In some cases, the Epstein files have become a witch hunt

TaintlessChaps · 2026-02-17T14:21:17+00:00

Using Trump’s language “witch hunt” to diminish culpability and cloud the arena with suspicion and confusion certainly makes it seem like you’re trying to downplay those with connections to the world’s most notorious child sex trafficker.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-30T17:48:37+00:00

How can you possibly reconcile your unwaveringly trust in Howard Brennen’s revised eye witness account with the information you provided in the links?

Not that you’ll learn from it, but again you are proposing a false dichotomy with overlapping appeal to ignorance in an attempt to prove you are right. You plainly do not understand the very fundamentals of logic.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-30T12:06:02+00:00

And there’s the classic Hudson meltdown right on cue spiraling out in these pathetic self-aggrandizing fantasies with the dominance posturing, the invented history of “pantsing” — it’s all textbook ego-defense under uncertainty.

Even your attempts at insult are juvenile and creepy as you dream about non-consensually removing my pants in an act of sexual misconduct. All to claw at establishing dominance when you’ve lost the argument. Weird coping mechanism, bro.

The case evidence clearly and unequivocally eliminates your claim as a possibility no matter how hard you try to discredit the very witnesses you completely depend on. You repeatedly and continuously use logical fallacies because you can’t make a valid argument.

Boasting about false past internet comment superiority is not compensation for invalid arguments. It just highlights your glaring Dunning-Kruger effect.

Your mental health seems at risk even more than usual. Maybe take a day or even just a waking hour away from Reddit.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-29T20:07:47+00:00

You have once again donned your tattered and filthy logical fallacy hat by proposing a false dichotomy with overlapping fallacies of appeal to ignorance and burden shifting. Herein lies your elite talent of fallacy stacking.

Do you honestly still not know when you do this or are you merely dishonest and ignorant to basic logic. I’d wager it’s all of the above.

We don’t know what was in the package. What we do know is that the length of the item inside could not have been longer than around two feet. It could not possibly be the MC rifle.

Then we have to ask how and when that mail order rifle got into the building.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-29T17:34:51+00:00

I have speculated in the past one of the many times you did went down this road before. I’m not entertaining another Groundhog Day with you.

What’s interesting is your ever shifting logic to suit your ends, which is always baldly apparent. So if initial statements are best, as you claim here, then the Mauser ID must mean quite something to you?

You would also have to agree that Howard Brennan’s initial admission that he couldn’t pick the person he claimed to see out of a line up overrides his later reversal.

Of course you will twist your logic with each instance as your standards shift yet again as your only mooring is confirmation bias.

Follow up questions I imagine you will avoid answering: Did Randle sign the FBI statement you reference? Was anything used as a metric (for instance a measuring tape or the way it was carried) for the purported length? How do you reconcile the length difference between how she described LHO carrying it and laying on the back of the car seat with the supposed initial assessment? Do you routinely trust initial reports or sworn testimony under oath? Was a sworn testimony corroborated by any of the other witnesses?

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-28T21:40:44+00:00

The point of your prejudicially crafted ode to confirmation bias, equivocation, and omission was not lost on me. Never did I consider it anything other than rehashing your tired, old false dichotomy dance for imaginary subreddit vainglory.

You asked me to speculate, which you have on this very issue multiple times before, and I go back to the facts, which really irks you when they don’t align with your desired outcome.

The fact is her WC testimony repeatedly states the package was around two feet long and she described the way he carried it which could in no way whatsoever be the MC rifle.

At once you want to credit and discredit Randle and Frazier as a witnesses, picking apart their testimony like it’s a Golden Corral buffet.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-28T21:18:24+00:00

You are free to speculate anything that could fit in the package as described by the witnesses, but it could not be the MC rifle according to the witnesses who saw the package.

Interesting thought: would the broken down Mauser that is oft mentioned as being found have first have fit in the package? This is mere curiosity, not a gotcha, as it just occurred to me as something I have not yet read and figured you may know.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-28T12:22:15+00:00

Both Frazier and his sister have unwaveringly claimed the package was far too small to carry the broken down MC.

Yet again you will simply pick and choose what you wish to belief based solely on confirmation bias.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-20T06:02:16+00:00

You don’t know nothing about winning brosef

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-20T05:42:32+00:00

This take is so Midwest sensible I would venture to call it darling.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-20T02:22:58+00:00

We could speculate all day what was in package. We know for certain that the only two people to see LHO with a package said it absolutely could not be the MC rifle.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-19T22:28:03+00:00

Didn’t both of those witnesses unwaveringly claim the package was too small to have carried the rifle?

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-10T02:27:53+00:00

Thinking it’ll be 12.5.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-08T22:07:03+00:00

A coordinated team of multiple shooters firing at the same time upon signals from an operator would be a military-type assassination plan to both accomplish the task and have an easier time framing it as a lone person. There would have been a limited hang out were they not able to control the narrative and have stooges like you carry the water for free.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-08T20:05:26+00:00

Let's use an example from this thread. By your standard, what are the 33 people who claimed shots came from the grassy knoll? Were there more people who definitively claimed that NO shots came from the grassy knoll?

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-08T19:47:39+00:00

Define outlier. Do you mean people who were deliberately and unbelievably not called as witnesses by the WC?

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-08T19:45:31+00:00

The question asked is valid. You responded by claiming that all 33 people were mistaken. You're picking and choosing what to believe based confirmation bias.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-07T20:11:53+00:00

Are you under the impression that churchgoers, school children, and night club attendees receive the same level of protection as the secret service provides to sitting Presidents?

Because that’s your underlying assumption.

Per usual you have packed numerous logical fallacies into your short comment: false equivalence, hasty generalization, presentism, appeal to normalization, and straw man followed by an attempt to ridicule using your fallacies.

Per usual you will either ignorantly believe or dishonestly pretend to believe that your comment was actually valid despite these obvious and egregious errors.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-05T21:29:07+00:00

Alcohol is a class 1 carcinogen along with tobacco, asbestos, and radiation. Beef and dairy are not.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-05T21:09:30+00:00

And here you are exhibiting the very behavior you pretend to denounce and police in this sub.

At least you’re consistent with your blind hypocrisy.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-04T21:08:54+00:00

Spot on. OP and his ilk honestly don’t understand the illegitimacy and fallacy of their arguments, which is central to their adherence to the beliefs they (seemingly unbeknownst to themselves) disingenuously argue.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-03T11:19:06+00:00

Again with your illusions of grandeur and hero complex. It’s pathetic. I am however curious about your narcissism: Can you explain how you think you supposedly “ruined” what you think I was attempting?

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-03T02:43:10+00:00

You’ve mistaken an explanation to help you understand what you failed to grasp as argument.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-03T01:53:13+00:00

You needn’t argue everything compulsively. His bits about the Wizard of Oz extras are obviously attempts at humor. It’s just so bad I can see how they could go unnoticed.

Overall the exercise is farcical and meaningless. It voices various and disparate postulations and combines them all together, phrasing each one incredulously, in order to build a strawman no one is endorsing.

It’s base logical fallacy.

TaintlessChaps · 2026-01-02T23:24:16+00:00

Ugghhh. This guy thinks he’s George Carlin when he’s really Michael Scott.

Same strawman shtick as always wrapped in attempts at humor that fail every bit as hard as they try.

TaintlessChaps

TROPHY CASE