Trump intervenes to allow pedophile to flee to Israel

[1032004]

24 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

You guys! Your boy is protecting another pedophile and you do everything you can to try to deny it when the truth is obvious.

I kinda doubt Trump knew anything about this TBH.  I’m sure someone from the admin did though.  Maybe Kash, reportedly this guy had a meeting with the FBI while he was here.

[Offthemat]

Is the OP just wild hare reporting?

“Police said that the suspects were released after being questioned, but added that indictments were expected to be filed against them.

According to Hebrew media reports, Alexandrovich returned to Israel after his release and was not arrested upon arrival.

The Cyber Directorate said the official reported that he was detained while in the US for matters “unrelated to work,” and that it was agreed he would be placed on leave until the matter was clarified.

The directorate added that it “had not yet received official details from US authorities,” and that “if and when such details are received, the directorate will act accordingly.””

https://www.timesofisrael.com/senior-israeli-cyber-official-detained-in-las-vegas-as-part-of-child-solicitation-probe/
 

“Alexandrovich "did not claim diplomatic immunity and was released by a state judge pending a court date. Any claims that the U.S. government intervened are false," the State Department said Monday on the social media site X.”

https://www.rgj.com/story/news/2025/08/19/us-denies-intervening-in-case-of-israeli-official-accused-of-nevada-sex-crime/85724914007/

Or just lies?

[JimmySpeaks]

Lies and phony propaganda is all the wokesters can come up with these days.  It’s priceless. 

[Bigbrog]

5 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

You guys! Your boy is protecting another pedophile and you do everything you can to try to deny it when the truth is obvious.

Wow...so prove I am "you guys".  Also, show me where anything I posted is denying the obvious truth...because YOU and RV claim it is so obvious because the DOJ met with Maxwell??  LOL  I merely posted you are claiming "you guys" are playing mental gymnastics...because I don't believe that the DOJ meeting with Maxwell means Trump is a pedophile??  Seriously???  You honestly think I am the one playing mental gymnastics here and you two aren't??  

Because your pee sized partisan brain can't think otherwiswe....I have always said, release the files no matter whose name is in there.  Hold whoever was involved in the rape of underage kids to the full extent of the law...actually even worse...they don't deserve to be in prison but rather 6 feet under.  But I am not going to subscribe to the very clear mental gymnastics you two are playing that because the DOJ met with Maxwell Trump is clearly guilty.

[uncle bernard]

12 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

Wow...so prove I am "you guys".  Also, show me where anything I posted is denying the obvious truth...because YOU and RV claim it is so obvious because the DOJ met with Maxwell??  LOL  I merely posted you are claiming "you guys" are playing mental gymnastics...because I don't believe that the DOJ meeting with Maxwell means Trump is a pedophile??  Seriously???  You honestly think I am the one playing mental gymnastics here and you two aren't??  

Because your pee sized partisan brain can't think otherwiswe....I have always said, release the files no matter whose name is in there.  Hold whoever was involved in the rape of underage kids to the full extent of the law...actually even worse...they don't deserve to be in prison but rather 6 feet under.  But I am not going to subscribe to the very clear mental gymnastics you two are playing that because the DOJ met with Maxwell Trump is clearly guilty.

Lol talk about mental gymnastics. The DOJ meeting with Maxwell is like piece of evidence 100 of why Trump is likely guilty. 

"Mental Gymnastics" from the guy who is feigning skepticism about Trump's connections to a guy he was good friends with for decades, has tons of pictures with, is on record calling him a good friend and alluding to the crimes, etc...and is now actively preventing the release of the case files. 

Pathetic! Do you have any dignity?

[Bigbrog]

4 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Lol talk about mental gymnastics. The DOJ meeting with Maxwell is like piece of evidence 100 of why Trump is likely guilty. 

"Mental Gymnastics" from the guy who is feigning skepticism about Trump's connections to a guy he was good friends with for decades, has tons of pictures with, is on record calling him a good friend and alluding to the crimes, etc...and is now actively preventing the release of the case files. 

Pathetic! Do you have any dignity?

You think I am "feigning skepticism" because I'm not buying into YOUR mental gymnastics??  LOL  And that translates for you that I am "pathetic" and don't have any "dignity"??  

So everyone who was "friends" with Epstein is guilty of being a pedophile?  Everyone who was at any party that Epstein was at is guilty of being a pedophile?  Everyone that ever took a picture with Epstein is guilty of being a pedophile??  Are all the previous prosecutors, DOJ, FBI, etc. that have spoken with Maxwell were trying to cover something up and is proof that whoever was in charge at the time is guilty of being a pedophile??  This is truly what you are going to hang your hat on and feel to be absolute truth??  YIKES!!

It's almost like you don't read all of people's posts and you have a story already made up in your head about what people mean or feel instead of actually reading what they wrote.

And I'll say it again for the 1000th time...release the files no matter whose name is in there.  Hold whoever was involved in the rape of underage kids to the full extent of the law...actually even worse...they don't deserve to be in prison but rather 6 feet under. 

[uncle bernard]

27 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

You think I am "feigning skepticism" because I'm not buying into YOUR mental gymnastics??  LOL  And that translates for you that I am "pathetic" and don't have any "dignity"??  

So everyone who was "friends" with Epstein is guilty of being a pedophile?  Everyone who was at any party that Epstein was at is guilty of being a pedophile?  Everyone that ever took a picture with Epstein is guilty of being a pedophile??  Are all the previous prosecutors, DOJ, FBI, etc. that have spoken with Maxwell were trying to cover something up and is proof that whoever was in charge at the time is guilty of being a pedophile??  This is truly what you are going to hang your hat on and feel to be absolute truth??  YIKES!!

It's almost like you don't read all of people's posts and you have a story already made up in your head about what people mean or feel instead of actually reading what they wrote.

And I'll say it again for the 1000th time...release the files no matter whose name is in there.  Hold whoever was involved in the rape of underage kids to the full extent of the law...actually even worse...they don't deserve to be in prison but rather 6 feet under. 

[WrestlingRasta]

2 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

So everyone who was "friends" with Epstein is guilty of being a pedophile?  Everyone who was at any party that Epstein was at is guilty of being a pedophile?  Everyone that ever took a picture with Epstein is guilty of being a pedophile??  Are all the previous prosecutors, DOJ, FBI, etc. that have spoken with Maxwell were trying to cover something up and is proof that whoever was in charge at the time is guilty of being a pedophile??  This is truly what you are going to hang your hat on and feel to be absolute truth??  YIKES!!

To be fair, the answer to your questions above is....no, of course not.  However, there are many additional things as it relates to our President that do not relate to 'everyone'.  In fact, relate to our President and our President only.  Additional things like...quote in reference to his good friend who is a proven pedophile: "He's a really good guy, and I hear he likes women, particularly on the younger side"; things like, quote in reference to his other good friend who is a proven pedophile regarding her being in prison: "I wish her well, I really wish her well, I wish everyone well" (when the fact he does not come even close to wishing everyone well cannot be debated); there are things like his interview "Will you release UFO files?" = (immediate) "yes"...."will you release JFK files" = (immediate) "yes"....."Will you release Epstein files" = (pause) 'Uh, yes, well, maybe not so much"; additional things like "sitting on my desk waiting to be reviewed", then later acknowledging to our President his name is in the files several times, then having a large number of officials ear mark any time his name is in the files; additional things like..the #2 in the DOJ going to interview the convicted pedophile, a very rare move on its own accord, then immediately after said interview (that no one was allowed to be privy to) moving the convicted pedophile to a level of security prison that no convicted pedophiles get sent to....with the added fact that said DOJ#2 was the President's personal criminal defense attorney before receiving that post; there's also the additional switch in tone from 'we are going to get to the bottom of this and get it all out', to it's 'all a hoax brought on by the other party', and 'I don't see why people are even interested in it', and so on...

 

Now, does any of this prove beyond a reasonable doubt our President is or has been in fact engaged in these activities..no it does not.   And even if there was only one of the above present, there may be a case of people reaching too much.   But when there is that much specific smoke (and there is more smoke, that's just a short off the top of my head list) around one particular person, it is very justified to be suspicious and raise questions.  And even more so, if you keep all of the above smoke but instead the name Biden or Obama were attached to them, the same people who are constantly trying to deflect, defend, and ignore that suspicion and questions would be jumping up and down all day every day.  Hardly debatable.   It's very easy to say release the files no matter who is in them, which admittingly everyone in here is saying, but while also many doing all they can to deflect and defend all of the smoke around this one particular person.   

[Offthemat]

25 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

To be fair, the answer to your questions above is....no, of course not.  However, there are many additional things as it relates to our President that do not relate to 'everyone'.  In fact, relate to our President and our President only.  Additional things like...quote in reference to his good friend who is a proven pedophile: "He's a really good guy, and I hear he likes women, particularly on the younger side"; things like, quote in reference to his other good friend who is a proven pedophile regarding her being in prison: "I wish her well, I really wish her well, I wish everyone well" (when the fact he does not come even close to wishing everyone well cannot be debated); there are things like his interview "Will you release UFO files?" = (immediate) "yes"...."will you release JFK files" = (immediate) "yes"....."Will you release Epstein files" = (pause) 'Uh, yes, well, maybe not so much"; additional things like "sitting on my desk waiting to be reviewed", then later acknowledging to our President his name is in the files several times, then having a large number of officials ear mark any time his name is in the files; additional things like..the #2 in the DOJ going to interview the convicted pedophile, a very rare move on its own accord, then immediately after said interview (that no one was allowed to be privy to) moving the convicted pedophile to a level of security prison that no convicted pedophiles get sent to....with the added fact that said DOJ#2 was the President's personal criminal defense attorney before receiving that post; there's also the additional switch in tone from 'we are going to get to the bottom of this and get it all out', to it's 'all a hoax brought on by the other party', and 'I don't see why people are even interested in it', and so on...

 

Now, does any of this prove beyond a reasonable doubt our President is or has been in fact engaged in these activities..no it does not.   And even if there was only one of the above present, there may be a case of people reaching too much.   But when there is that much specific smoke (and there is more smoke, that's just a short off the top of my head list) around one particular person, it is very justified to be suspicious and raise questions.  And even more so, if you keep all of the above smoke but instead the name Biden or Obama were attached to them, the same people who are constantly trying to deflect, defend, and ignore that suspicion and questions would be jumping up and down all day every day.  Hardly debatable.   It's very easy to say release the files no matter who is in them, which admittingly everyone in here is saying, but while also many doing all they can to deflect and defend all of the smoke around this one particular person.   

You don’t believe Bill Barr?

[WrestlingRasta]

30 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

You don’t believe Bill Barr?

And now all the sudden you do???   Out of all your hilarious posts, this has to go immediately to the top five. 

Deflect and defend.....it's okay, not trying to change anyone's mind here.  Just answering Bigbrogs question. 

[Offthemat]

3 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

And now all the sudden you do???   Out of all your hilarious posts, this has to go immediately to the top five. 

Deflect and defend.....it's okay, not trying to change anyone's mind here.  Just answering Bigbrogs question. 

Typically non-responsive.  I’ll ask again, do you not believe Bill Barr?  To expand a little, do you believe that after all the criticism he has received, that Barr wouldn’t jump at the opportunity to damage Trump?

[WrestlingRasta]

3 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Typically non-responsive.  I’ll ask again, do you not believe Bill Barr?  To expand a little, do you believe that after all the criticism he has received, that Barr wouldn’t jump at the opportunity to damage Trump?

Non-responsive?  You literally started by quoting my post that was extremely responsive.  I honestly cannot take you seriously.
 

But I’ll humor you and your little games for about two minutes.  As it relates to the Epstein case, I can no longer believe anything that comes out of Washington.   As it relates to Barr, he never claimed to have all of the documents referring to the Epstein files sitting on his desk waiting for his review. More specifically, he was not AG when Epstein was first indicted, and he was AG for very short period of time during his second indictment as well as Maxwell’s, and he didn’t make claims to get everything out to the public.  So, not only do you have the very real likelihood that he didn’t have all of the documents, that were sitting on Bondi’s desk waiting for her review of which she informed the president he was in there a lot and had numerous officials scour said documents to earmark each of those instances, he still fits in the description I noted above, being that as it relates to this case I can no longer believe anything coming out of Washington.   
 

Responsive enough?   Now, I’m not going to ask you to respond to my question, no bother, you’re one big joke in my view.  It’s okay. 
 

 

[Offthemat]

15 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Non-responsive?  You literally started by quoting my post that was extremely responsive.  I honestly cannot take you seriously.
 

But I’ll humor you and your little games for about two minutes.  As it relates to the Epstein case, I can no longer believe anything that comes out of Washington.   As it relates to Barr, he never claimed to have all of the documents referring to the Epstein files sitting on his desk waiting for his review. More specifically, he was not AG when Epstein was first indicted, and he was AG for very short period of time during his second indictment as well as Maxwell’s, and he didn’t make claims to get everything out to the public.  So, not only do you have the very real likelihood that he didn’t have all of the documents, that were sitting on Bondi’s desk waiting for her review of which she informed the president he was in there a lot and had numerous officials scour said documents to earmark each of those instances, he still fits in the description I noted above, being that as it relates to this case I can no longer believe anything coming out of Washington.   
 

Responsive enough?   Now, I’m not going to ask you to respond to my question, no bother, you’re one big joke in my view.  It’s okay. 
 

 

TDS

[WrestlingRasta]

5 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

TDS

. 
mark

[Caveira]

26 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I can no longer believe anything that comes out of Washington.

Slight tangent.   Change Washington to any “government” …. And change the time frame to —> Since the beginning of humans until the end of humans.    Then we’re on to something.  

[Bigbrog]

6 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

To be fair, the answer to your questions above is....no, of course not.  However, there are many additional things as it relates to our President that do not relate to 'everyone'.  In fact, relate to our President and our President only.  Additional things like...quote in reference to his good friend who is a proven pedophile: "He's a really good guy, and I hear he likes women, particularly on the younger side"; things like, quote in reference to his other good friend who is a proven pedophile regarding her being in prison: "I wish her well, I really wish her well, I wish everyone well" (when the fact he does not come even close to wishing everyone well cannot be debated); there are things like his interview "Will you release UFO files?" = (immediate) "yes"...."will you release JFK files" = (immediate) "yes"....."Will you release Epstein files" = (pause) 'Uh, yes, well, maybe not so much"; additional things like "sitting on my desk waiting to be reviewed", then later acknowledging to our President his name is in the files several times, then having a large number of officials ear mark any time his name is in the files; additional things like..the #2 in the DOJ going to interview the convicted pedophile, a very rare move on its own accord, then immediately after said interview (that no one was allowed to be privy to) moving the convicted pedophile to a level of security prison that no convicted pedophiles get sent to....with the added fact that said DOJ#2 was the President's personal criminal defense attorney before receiving that post; there's also the additional switch in tone from 'we are going to get to the bottom of this and get it all out', to it's 'all a hoax brought on by the other party', and 'I don't see why people are even interested in it', and so on...

 

Now, does any of this prove beyond a reasonable doubt our President is or has been in fact engaged in these activities..no it does not.   And even if there was only one of the above present, there may be a case of people reaching too much.   But when there is that much specific smoke (and there is more smoke, that's just a short off the top of my head list) around one particular person, it is very justified to be suspicious and raise questions.  And even more so, if you keep all of the above smoke but instead the name Biden or Obama were attached to them, the same people who are constantly trying to deflect, defend, and ignore that suspicion and questions would be jumping up and down all day every day.  Hardly debatable.   It's very easy to say release the files no matter who is in them, which admittingly everyone in here is saying, but while also many doing all they can to deflect and defend all of the smoke around this one particular person.   

It's totally fine that you look at it the way you do.  All I am doing is also applying some of the logical thinking to the things that don't point to "smoke"...ex., him running on releasing the files, if there was any sort of damning information about Trump the past administration would have absolutely "used it", etc.  My point being I think it is absolutely ridiculous to run around and adamantly say Trump IS a pedophile (I know you are not saying that as an absolute like others) and the same scrutiny to all the things you claim as smoke aren't given to the things that would point he probably isn't a pedophile and on some "list" that proves it.  

Obviously people are allowed to use whatever deductive reasoning to come up with their pointions; however, I am just not someone, who for political reasons instantly (or only looks at things one sided) villainizes someone because they are an R or a D.  And yes, it is easy for me to say release the files (because neither you nor I nor anyone on these boards knows what is in them), and whomever was engaging in sexual acts with minors, should be, at a minimum, put in jail for life.

[WrestlingRasta]

1 hour ago, Bigbrog said:

It's totally fine that you look at it the way you do.  All I am doing is also applying some of the logical thinking to the things that don't point to "smoke"...ex., him running on releasing the files, if there was any sort of damning information about Trump the past administration would have absolutely "used it", etc.  My point being I think it is absolutely ridiculous to run around and adamantly say Trump IS a pedophile (I know you are not saying that as an absolute like others) and the same scrutiny to all the things you claim as smoke aren't given to the things that would point he probably isn't a pedophile and on some "list" that proves it.  

Obviously people are allowed to use whatever deductive reasoning to come up with their pointions; however, I am just not someone, who for political reasons instantly (or only looks at things one sided) villainizes someone because they are an R or a D.  And yes, it is easy for me to say release the files (because neither you nor I nor anyone on these boards knows what is in them), and whomever was engaging in sexual acts with minors, should be, at a minimum, put in jail for life.

We’ll have to agree to disagree that him “running on releasing the files” is a point in his favor, is applying any logic.  Particularly as that stance has taken a complete 180 since his election.  And I quote “I don’t see why anyone is interested in this Epstein stuff”, among many other quotes the last couple of months since his AG reviewed the files. 
 

I don’t believe the “last presidential administration would have released it” really applies logic either.  Part of that opinion I’ve shared here a number of times.  But I’ll save that for another day.  I’m tired. 

Edited 8 hours ago by WrestlingRasta

[1032004]

7 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

As it relates to Barr, he never claimed to have all of the documents referring to the Epstein files sitting on his desk waiting for his review.

Not only that, he said he knew nothing about a client list at all.  Saying he didn’t see anything implicating Trump means nothing, since he apparently didn’t see much of anything.

Edited 7 hours ago by 1032004

[JimmySpeaks]

27 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Not only that, he said he knew nothing about a client list at all.  Saying he didn’t see anything implicating Trump means nothing, since he apparently didn’t see much of anything.

Apparently.  Bahahahahhahah. Don’t you have a couple of wrestlers to mix up ? 

[1032004]

Comer said Barr told investigators that he "didn't know anything about a client list," and did not have conversations with Trump about such a list.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bill-barr-testifies-he-didnt-see-info-would-implicate-trump-epstein-case-comer-says

[scourge165]

On 8/18/2025 at 2:43 PM, El Luchador said:

 

 

 

There are few people who are dumb enough to take a parody mocking the right... and then think using that parody somehow helps their argument when it's again, just mocking your very own position! 

[scourge165]

3 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Comer said Barr told investigators that he "didn't know anything about a client list," and did not have conversations with Trump about such a list.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bill-barr-testifies-he-didnt-see-info-would-implicate-trump-epstein-case-comer-says

I'm more concerned with how Pam Bondi said there were thousands of hours of video including child porn and then Kash Patel just said there was... nothing. Nothing to see here, this was a hoax pushed by the DEMOCRATS when this was like Qanon's #1 topic... when that was still relevant and then after, it was still among the right's top priorities. 

He appointed people like Patel and Bongino who talked about the Epstein files hundreds of times in their previous jobs that made them VERY qualified... 'skeptical podcasts hosts.' 

 

 

I think most people are seeing through this. Even MAGA people I know who have defended him through EVERYTHING are now starting to point out it's a little weird he won't release this stuff.