wtf did nobody else post this????? don't make me get my news from Reddit 
Graphic details about Donald Trump's alleged "sexual proclivities" have emerged in the latest round of court documents containing details of late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein's associates.
The new documents contain "incendiary claims" about the former president, including accusations that he had sexual relations with "many girls", made by one of Epstein's alleged victims, Sarah Ransome.
Mr Trump's name has appeared a handful of times previously in the documents and, while not accusing him of wrongdoing, appears to illustrate the good relationship he had with the disgraced financier.
In the newly unsealed documents, Ms Ransome testified that her unnamed friend "was one of the many girls that had sexual relations with Donald Trump" – including at Epstein's New York townhouse.
"She confided in me about her casual 'friendship' with Donald. Mr Trump definitely seemed to have a thing for her and she told me how he kept going on about how he liked her 'pert nipples'," she testified.
She then described in graphic detail how Mr Trump allegedly caused pain to the victim's nipples – and claimed she saw the resulting injury firsthand.
"I also know she had sexual relations with Trump at Jeffery's NY mansion on regular occasions as I once met Jen for coffee, just before she was going to meet Trump and Epstein together at his mansion," she said.
Patriot cope (just starting):
Epstein docs going around today, please tell me this is not real
Edit: Now I'm confused
This article is from January?? The demonrats are passing off old news as new revelations, using the recent unsealing to pretend this is new information??? No way
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Literally the same exact thing that was happening with Justice Thomas like 2 weeks ago. They jumped back into his (allowable) gifts like it was a new bomb shell report, despite the fact it already fell on its face the first time the "story" broke. They're down to recycling the same news to drive internet engagement.
Part of me thinks that this rehashing habit they have is due to whatever publicity firm they've hired trying to keep engagement numbers high during the election cycle in order to continue billing the DNC/PACs. So long as you keep churning views, you still get to say you met the engagement numbers required as the consulting firm.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Bingo, also because the dems have a perpetual turnout issue. Younger voters on avg dgaf about turning up at the voting booth, so they gotta outrage us in order to try to get them there
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context