Epstein

[tommyguns2]

Since she signed sworn declarations even though it didn’t go to court, if they were deemed false she would still have been in violation of law because she swore her statements of events were true, correct?

ChatGPT said:

Yes, exactly — even if a case doesn’t go to trial, a person who submits a sworn declaration under penalty of perjurycan still face legal consequences if that declaration is proven to be knowingly false.

Here's how that works under the law:

• Federal law (28 U.S.C. § 1746) allows individuals to submit unsworn declarations in place of affidavits if they include a specific statement that they declare the contents are true under penalty of perjury.
• If someone knowingly lies in one of those declarations, it's a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1621 (perjury) or § 1001(false statements), both of which are federal crimes.

So even if:

• The lawsuit was dismissed voluntarily,
• The case never went to trial, and
• The individual never testified in court,

— the sworn declaration remains a legal statement, and making false statements in it could be prosecuted if the government chose to pursue it and could prove intent to deceive.

However, this kind of prosecution is rare and typically only happens when:

• There's strong evidence the person knowingly lied, and
• The false statement had significant legal or public consequences.

In the case of "Jane Doe" vs. Trump and Epstein:

• No such perjury charges were filed.
• The case was dropped before any formal legal challenge to the truthfulness of the claims occurred.
• The identity of "Jane Doe" was never publicly confirmed, and she never gave a public interview or deposition.

That's absolutely true. But who's going to prosecute her for her false statement. A prosecutor (DA) in a blue jurisdiction? Nope. She can say whatever she wants without any real consequence.

BTW, people file declarations in civil disputes ALL the time. In fact, it's common that a jury will have two conflicting sworn statements to evaluate. The jury sifts through them as one piece of evidence and weighs it in view of other evidence to arrive at a conclusion.

 

[tommyguns2]

And her complaints were filed 3x.

• April 2016, in federal court in California under the name Katie Johnson. That suit was dismissed due to procedural issues (invalid address, etc.) Heavy SportsThe IndependentWikipedia.
• June 2016, refiled in New York under the pseudonym Jane Doe The GuardianWikipediaWikipedia.
• September 30, 2016, filed again in New York as an amended Jane Doe suit with new witness declarations

All three dates strategically before the November election with the goal of the NYT and WaPo, etc. picking up the story and running with it. She was allegedly abused 15 or more years earlier, but brought the lawsuit after Trump appeared to be securing the GOP nomination. The timing absolutely stinks. I don't buy it for a second.

 

[tommyguns2]

TG,
To the extent her claims were made - she faced formal risk of perjury — simply filing the claims risked perjury regardless that the case did not proceed to court. She suffered no ramifications, indicating her claims could not be countered / proven false. Had she filed falsely she would have been legally attacked to the fullest extent.
There is at least to the same potential of your imagined outcome, the likelihood that she was in fact given a “Big Beautiful Bundle” to agree to a life of financial abundance in silence.

Stormy Daniels was given a bundle to sign an NDA, and she renegged when she had good reason to believe she'd make a bigger bundle violating it. Once Trump won the nomination and was a reasonable threat (although no one, including me, thought he'd win), there was way MORE money to be made being the face of the person to bring down Trump.

Stormy and Avenetti were the talk of the town when it looked like it was damaging Trump. Once Trump won, the Dems dumped her like a bad habit, as she provided no more political value. The same for this lady. She was a political pawn. Used when she provided some value, thrown away once she was no longer useful. Almost sounds like Game of Thrones.

 

[testboner]

Oh TG…. Trump didn’t “win,” no one wins. Trump (as others before him) was selected, not “elected.”
Pedo and rapist Mango Mussolini is who the system owners / orchestrators have deemed their current best useful idiot.
Beyond all that, what we’ve seemed to all go comfortably numb to, is empathy — all of Trump, Clinton, Biden, etc victims get denigrated as cons. At least be grateful that none of your immediate loved ones were among them; perhaps you can at least feel something by framing it that way.
I will never fully understand why these political puppet assailants… so called “leaders” are perpetually venerated and defended by a significant number of public. It bewilders me beyond all comprehension.

 

[captaincaveman]

Explain how the American people paying 15% more to the American government for good imported from Europe is winning?

Explain how all the taxes we pay have benefitted us (as a nation) seeing we are $37,000,000,000,000.00 in debt?

It is just another increase in costs unless it is earmarked for debt reduction or to be refunded to the taxpayers.

People do not even own their homes once they pay it off. Don't believe it? Don't pay property taxes (or their state equivalent) for a few years. You will find out we are all renters.
Also, we are securing a real asset (a house and land) with an ever inflating INTEREST BEARING note that has lost 3300% of its value since its creation.

We are a nation that is bleeding with a massive neck would and we are going to the nail salon.

 

[captaincaveman]

Oh TG…. Trump didn’t “win,” no one wins. Trump (as others before him) was selected, not “elected.”
Pedo and rapist Mango Mussolini is who the system owners / orchestrators have deemed their current best useful idiot.
Beyond all that, what we’ve seemed to all go comfortably numb to, is empathy — all of Trump, Clinton, Biden, etc victims get denigrated as cons. At least be grateful that none of your immediate loved ones were among them; perhaps you can at least feel something by framing it that way.
I will never fully understand why these political puppet assailants… so called “leaders” are perpetually venerated and defended by a significant number of public. It bewilders me beyond all comprehension.

What is the alternative when we are in a system of false choices and lesser evils are the winner? And "lesser evil" is subjective as is evidenced by this thread.

Auto-pen Dementia Child Sniffer Incest Shower-taker Wet Hairy Leg Biden a better choice? Does this name-calling help?

Circular logic and "discussion"...and I am still right where I was.

It is fun from time to time.

 

[testboner]

What is the alternative when we are in a system of false choices and lesser evils are the winner? And "lesser evil" is subjective as is evidenced by this thread.

Auto-pen Dementia Child Sniffer Incest Shower-taker Wet Hairy Leg Biden a better choice? Does this name-calling help?

Circular logic and "discussion"...and I am still right where I was.

It is fun from time to time.

You’re correct . I know the problem — most of us realize the problem/s. What I don’t have is a viable solution, however that cannot / should not cause us to simply accept what we currently have as the status quo —we know it’s a failure, and thus should not simply settle because we do t currently have a replacement.

 

[tommyguns2]

You’re correct . I know the problem — most of us realize the problem/s. What I don’t have is a viable solution, however that cannot / should not cause us to simply accept what we currently have as the status quo —we know it’s a failure, and thus should not simply settle because we do t currently have a replacement.

I know I may sound naive, and perhaps I am. But I was listening to Bessent (Treasury secretary) who said it's his goal (his 3/3/3 plan) by the end of Trump's term to get the U.S. deficit as a percentage of U.S. GDP down to <3%, create economic growth at 3%, and the equivalent of 3 million additional barrels of oil production (or equivalent US energy: gas, solar, nuclear) per day.

If we can get to that over the next three years, there may be some hope. But I agree that without some leadership by people willing to make difficult decisions, the slow motion train wreck will inevitably occur.

Another naive hope is that the AI boom will be so transformational with respect to productivity growth, that we'll grow out of our present deficit. But again, both Repubs and Dems will want to spend more and more.

 

[fasttwitch]

Another naive hope is that the AI boom will be so transformational with respect to productivity growth, that we'll grow out of our present deficit.

As my uncle always said, "wish in one hand and shit in the other, see which side fills up first."

AI is going to annihilate jobs. In ten years the unemployment rate will be over 80%-90%

 

[tommyguns2]

As my uncle always said, "wish in one hand and shit in the other, see which side fills up first."

AI is going to annihilate jobs. In ten years the unemployment rate will be over 80%-90%

The first statement I agree with! The second, not so much.

AI will change jobs, that is for sure. But every transformational technology has done that. Remember when the ATM machine was introduced, and everyone said that all the bank tellers would lose their jobs. That didn't happen, but the tellers' jobs did change, and became more productive.

When the automobile was introduced, it negatively affected the covered wagon business, but the net result was productivity growth and new jobs in other areas. Don't want to minimize the discomfort of change, as that's real, but aren't you happy to turn on the lights by flipping the switch instead of lighting a candle? What about all the candle makers?

 

[fasttwitch]

The first statement I agree with! The second, not so much.

AI will change jobs, that is for sure. But every transformational technology has done that. Remember when the ATM machine was introduced, and everyone said that all the bank tellers would lose their jobs. That didn't happen, but the tellers' jobs did change, and became more productive.

When the automobile was introduced, it negatively affected the covered wagon business, but the net result was productivity growth and new jobs in other areas. Don't want to minimize the discomfort of change, as that's real, but aren't you happy to turn on the lights by flipping the switch instead of lighting a candle? What about all the candle makers?

Yeah man, I hear you. I am very well versed in the history of tech's effects on labor. Like you, I've studied this intensely. This is the argument of the eternal optimists. (I used to be an optimist like you). That somehow, someway jobs just appear once jobs are taken away. But this time it is indeed different. Here is why.

First we all farmed, working with our backs. Depending on where you lived perhaps 80% or more of people worked in food production. Then equipment took those jobs down to the low single digits percentage.

So we moved to factories and worked with our hands. Then automation took many of those jobs.

So we moved into service and tech. Now automation is about to take those jobs.

So tech took over our back work. Then tech took over the work we did with our hands. Now tech is coming for the work humans do with their minds. Tell me, what is left? Once the human mind and body are no longer useful, what is left?

 

[fasttwitch]

Yeah man, I hear you. I am very well versed in the history of tech's effects on labor. Like you, I've studied this intensely. This is the argument of the eternal optimists. (I used to be an optimist like you). That somehow, someway jobs just appear once jobs are taken away. But this time it is indeed different. Here is why.

First we all farmed, working with our backs. Depending on where you lived perhaps 80% or more of people worked in food production. Then equipment took those jobs down to the low single digits percentage.

So we moved to factories and worked with our hands. Then automation took many of those jobs.

So we moved into service and tech. Now automation is about to take those jobs.

So tech took over our back work. Then tech took over the work we did with our hands. Now tech is coming for the work humans do with their minds. Tell me, what is left? Once the human mind and body are no longer useful, what is left?

Just to be clear, I am certain new businesses will be created. Perhaps even at faster rates than before. But these businesses will ONLY come into existence and operate profitably WITHOUT humans slowing down progress, doing sloppy work, taking sick days, maternity leave, forming unions and needing breaks and vacations.

Anyone creating a business now days has the following desire: Make sure humans (or few humans) are needed.

I ask this question with all sincerity.. Use your wildest imagination to imagine a new industry or business that will require tens of millions or humans. An industry that AI and automation simply cannot do.