At the end of the day, if you have a “friend” who supports Trump, the question goes beyond political disagreement, policy differences, or opinions about Trumps character, record, or intent. You have to ask yourself this: if things truly escalated, which category would that "friend" fall into?

These behaviors did not emerge all at once. Early support or indifference often preceded more extreme actions as laws, propaganda, and social pressure escalated. Ordinary people responded in profoundly different ways when moral conviction collided with fear, conformity, and perceived self-interest.

I swear they ignore every bit of corruption the felon does...

Crazy how Lisa Rein at the @washingtonpost.com is attacking veterans benefits about fraud but absolutely ignoring this investigative reporting about Trump possibly scamming and frauding American citizens while he is the president of the United States...

As the Washington post spreads its lies and attacks veterans benefits... The Trump administration is blatantly frauding its followers but no one is talking about that.

@cnn.com @ms.now @cbsnews.com absolutely no coverage by your news organization on this potential predatory elder abuse/fraud and financial fraud by the Trump administration!!!!!!! Pathetic reporting by legacy media, you should be ashamed. Why is legacy media not addressing this!!!

Great coverage Meidas! This should be freaking investigated it's so disgusting... The Felon needs to be held accountable for every single bit of his corruption.

I made a post with this exact information and someone on here appeared to try to dismiss it saying it is old news and that ransom was "of age" they missed the point entirely. Be careful who you engage with on here not all are genuine.

Doesn't mean the claims are proven, but it does mean you don't dismiss by focusing narrowly on age or timing rather than the conduct alleged and the handling of redacting the files. It's sad
I usually don't get upset with disingenuous responses but when it's in the guise of allies it is irritating.

regardless of whether those individuals were adults or minors, such allegations warrant serious questions. Not all engagement on these platforms is in good faith. The response I got relied on minimization rather than addressing why certain documents were altered after release.

When documents are presented to the public in the name of transparency, and a specific name, Donald Trump, is later redacted that action alone invites scrutiny. Ransome has implicated Trump in associations and sexual relations with trafficked individuals.

Whether Ransome was of legal age does not negate her status as a victim, nor does it invalidate the allegations she has made. What is legitimately worth questioning is that this material was re-released as part of the Epstein files, then subsequently removed/ reissued with selective redactions.

The response i received missed the core issue. Dismissing the discussion by focusing solely on Sarah Ransome’s age or by labeling the information as old news sidesteps the substance of the concern.

I made a post with this exact information and someone on here appeared to try to dismiss it saying it is old news and that ransom was "of age" they missed the point entirely. Be careful who you engage with on here not all are genuine.

Are his numbers actually legit? I get it, the government has officially put this GDP number out.. they only have themselves to blame if the people don't believe it as they control and not release any metrics or statistics except for what the felon himself deems to be accurate.

All good.
If there was involvement by Trump or anyone engaging in or having knowledge of sexual relations with trafficked persons, underage persons, or of age trafficked persons, or sexual abuse, I think yes in those terms it does matter and if it's nothing to see here why try to redact your name.

While that is true.