this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
90 points (95.0% liked)

politics

25609 readers
3084 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 58 points 6 days ago

In short, Epstein may have been preparing to blow the whistle on Trump's money laundering for the Russian mob. Trump got wind of this and tipped off the FBI about Epstein.

Epstein was trying to buy a South Florida estate. He brought Trump along to see it one time. A short time later Epstein found out that Trump had gone behind his back and placed a higher and ultimately successful bid on the property. He’d snatched it out from under him with a much higher bid. The problem was that Trump’s entire empire in 2004 was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. It made no sense where Trump was coming up with $41 million to buy this property. Epstein suspected that Trump was acting as a front for a Russian oligarch as a money-laundering scheme. And in fact Trump did purchase and flip the estate two years later to a Russian oligarch named Dmitry Rybolovlev for $95 million, or a profit over $50 million dollars.

Epstein was pissed for his own reasons (he wanted the estate). But he also suspected the money laundering scheme. So he threatened Trump that he would bring the whole thing out into the open through a series of lawsuits. Right about this same time authorities got a tip about Epstein’s activities which started the investigation that eventually led to his eventual 2008 plea deal.

[–] xyzzy@lemmy.today 36 points 6 days ago (2 children)

If this were true Trump wouldn't be able to shut up about it. He'd spin it the same way Johnson did, that he "heard a rumor" and notified the FBI. But all of Trump's behavior is about trying to suppress interest in the case, so there's something very bad in there for him and it's not money laundering. His base doesn't give a shit about money laundering.

So either he actually did notify the FBI but there's also direct evidence he participated in rape of underage girls and was somehow granted immunity, or this is just yet another trial balloon by his supporters to try to present him as some kind of avenging hero.

My bet is the latter.

[–] 60d@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 days ago

Yeah I knew he was a big time pedophile and we were big pals and partied together all the time and I was fine with it. But then he tried to expose my money laundering scheme so I called my friends at the FBI.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 4 points 6 days ago

My bet is the latter.

Yeah, it sounds like some Qanon bullshit. Just the kind of thing the MAGAts swallow whole.

[–] whiwake@lemmy.cafe 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I think you're right.

Trump was laundering Russian money for a very long time, and the Feds appear to have given him a free pass to do so. My hypotesis is that this was because he was a confidential informant for the FBI and ratted out the Mafia back when Giuliani was a US attorney running SDNY. What's documented is that attempted federal prosecutions of Trump after the mob was gone after would always stop before charges were made. So someone in the federal government was protecting him. An ongoing CI agreement would be the most likely explanation, consistent with FBI procedure.

So Trump wasn't worried about money laundering charges. A fix was in to prevent those. That means it was something else. And what was the big something else that involved Epstein? Trafficking and rape of underaged girls. It's unlikely that a hypothetical CI agreement would protect him from that kind of charges. Either material likely to emerge at one of Epstein's trials would implicate Trump, or Epstein held (and probably sold or shared) compromising material on Trump. Maybe both.