TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Is running bad for your knees?

Fact Check: Is running bad for your knees?

Published July 2, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
✗
VERDICT
Mostly False

# Is Running Bad for Your Knees? ## Introduction The claim that "running is bad for your knees" has been a topic of debate among health professionals...

Is Running Bad for Your Knees?

Introduction

The claim that "running is bad for your knees" has been a topic of debate among health professionals and fitness enthusiasts alike. Some argue that the repetitive impact of running can lead to knee injuries and conditions such as osteoarthritis, while others contend that running may actually benefit knee health. This article examines the available research and opinions on this claim without reaching a definitive conclusion.

What We Know

  1. Osteoarthritis and Running: A study published in 2023 discusses the conflicting evidence regarding running and knee osteoarthritis (OA). Some research suggests that running may increase the risk of developing OA, while other studies indicate that it could have a protective effect against it [1].

  2. Knee Health Trajectories: Another 2023 study found that repetitive joint loads from running could potentially damage knee cartilage, leading to OA. However, this study also emphasizes the need for further research to clarify these relationships [2].

  3. General Consensus on Running: An article from Stanford's Longevity Center states that current evidence suggests recreational running does not increase the risk of knee OA. In fact, it posits that running may be beneficial for knee health, as recreational runners reportedly have healthier cartilage than sedentary individuals [3].

  4. Additional Perspectives: A blog post from Cedars-Sinai supports the notion that recreational running is associated with a lower incidence of OA compared to non-runners, indicating that running may not be detrimental to knee health [7].

Analysis

The evidence surrounding the claim that running is bad for the knees is mixed and requires careful evaluation:

  • Source Reliability: The studies referenced from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [1][2] are peer-reviewed and published in reputable medical journals, which generally enhances their credibility. However, the interpretation of their findings can vary, and they may not account for all variables affecting knee health.

  • Potential Bias: The article from Stanford's Longevity Center [3] presents a positive view of running, which could reflect a bias towards promoting physical activity. It is essential to consider whether the authors have any affiliations with organizations that advocate for running or fitness, which might influence their conclusions.

  • Methodological Concerns: The studies cited often rely on observational data, which can be influenced by confounding factors such as the runners' overall fitness levels, body weight, and running habits. More controlled studies would be beneficial to establish a clearer causal relationship between running and knee health.

  • Contradictory Evidence: While some sources argue that running is not harmful to the knees, others highlight the potential risks associated with repetitive impact, particularly for individuals with pre-existing conditions or those who run excessively without proper technique or recovery [2].

What Additional Information Would Be Helpful?

To further clarify the relationship between running and knee health, additional research could focus on:

  • Longitudinal studies that track knee health in runners over time compared to non-runners.
  • Controlled trials that examine the effects of different running intensities and techniques on knee health.
  • Investigations into the impact of other factors, such as body weight, age, and pre-existing conditions, on knee health outcomes in runners.

Conclusion

Verdict: Mostly False

The claim that running is categorically "bad for your knees" is largely unsupported by current evidence, which suggests a more nuanced relationship. While some studies indicate potential risks associated with running, particularly for individuals with pre-existing conditions, other research points to the benefits of running for knee health, including a lower incidence of osteoarthritis among recreational runners. The mixed findings highlight the complexity of this issue, suggesting that running may not be inherently harmful but could pose risks under certain circumstances.

It is important to note that the available evidence is not definitive, and further research is needed to fully understand the long-term effects of running on knee health. Observational studies and potential biases in the literature also contribute to the uncertainty surrounding this claim. Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information and consider their individual circumstances when assessing the impact of running on knee health.

Sources

  1. Effects of Running on the Development of Knee Osteoarthritis. National Institutes of Health. Link
  2. Trajectory of knee health in runners with and without osteoarthritis. National Institutes of Health. Link
  3. Is Running Bad for Your Knees? Research Says, “No.” Stanford Longevity Center. Link
  4. Could Running Be Good for Your Knees? Cedars-Sinai. Link

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 If you thought the Epstein files were bad, wait until you hear this. 21 children were just rescued from a four-million-dollar mansion in California. Not from a cartel, not overseas but right here in the sunny California. The couple behind it, Sylvia Zang and Guhan Shang. They were running what looks like a surrogate agency but is now being investigated as a potential child trafficking operation. One surrogate, Kayla Elliott said, I was told that they already had a child and they just wanted one more. I didn't know that they had owned the agency.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 If you thought the Epstein files were bad, wait until you hear this. 21 children were just rescued from a four-million-dollar mansion in California. Not from a cartel, not overseas but right here in the sunny California. The couple behind it, Sylvia Zang and Guhan Shang. They were running what looks like a surrogate agency but is now being investigated as a potential child trafficking operation. One surrogate, Kayla Elliott said, I was told that they already had a child and they just wanted one more. I didn't know that they had owned the agency.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 If you thought the Epstein files were bad, wait until you hear this. 21 children were just rescued from a four-million-dollar mansion in California. Not from a cartel, not overseas but right here in the sunny California. The couple behind it, Sylvia Zang and Guhan Shang. They were running what looks like a surrogate agency but is now being investigated as a potential child trafficking operation. One surrogate, Kayla Elliott said, I was told that they already had a child and they just wanted one more. I didn't know that they had owned the agency.

Jul 26, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: There are no larger long-running crime series about everyday small systemic crimes in democracies
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: There are no larger long-running crime series about everyday small systemic crimes in democracies

Detailed fact-check analysis of: There are no larger long-running crime series about everyday small systemic crimes in democracies

Aug 15, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Running not effective way to lose weight "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full" "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full"
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Running not effective way to lose weight "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full" "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full"

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Running not effective way to lose weight "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full" "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full"

Aug 14, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Donny’s sent Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to ‘interview’ Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving twenty years in prison for trafficking teenage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. wait, did I say Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche? I should have said Donny’s personal attorney Todd Blanche — because that’s what Todd was before Donny appointed him to the DOJ. how convenient, to have one’s own personal attorney running interference as the second-in-command at the DOJ. so Blanche is talking to Maxwell. here’s the adminstration’s official bullshit cover story, as dutifully stenographed by the worthless scribblers of The New York Times. The interview with Ms. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, is part of the department’s effort to quell criticism that it is concealing details of Mr. Epstein’s crimes and interactions with high-profile figures, including President Trump. oh, I see — they’re ‘quelling criticism.’ how in the holy name of fuck does that work? does anyone believe that justice is what this is about? if you do, I have five bankrupt casinos in Atlantic City to sell you. we all goddamn well know that Blanche is down there offering Ghislaine a deal. it’s probably something like ‘exonerate Donny. tell everyone he did nothing wrong, and Donny will pardon you on the spot.’ you’d be naive to think otherwise. because that’s how the most corrupt administration in the history of corruption rolls. it’s a fucking cover-up, is what it is. let’s go to Akaash Singh one more time: ‘they’re hiding something CRAZY.’
Partially True

Fact Check: Donny’s sent Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to ‘interview’ Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving twenty years in prison for trafficking teenage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. wait, did I say Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche? I should have said Donny’s personal attorney Todd Blanche — because that’s what Todd was before Donny appointed him to the DOJ. how convenient, to have one’s own personal attorney running interference as the second-in-command at the DOJ. so Blanche is talking to Maxwell. here’s the adminstration’s official bullshit cover story, as dutifully stenographed by the worthless scribblers of The New York Times. The interview with Ms. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, is part of the department’s effort to quell criticism that it is concealing details of Mr. Epstein’s crimes and interactions with high-profile figures, including President Trump. oh, I see — they’re ‘quelling criticism.’ how in the holy name of fuck does that work? does anyone believe that justice is what this is about? if you do, I have five bankrupt casinos in Atlantic City to sell you. we all goddamn well know that Blanche is down there offering Ghislaine a deal. it’s probably something like ‘exonerate Donny. tell everyone he did nothing wrong, and Donny will pardon you on the spot.’ you’d be naive to think otherwise. because that’s how the most corrupt administration in the history of corruption rolls. it’s a fucking cover-up, is what it is. let’s go to Akaash Singh one more time: ‘they’re hiding something CRAZY.’

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Donny’s sent Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to ‘interview’ Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving twenty years in prison for trafficking teenage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. wait, did I say Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche? I should have said Donny’s personal attorney Todd Blanche — because that’s what Todd was before Donny appointed him to the DOJ. how convenient, to have one’s own personal attorney running interference as the second-in-command at the DOJ. so Blanche is talking to Maxwell. here’s the adminstration’s official bullshit cover story, as dutifully stenographed by the worthless scribblers of The New York Times. The interview with Ms. Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking, is part of the department’s effort to quell criticism that it is concealing details of Mr. Epstein’s crimes and interactions with high-profile figures, including President Trump. oh, I see — they’re ‘quelling criticism.’ how in the holy name of fuck does that work? does anyone believe that justice is what this is about? if you do, I have five bankrupt casinos in Atlantic City to sell you. we all goddamn well know that Blanche is down there offering Ghislaine a deal. it’s probably something like ‘exonerate Donny. tell everyone he did nothing wrong, and Donny will pardon you on the spot.’ you’d be naive to think otherwise. because that’s how the most corrupt administration in the history of corruption rolls. it’s a fucking cover-up, is what it is. let’s go to Akaash Singh one more time: ‘they’re hiding something CRAZY.’

Jul 26, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks