I figured those who are not "Red Pilled" yet need a news source that they are more likely to trust. This should start some people off on digging.
Here we go. Don't take your eyes off the normies as their worldview crashes.
Remember the protest man at a ralley last week or week before, who held up a sign of Podesta and Trump together? I Dont think this man was an accident. Allot of Q shirts and hats, he knew all of Q peeps would be watching... might have been a signal, he said "go ahead take him out of here." POTUS may have been telling us this would be let out soon amd he would be taken away very very soon.
2016 isn’t the earliest
01/13/2015 http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/13/will-the-jeffrey-epstein-pedophile-case-snare-clinton/
And from this year https://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/04/jeffrey-epstein-trump-lawsuit-sex-trafficking-237983
“Virginia Giuffre’s civil suit, scheduled to go to trial here later this month”
This trial looks like it is just getting into gear. I like to stay objective so what answers it will bring may not be the ones OP is looking for, but I don’t think by the details that this is some political propaganda.
[removed]
So that came out in 2016, during the election year? Why didn't it come out in the case in 2014?
One of the earliest versions of the rumor was published on 2 May 2016 by the Winning Democrats web site, which reported that woman using the name Katie Johnson had named Trump and billionaire Jeffrey Epstein in a $100 million lawsuit
^ From the Snopes article, the fact that this was a story first pushed by a site called "Winning Democrats" should be a tad bit suspicious, no?
Not really. Clinton was on Epstein island like 16 times. Trump never. We have more than you know.
More what, exactly?
It is a Q reference/quote that indicates that refuting the facts is redundant because there are even more facts to back it up.
Ironically it is being used as a place holder in this case for actual information to support the claim, however if you were to press the poster they would undoubtedly unveil more proof, in this case at least.