That’s not what is being reported.
Maxwell collected letters from Trump and dozens of Epstein’s other associates for a 2003 birthday album, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
The letter bearing Trump’s name, which was reviewed by the Journal, is bawdy—like others in the album.
A birthday card to a ‘terrific guy’ who likes beautiful women as much as Trump does, many of them on the younger side.. Just besties celebrating a 50th birthday and reminiscing about all the fun they’ve had together.
The WSJ first broke the story on Thursday. However, it didn’t include an image of the card, only the text and a description. From all the sources I’ve seen, the original image has not been released. It is possible that someone only leaked a written report to the WSJ and they dont even have a photo of it. I suspect all these photos are fake, but since Trump will likely sue for defamation, I don’t believe this story would have been published without a high certainty of the text’s authenticity.
Oh, interesting. I don’t watch a lot of politics media, mostly just Breaking Points, so I haven’t seen her on any other platform. I’ll look out for her appearances on other shows. Thanks for the insight!
Heck yeah, Breaking Points is awesome! I especially like the episodes hosted by Ryan and Emily.
Good question. I’m honestly not sure. You have a good point about screen readers, so I think the way you have it would be preferred by those who need the text. Alternatively, I’ve seen “[sic]” used to indicate that text is reproduced exactly as it originally appeared, including errors. However, I’m not sure if that would help screen readers in any way.
I was only pointing it out because it seemed fun to claim “worht” was in any way correct. Also, I always wondered if the alt text was manually entered or if some AI/ML generated it from the submitted photo. Thanks for clearing that up for me!
Hmm, looks like there’s a typo in the alt text. It’s supposed to be worht.
I didn’t downvote, but I can assume the reason is that other sources like the one you just affirmed had already been posted in this thread by the time you asked. It was likely interpreted as disingenuous.