18."

(snip) "What he was not is a person on the top of a sex trafficking operation that was sending women to powerful people around the world so that he could make money. It was not a business," XXXXX said. "And I think the few examples that we have, the known examples, have led to this belief that he must have been doing that with all of the women that he was abusing. That must have just been his gig. But that wasn't what he was doing on a daily basis. He's a sexual abuser and predator himself."

Once you've made your supposition as to who XXXXX is, Here Is A Link to The Interview Quoted. Again, the whole thing is worth a read.

At least, can you see why I sometimes interject on this topic saying that the evidence for a "pedo cabal involving many girls/many men " is not as strong as people think?

[Wiz Imp]

83. I don't care who said that. It's a fact that many victims have provided testimony that

directly contradicts it. I believe the victims.

[AZJonnie]

86. Well, ignoring who's saying that is convenient

And, point of fact, no the victims have not "provided testimony that directly contradicts it", otherwise the person who said all of that?

Would not have

[Wiz Imp]

94. Get over yourself. You're not as smart as you think you are.

You clearly have not read any of my dozens if not hundreds of posts on this subject. You love to take one piece of information and then make about 100 assumptions that miraculously completely support your predetermined conclusion. Your lack of self awareness is amazing.

[AZJonnie]

104. Are you this far into this discussion, saying mean things to me, NOT having looked into who said all that yet?

To reveal the mystery, that interview was with Bradley Edwards, in May 2025.

Are you familiar with that name?

A victims' rights lawyer from Florida, Edwards has been in pursuit of the truth about financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's life and crimes for nearly two decades. He would be the first to say that Epstein caused incalculable damage and trauma to hundreds of women and girls.

In fact, long before Epstein became known worldwide for his crimes, Edwards presciently told a federal judge, "Because of [Epstein's] deviant appetite for young girls, combined with his extraordinary wealth and power, he may just be the most dangerous sexual predator in U.S. history."

That was 17 years ago. Back then, hardly anyone listened.

In the years since, Edwards and his co-counsel -- on behalf of Epstein's victims -- have sued Epstein, his estate, the federal government and several financial institutions, recovering hundreds of millions of dollars for more than 200 survivors of Epstein's sex abuse and trafficking. He knows the victims' stories as well as anyone and, in the course of all the litigation, he has reviewed an expansive amount of non-public documents and evidence related to the late Epstein, who died by suicide in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial for sex trafficking of minors.

So what is your theory with regards to why Bradley Edwards would go out of his way to downplay the whole 'pedo cabal' angle (as did 18 years of FBI analysis over 6 POTUS terms, 3 of them Democrats), while, to your thinking, *his own, long-time clients* are out "testifying" the exact opposite?

I'm suggesting they're actually NOT saying that, but if they did, I'd believe them. You said I've missed dozens of your posts that would prove otherwise, so, I invite you to show me I'm wrong, friend. I'm all ears

I'm not claiming I'm "so smart", I'm claiming I've paid very close attention. Neither evidence, nor victim testimony proving that Epstein was trafficking many minors to many men has ever materialized. Guiffre? I believe her accounts in Nobody's Girl. But she is the only who's said she was sent to his rich friends, and only claimed it about herself (almost every time, at least). And she clearly occupied a different place in their world than the other victims. I could explain why, but my hands are tired already.

Lastly I humbly ask that you PLEASE not insult me again if you've not read the two articles. You'll need to in order to understand at least why *I believe* I'm not talking out my ass here. I believe I'm accurately reporting what is known vs. what is not known, and there's no predetermined outcome involved.

[Wiz Imp]

115. There you go making assumptions again.

I knew who made that statement right away but consider it irrelevant. Are you Brad Edwards? apparently you believe everything he says is gospel truth even when there is evidence contradicting it. Brad Edwards, despite representing many victims, is far from a unimpeachable source. He has made many ridiculous and false statements over the years including that Epstein committed suicide - a statement that practically all of the victims disagree with. Despite your refusal to admit it, there have been many victims who have said they were trafficked. Sorry, you are as close minded about this as all the people here who are convinced that Trump is automatically guilty of everything that has been alleged just because someone made an accusation. You're both wrong and refuse to accept contrary opinions so there is no point in continuing here. I'm done. Bye.

[AZJonnie]

119. I've shown solid sources for my current working thesis, and you have shown nothing but personal insults and *opinion*

Respectfully, from where I sit, you seem to be the one with the predetermined outcome here.

Nice talk, see you around.

[AZJonnie]

25. Ted, I love you man, but these allegations have been public since 2016

Believe me when I say I hate sounding like I'm defending Trump and I'm not saying he may not be guilty of similar crimes (he's CERTAINLY capable), but *that* case is the wrong one to be looking at for evidence thereof.

Much of the press concluded that the "Katie Johnson" (with "Tiffany Doe" acting as a witness) accusations against Trump & Epstein were a hoax 10 years ago, and there are MANY good reasons to believe that. So I doubt they'll change their minds about it, despite his urging.

I'm worried about seeing Lieu (a bit recklessly, IMHO) step into this particular pile of shit, because I LOVE that guy, and I don't want to see him possibly damage his great reputation.

[dpibel]

30. AZJonnie on the spot

"I hate to sound like I'm defending Trump, BUT..."

[AZJonnie]

57. I ignore many, many Epstein posts I disagree with, but on THIS topic, yes I will often comment

I don't like to see Democrats (esp. not those I really like like Ted Lieu) end up looking like they're hyping known hoaxes for political points.

You will find, if you come across what I say enough, I will consistently defend ANYone against false accusations NO MATTER HOW MUCH I HATE THEM, and yes that even includes Trump. Facts supersede politics for me.

Seems you perceive that to be flaw, I consider it a virtue, even if sometimes people question my motives

[dpibel]

62. Your definition of facts

You seem overly confident that the facts you are superseding with are, in fact, facts.

They are no more than your conclusions, based on incomplete evidence. Pretty much like everyone else's claims.

It's just that your conclusions seem so frequently to align with malign interests.

And, you should note, Lieu didn't say anything more than that there is evidence. There is. You deem it to be evidence without credence. That does not remove it from the realm of evidence.

[AZJonnie]

70. You happen to take notice when my conclusions appear to do so

But if you wanted to, you would also find I'm here nearly every day, for hours, bashing the entire fascist GQP regime, and especially IQ47. So your insinuation that I have ulterior motives when I VERY occasionally buck that trend, is not really appreciated.

I will say though I do appreciate the pedantic nature of what you had to say here (for real, see my sig line ):

And, you should note, Lieu didn't say anything more than that there is evidence. There is. You deem it to be evidence without credence. That does not remove it from the realm of evidence.

My retort: it seems our definition of "evidence" is different, because I do not consider claims from an abandoned anonymous lawsuit (and staged-looking video "testimony" produced in conjunction with it) to be "evidence". The proper word would be "claims" or "allegations", IMHO. Had he used one of those words, we wouldn't be having this conversation

I GREATLY admire and LOVE 99% of everything Lieu ever says, but here he's overstating the certainty level (evidence being a stronger word than allegation) and I'm disappointed it doesn't seem like he did his research.

Now, I realize I would be better served if I could get a message to Lieu directly, but the odds that I could actually do so are slim, so I said my piece here.

[dpibel]

77. Fun FACT, AZ!!

Scroll up to the top of this whole meshugas.

There's this word there that will surprise you!

It is "allegations."

That's what Ted said.

My bad for misquoting him and referring to evidence (and, BTW, your definition of evidence is yours and yours alone).

But gosh, FactsMan! You say, "The proper word would be "claims" or "allegations", IMHO. Had he used one of those words, we wouldn't be having this conversation."

But he did. And we still are. Although I guess at this point, you'll be wanting to take back all that tutting about Ted, since he said exactly what you believe he should have said.

Ain't life a stitch sometimes?

[AZJonnie]

82. Okay, well ya got me! I should have gone back and re-read it, I took your word for it

And then I thought "I wouldn't have said it if it were allegations", but apparently, in this case, I fooled myself. Turns out my brain registered "highly disturbing allegations" as being a strong statement of truth, so I was easily convinced he said "evidence" when you said he said "evidence"

Plus I read over coverage of the Bondi hearings just the other day, wherein he said “there is evidence that Trump, similar to Prince Andrew, went to parties with Epstein.” and I guess him using the word evidence there may've stuck a little bit.

SO, I was WRONG on that point of fact, and YOU my friend have caught me out!

In any case, my main thought from the start was just that Ted Lieu is stepping into a trap here, and I didn't want him to. He used the more accurate word, as you say, but the overall tenor is that "these allegations should be taken seriously" (and he's repeated it few times now), hence urging the press to look into it, and I thought that could cause him problems. Whether he said evidence or allegations, it's still a bogus case.

Other Dems I perhaps wouldn't have mentioned it, but Ted Lieu has been a paragon of accuracy and integrity, IMHO.

[dpibel]

84. Lieu actually has some relevant experience

You should check it out. He might have some skills examining allegations, evidence, and such that you seem to be overlooking.

It's just possible--amazing to think, I know--that Ted knows more about what he's saying and how he's saying it than you do.

But hey! His contact info is readily available. You can let him know what he should and should not say.

[AZJonnie]

101. Ya know what, I kinda like you dpibel

That sounds a lot like something I would say

Okay, what Lieu said is his business, and I admit I was acting a little bit on personal grievance WRT that Katie Johnson case. I remember when news of the lawsuit came out in 2016, height of election season. I remember arguing with a RWNJ relative who was like laughing at me that I actually believed something as extreme as what was alleged. I said *I* believe women, you're a dick for not, and Trump is totally capable of the absolutely over-the-top, crazy-depraved stuff being alleged.

They argued that "the liberal media" didn't seem to be covering it that much, why wouldn't this be wall to wall if it were true? I'm like the media isn't that liberal, that's garbage, they seem to be more on Trump's side to me, etc. Then as that summer and fall progressed, same relative sent me a couple of updates on "why the whole thing smells like BS". I said NO NO NO, you're wrong.

Turned out, early November, I ended up entirely embarrassed when the fact that it was nearly undeniably a hoax (carried out by a MAN, not woman, to be clear!) became an unavoidable admission, and I had to mea culpa to my relative. Then, fuckhead WON, like RIGHT THEN. It's not a time I remember with fondness. It's also a story, which, for the past 10 years I've been telling people who bring it up not to rely on it to attack Trump, because it bears EVERY hallmark of a hoax.

So, short story long, seeing one of my favorite congresspeople seeming to rely on this story, as I did? And calling out Trump as an alleged child rapist and murderer, based on filings for *that* story? It concerns me that it could backfire, and possibly end up helping Trump. This is one of only a very few times I have disbelieved allegations made against Mango Mussolini.

But you're right, Ted knows much more than I do about reviewing allegations, and about politicking, so I should have faith.

Anyways, good talk!

[Wiz Imp]

95. There is video proof that Trump went to parties with Epstein.

[AZJonnie]

102. OH ABSOLUTELY!!! I'm saying I probably vaguely recalled seeing video of Ted saying "evidence" just days ago

which is why I easily believed dpidel when he initially (mistakenly) used 'evidence' instead of "Deeply Troubling Allegations".

I absolutely think IQ47 is guilty of ALL KINDS of illegal shit with Epstein and HE DEFINITELY FUCKING KNEW and SAID NOTHING, which should be enough to END THAT FUCKER!!!

Still I have to admit that *credible* evidence he molested Epstein's minors remains basically non-existent, and no known minor Epstein victim has accused him of taking liberties with them. That's the current status on that particular front, but I will be totally unsurprised if that changes at some point, and the moment that happens you'll find me shouting it from the rooftops. He's CAPABLE, for sure. Hell, he could've molested OTHER minors, not Epstein's, too

[questionseverything]

64. It's his job evidently

[EdmondDantes_]

50. If Lieu is talking about the anonymous tips that we've seen

It's not really possible to investigate due to lack of details. Obviously we don't know if that's what he's talking about, but he didn't provide details.

We've seen people shooting a pizza place, aCDC building, and storming the capital building because of allegations. As much as I would love to be rid of Trump, I'm skeptical of uncorroborated allegations and of we can't tell you, but it's awful claims.

[Wiz Imp]

96. Many of the FBI Tips were not anonymous.

In fact, I believe most were not anonymous. The names of the persons providing the tips have actually been properly redacted in this case.

[EdmondDantes_]

108. Can you provide a link for that?

Justice Department and FBI records reviewed as part of the latest Epstein-related disclosures contain dozens of tips and allegations referencing President Donald Trump and other prominent figures, many of which were deemed not credible by investigators.

The documents, drawn largely from FBI National Threat Operations Center (NTOC) tips, include allegations of sexual assault, sex trafficking, coerced sexual acts involving minors, and organized sex parties tied to Epstein and his associates spanning from the 1980s through the mid-2000s. No charges resulted from the tips described, and the records repeatedly note instances where complainants could not be contacted, failed to corroborate claims, or were assessed by agents as not credible.

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-allegations-in-new-epstein-files-release-read-in-full-11444530

And the article links to the documents here

https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01660679.pdf

Based on that second link, there's nothing that can meaningfully be investigated. Again maybe there's something in what Lieu has access to that is different, but then he needed to bring more if he wants the press to investigate. I'm basing my position on the type of claims I've seen in the releases. If I missed something, I will update my position.

[Wiz Imp]

112. Huh? That document you linked to proves the tips were not anonymous.

Spoke with caller
2 voicemails left, no response received.
Complainant was spoken to and deemed not credible.
Spoken with twice.
Voicemail left
complainant did not have confirmed information

The FBI spoke directly to these people and/or had their contact information. Those are not anonymous tips. Only one entry on that document said No contact information provided. That was an anonymous tip.

It is clear from that document that most of the tips were not anonymous. Most were not from the actual alleged victims but that doesn't make them anonymous. Just because they were determined to be "not credible" doesn't mean they were anonymous. Nor does it automatically mean they were not true. It means someone decided it wasn't worth investigating. It wouldn't be the first time law enforcement deemed a tip not credible that was later determined to be telling the truth.

Also, it appears most of these were just dismissed with no real investigation. Everything could be investigated. For example this one:

In 2004 or 2005, Sir Ivan Wilzig, hosted a party
where Jeffrey Epstein, Sammy Sosa, and Donald
Trump were in attendance. Patti LaBelle's PR agent
stood at the door. At the party, caller met an
individual who was approximately 18 to 23 years of
age, who was brought from Oklahoma for a
modeling job but then sold to a man in France.
Several women were being auctioned, and a woman
possibly known as Colette LNU was the madam. A
couple of years later, caller saw Colette at the
Cheetah Club in New York, NY. and she told one of
Santos friends that Jamie Foxx was interested in
spending a night with her, and that he could pay her
a lot money.

Interviews should have been conducted with people mentioned. That doesn't appear to have been done.

And we know Maria Farmer's tip she called in was totally ignored for at least 10 years.

I'm not claiming to necessarily believe any speciic tips are absolutely true, just pointing out that most were not anonymous and even if anonymous, more investigation could have and should have been done. Finally, for the claims they said they did investigate, why have they not released the documents recording the details of what the investigation found?

[EdmondDantes_]

113. No it doesn't

Spoke to random person doesn't mean you know who you spoke to. You'd need additional information to confirm who it was and given all the called got no answer, changed their story etc, that's not anything concrete.

If I call the police from a burner phone and tell them a bank was robbed but not which bank or when, how much time should they spend checking every bank? Nothing we have so far is solid enough to do anything that would qualify as an investigation.

[Wiz Imp]

114. So brilliant one, If the tips were anonymous then why is the name on all of them redacted?

If anonymous, there would be nothing to redact. Also, apparently you don't know what an anonymous tip is. If any contact information is shared (like many/most on this FBI document) it is NOT anonymous.

Are you Kash Patel? Pam Bondi? We know the FBI received 4500 tips on Brett Kavanaugh and investigated zero of them. Do you really believe none were worthy of being investgated? Given what happened with Kavanaugh, why should we believe they were more diligent with Epstein?

Since you are wrong and refuse to admit it, there is no point in continuing. I'm done. Bye.

[Initech]

26. It's insane that Stephen Colbert gets fired...

But the psychotically deranged lunatic child rapist continues to fail upward and get his name and face put on everything. WTF are we doing right now?

[Grim Chieftain]

28. Child rape, sexual assault, thirty-four felonies

The list goes on and on, and yet there he is, in the White House, which he is destroying in more ways than one.
What the hell has happened to this country? How can he get away with all of this? Where is the outrage?

And since I'm on a rant - I don't want to hear about another "No Kings" rally. It's far, far worse than that. We need to have a "Lock Him Up" rally, a "25th Amendment" rally. an "Impeach the Criminal" rally. To hell with the kings tripe.

He has to go asap to save our country!

[Ilsa]

45. I think that will be my sign at the next protest.

Since you mentioned rants, my biggest rant has been about the constant texts I'm getting from No Kings about attending March 28. I answered "yes" even though it's too far ahead for me to plan. I think they are more about leading me to Paypal, etc, though.

[calimary]

117. Sounds like a great idea.

I’m gonna make a sign that says “Lock Him Up!”

My Indivisible group has a sign-waving protest at a busy corner every Friday afternoon.

[Initech]

47. And so does his worthless fucking family.

Shit, Lara Trump was on Fox News bragging about how they want to stay in power indefinitely. Fucking hell no! We don't do that sort of thing in this country. These shitheads need to be expelled now before they do any further damage.

[Grim Chieftain]

48. Could not agree more

People better wake up to how dangerous the Trump cabal is.

[bdamomma]

80. Not really related

But Steve Bannon got away with saying this in Nov. 2020.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/05/steve-bannon-makes-beheading-comment-about-fauci-on-war-room-podcast-.html

[spanone]

29. Our media is not concerned about Epstein at all.

[hamsterjill]

31. It's surprising to me how much control there actually is over the media right now.

Gone are the days of "getting the scoop" and selling copy. I lived through Watergate and that was what got it published. Getting the scoop and selling papers! One newspaper outdoing all the others.

Where is that concept any more? It's all cable news and subscription services.

It's going to take some hard working (and I do mean HARD working), intelligent, well connected INDEPENDENT journalists to get this story out there. Right now, I haven't seen any of them who are willing to put forth the effort, the time and expense to force it into view by the general populace.

Am I wrong???? Because I'd love to be.

[Torchlight]

38. WTG Rep. Lieu! For a story that was six months ago declared dead on arrival

Last edited Wed Feb 18, 2026, 04:47 PM - Edit history (1)

by some of the best brains in the universe (or so it was advertised by those very brains, no less), this story certainly seems to be hanging on, metastasizing and foiling the best narratives to make it look like something it's not.

Each passing day, the mid-terms look brighter and brighter (while the sealions of the world continue looking more and more sad as they dig in harder and harder) .

[C Moon]

39. The U.S. needs more Bob Woodwards and Carl Bernsteins.

[bdamomma]

81. Or

more "whistleblowers".

[Wiz Imp]

97. 1972 to 1974 period Woodward and Bernstein.

2026 Woodward and Bernstein are as complicit as most of the rest of the media.

[SheltieLover]

51. And moscow mitch thought Kamala "would be our worst nightmare!"

[czarjak]

52. Never forget Rule#1

“If rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it.”
Without Fail2

[awesomerwb1]

53. That's better Ted

Imagine the names fox news and the magapublicans would be calling Biden if it was him thousands of times in the Epstein files instead.

[Joinfortmill]

66. Jeezus

[Swede]

69. Oh, Trump is gonna sue his ass off...

Or he'll bomb Iran

.

[AllyCat]

74. Dunno. Social media ablaze with Iranian hackers saying

They will release the videos if he attacks Iran.

[Skittles]

73. PREACH IT TED

GET IT OUT THERE

[LymphocyteLover]

85. the motherfucking child rapist POTUS needs to resign... but will Republicans pressure him?

Of course not. So freaking disgusting!

[ecstatic]

105. It's up to us. A lot of news organizations are compromised

and too worried about their pockets to fight for democracy.

Even on a small scale: look at how reporters conduct themselves at the White House press "briefings."

No unity or concern about the bigger picture, just everyone out for themselves.

[634-5789]

106. Link to the clip:

https://www.c-span.org/clip/news-conference/rep-ted-lieu-claims-president-trump-is-accused-of-raping-children-in-the-epstein-files/5191713

[raccoon]

107. K&R

[LaMouffette]

109. Thank you, Ted Lieu, for stating loud and clear that in the files, Trump is accused of RAPING CHILDREN.

This basic disgusting fact needs to be stated everywhere, by every elected Democratic official and the news media, over and over and over again, so that even Repub voters in their right-wing media bubble can hear it.