224
'Stay tuned!' Trump announces new criminal probe into Epstein ties to Bill Clinton
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2025
224 points (98.3% liked)
politics
30937 readers
1832 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
For extra fun, try posing the statement to Google's AI mode and watch it try to pretend this isn't in the news right now, and then make up lies to protect Trump, until it realizes it can't a suddenly kills the conversation.
It just said to me that there wasn't any conclusive proof that it happened, which is true.
"Trump blew Clinton" led to it talking about how he "blew Clinton away at the polls in 2016." Every additional layer of specifity leads to another slight diversion. Adding "Bill Clinton" caused it to recognize that this is in the news right now, but it's definitely not true because Bubba isn't Bill Clinton. Telling it that Bubba is Bill's known nickname caused it to agree that this is true, but Epstein said that "Bubba doesn't refer to Bill Clinton." (Epstein is commenting on these emails post-mortem? Maybe I missed something here.) Telling it that Epstein is a known pedophile sex trafficker with ties to these men and reason to lie caused it to admit that Epstein isn't a reliable source for this, and it tried to dismiss the validity of the emails altogether as "contextually untrustworthy." I then told it that a known pedophile discussing his practices in a believed to be private email thread is a reasonable context to consider the validity of his statements, but it was tired of me, and went "here are some more links on the subject. Any additional messages with start a new conversation." This could normal after being 5-6 messages deep with this AI; I had literally never used it before to know, but it felt weird to me.
It is weirdly defensive about the possibility that this had taken place, actively omitting details to bias weird takes.
Mark Epstein, Jeffrey's brother, apparently.
To be fair, there's no way Trump could know who was on the other side of the wall in that glory hole.
Well, except for asking, and that'd just sound like "Mmpfgharbl."
It did mention "Jeffery Epstein email releases" in passing, but it should have given that specific email as to where the rumor came from. Definitely more vague than was reasonable to be.