Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

SunSeeker

(57,320 posts)

20. Yes, during the hearing, so she could get info on what Cohen was talking about.

Reply to stopdiggin (Reply #19)

Wed Nov 19, 2025, 02:25 PM

Wednesday

So that she can be prepared when it was her turn to question Cohen. Which is what Epstein provided and what happened. Because of the info Epstein provided, she was able to get Cohen to describe on the record the relationship Rhona ("the keeper of secrets" ) had to Trump and the Trump organization. Plaskett was not texting Epstein while she was questioning Cohen, obviously.

100% of the Democrats in the House disagree with you. They all voted against the censure motion.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Cha RedArkGuy

30 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

House Republicans move to censure Plaskett over text messages with Epstein [View all] Zorro Tuesday OP

If only Republicans were as eager to pursue Epstein's predator friends dlk Tuesday #1

i agree with norman in general, but rampartd Tuesday #2

Epstein had been convicted as a sex offender of minors eleven years earlier MichMan Tuesday #3

i get it, but if court decisions are the standard. rampartd Tuesday #4

Have no idea of what that has anything to do with Plaskett and Epstein texting each other in a congressional hearing MichMan Tuesday #5

I hadn't heard about any of this before now, slightlv Tuesday #8

Here is a clip from the Washington Post of some of it MichMan Tuesday #10

Thank you... slightlv Wednesday #26

Epstein was acting as an informant to Plaskett on Trump/Cohen for that 2019 hearing. SunSeeker Wednesday #13

having a hard time following the defense here stopdiggin Tuesday #9

Oops. Well that kinda' sucks. Well, okay - really, really blows? stopdiggin Tuesday #6

Plaskett did nothing wrong. She was using Epstein as an informant. SunSeeker Wednesday #14

believe that if you want to stopdiggin Wednesday #19

Yes, during the hearing, so she could get info on what Cohen was talking about. SunSeeker Wednesday #20

you do you. Meanwhile, I am going to criticize Democrats when they make egregious ethical stopdiggin Wednesday #22

There was nothing unethical about Plaskett getting info to prosecute Trump from his former best friend. SunSeeker Wednesday #23

Disagree on the very strongest of terms stopdiggin Wednesday #24

You've made your opinion quite clear. I, and House Democrats, do not share it. SunSeeker Wednesday #25

Enough already RedArkGuy Wednesday #28

Don't be absurd. I advocate no such thing. stopdiggin Wednesday #29

I support censuring her. You cannot be appearing to take Wiz Imp Tuesday #7

I don't. She was not taking direction from Epstein, she was using him as an informant. SunSeeker Wednesday #15

I'd also add that whistleblowers . . . RedArkGuy Wednesday #27

Wasn't She One of the Impeachment Managers? Deep State Witch Tuesday #11

Yes she was. But this is NOT payback Wiz Imp Wednesday #16

It totally was payback for her prosecution of Trump. SunSeeker Wednesday #21

The motion FAILED. Plaskett did nothing wrong; she was talking to an scumbag informant to get info on Trump/Cohen. SunSeeker Tuesday #12

Who knew more about Trump and his dirty dealings that Jeffrey Epstein? mackdaddy Wednesday #17

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-South Carolina), is this lap puppy republianmushroom Wednesday #18

Gosh I wonder what sets her apart in their minds mahina Wednesday #30