Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I chose the MSN link so people wouldn't say it was a right wing source. Imagine if the portrait was of Trump, the media would be all over this, again attempting to link Trump with Epstein. But, since it's Clinton, one of their own, linked to the pedophile, not even a blip on the radar.
Do a search and find better articles in more detail. This is really bizarre.
And the left says Trump is a disgrace to the office of president ???
The image was lifted and photoshopped from here around a fake hallway door and stated "here's a picture from Epstein's house"
Seems the MSM is only too happy to oblige all these "anonymous" reports without doing a shred of investigating.
The artist said she painted both Clinton and Bush while she was in school.
I read this morning that an aspiring female artist had painted and sold it years ago. Only to be surprised recently that the buyer turned out to be Epstein.
I'm not sure I'm following what you are trying to claim in your post above? That Epstein really didn't have that painting hanging in one of his properties?
You do realize that just because someone painted a portrait of Bill Clinton in a dress doesn't mean that Bill Clinton actually put on that dress and posed for the picture, right? And whatever Epstein did or didn't have in his house, neither Clinton nor Trump had control over that.
I read this morning that an aspiring female artist had painted and sold it years ago. Only to be surprised recently that the buyer turned out to be Epstein.
Really ? So it got sold to Epstein in 2012.
How was she able to get that painting back for that exhibit she had in 2013 if she didn't know that Epstein bought it ?
I read this morning that an aspiring female artist had painted and sold it years ago. Only to be surprised recently that the buyer turned out to be Epstein.
You do realize that just because someone painted a portrait of Bill Clinton in a dress doesn't mean that Bill Clinton actually put on that dress and posed for the picture, right? And whatever Epstein did or didn't have in his house, neither Clinton nor Trump had control over that.
Apparently those very simple concepts are too much for this crowd.
Really ? So it got sold to Epstein in 2012.
How was she able to get that painting back for that exhibit she had in 2013 if she didn't know that Epstein bought it ?
I do see in the article that she was a art graduate in 2012 and it may be at this time when she had first painted it. Selling it later that year, maybe? Where is it mentioned an exhibit in 2013? Regardless of when it was first painted, sold, etc. it eventually wound up in one of Epstein's homes.
They should name that painting "The Stain Maker".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
