Labor Sec. Acosta accused of helping Jeffrey Epstein beat sex trafficking charges

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a huge news and should get enough news coverage...but these days its hard to tell!

It’s when stories like these go away quietly that I can’t help but wonder if the management of media companies are themselves compromised in some way. Why else would stories like this get almost zero coverage and non-issues like a crazy man staging a crime get wall to wall coverage?

Your crazy man is an evil hater.

I was referring to non-issue Jussie Smollett.

Yes, Smollett is an evil hater.

And again, the guy whom a federal judge found to be running a sex-trafficking ring - the guy who is the actual topic of this thread - is what exactly? And what about the lawyers who covered it up? Including the current secretary of labor?

So crickets on Jeffrey Epstein, Trump’s good buddy who trafficks underage girls?

He was far closer to Clinton than trump. Epstein is obviously a very, very bad actor but he has the connections to get him off easy that go way above Acosta....way above. I hope they apply intense pressure on Acosta to see how high up the food chain this goes.

[Anonymous]

Good, Clinton should pay for his crimes. As should Epstein, Trump, Dershowitz and anyone else embroiled in this.

[Anonymous]

It took 11 years, partly, because of the tenacity of a handful of victims, who grew up, and attorneys. Also, Acosta made himself vulnerable, and more central to the story, because he joined Trump's cabinet.

There is a significant community of people who, both in a personal and professional context, spend their time looking for dirt on Trump's appointees. I'm not saying it's wrong (it goes on in every administration), but in Trump's admin, you make yourself especially vulnerable. I honestly do not see why anyone would join it, regardless of policy stance - much better to ride out the 4-8 years.

Had Acosta stayed Dean of the law school at FIU, I do not believe this story would have as much traction, or that he would be positioned as a central figure in it as much. He would just be one, and not mentioned in the headline. But, that's the choice he made. But as has been mentioned, the story might actually get buried, because he's only one of the President's men, and Trump doesn't figure in it that much, so people aren't all that interested.


I hope people DO pay attention. It's a sad, sad story.

[Anonymous]

There is a significant community of people who, both in a personal and professional context, spend their time looking for dirt on Trump's appointees.

The reporter for the Miami Herald who uncovered all of this just won a Polk Award for her efforts. Just like the federal investigation into the criminal young men who Saudi Arabia is sneaking out of the US so they won’t have to account for their crimes here, none of this would’ve happened without good journalism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There is a significant community of people who, both in a personal and professional context, spend their time looking for dirt on Trump's appointees.

The reporter for the Miami Herald who uncovered all of this just won a Polk Award for her efforts. Just like the federal investigation into the criminal young men who Saudi Arabia is sneaking out of the US so they won’t have to account for their crimes here, none of this would’ve happened without good journalism.

Oh - I'm the PP who said this. I completely agree. I think Acosta (and all) should be held accountable. And I'm a big Miami Herald fan, having actually worked there in my (very) young years, early 90s. I'm just saying that the story gained more traction (but not enough) as a result of being able to say "Trump's Labor Secretary" instead of "Alexander Acosta." Nothing but highest respect for good journalism, certainly.

[Anonymous]

And none other than Ken Starr was Epstein’s attorney, btw.

There’s a good summary of what the federal judge found problematic about the deal here:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1098775575668408320.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It took 11 years, partly, because of the tenacity of a handful of victims, who grew up, and attorneys. Also, Acosta made himself vulnerable, and more central to the story, because he joined Trump's cabinet.

There is a significant community of people who, both in a personal and professional context, spend their time looking for dirt on Trump's appointees. I'm not saying it's wrong (it goes on in every administration), but in Trump's admin, you make yourself especially vulnerable. I honestly do not see why anyone would join it, regardless of policy stance - much better to ride out the 4-8 years.

Had Acosta stayed Dean of the law school at FIU, I do not believe this story would have as much traction, or that he would be positioned as a central figure in it as much. He would just be one, and not mentioned in the headline. But, that's the choice he made. But as has been mentioned, the story might actually get buried, because he's only one of the President's men, and Trump doesn't figure in it that much, so people aren't all that interested.


I hope people DO pay attention. It's a sad, sad story.

Uh, maybe he was "forced" into the administration BECAUSE of the story?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a significant community of people who, both in a personal and professional context, spend their time looking for dirt on Trump's appointees.

Clearly Trump-supporter projection as far more time, money and resources were put toward investigating the Clintons. Benghazi alone was 2 and a half year, in excess of 30 million spent just on the Gowdy probe alone, and there were at least a half dozen other separate GOP investigations on Benghazi outside of that. And then her emails, et cetera... Yet even with all of that they still didn't manage to come up with anything prosecutable, not a single indictment. With Benghazi they couldn't even come up with a single bonafide finding of wrongdoing.

Trump and his circle on the other hand... that's a very different matter. They are so sleazy, corrupt and sloppy that you don't even have to dig that hard, one trips over their scandals right and left. There's so much of it that one scandal takes the place of the next each time a new issue of the newspaper comes out. You don't have to look too hard to find dirt.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a significant community of people who, both in a personal and professional context, spend their time looking for dirt on Trump's appointees.

Clearly Trump-supporter projection as far more time, money and resources were put toward investigating the Clintons. Benghazi alone was 2 and a half year, in excess of 30 million spent just on the Gowdy probe alone, and there were at least a half dozen other separate GOP investigations on Benghazi outside of that. And then her emails, et cetera... Yet even with all of that they still didn't manage to come up with anything prosecutable, not a single indictment. With Benghazi they couldn't even come up with a single bonafide finding of wrongdoing.

Trump and his circle on the other hand... that's a very different matter. They are so sleazy, corrupt and sloppy that you don't even have to dig that hard, one trips over their scandals right and left. There's so much of it that one scandal takes the place of the next each time a new issue of the newspaper comes out. You don't have to look too hard to find dirt.

I'm not sure I fully understand, but I can assure you I am not a Trump supporter. If you knew my work, you'd know how funny the mischaracterization is. I said I know it goes on in every administration, and although Hillary Clinton was obviously a cabinet member, the focus on her outstripped that of any other due to her background and future plans. I think you all know what I mean. Association with Trump puts a target on your back. I am not saying i think it should not; in fact, I see it as one dimension of the journey to ensuring his exit from politics and, hopefully, the national psyche.

[Anonymous]

Good for Sen. Sasse. There should be 99 others who agree with him and should make that clear.

[Anonymous]

“The investigation will show that Acosta followed the rules.”
- Alan Dershowitz on Twitter three weeks ago

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It took 11 years, partly, because of the tenacity of a handful of victims, who grew up, and attorneys. Also, Acosta made himself vulnerable, and more central to the story, because he joined Trump's cabinet.

There is a significant community of people who, both in a personal and professional context, spend their time looking for dirt on Trump's appointees. I'm not saying it's wrong (it goes on in every administration), but in Trump's admin, you make yourself especially vulnerable. I honestly do not see why anyone would join it, regardless of policy stance - much better to ride out the 4-8 years.

Had Acosta stayed Dean of the law school at FIU, I do not believe this story would have as much traction, or that he would be positioned as a central figure in it as much. He would just be one, and not mentioned in the headline. But, that's the choice he made. But as has been mentioned, the story might actually get buried, because he's only one of the President's men, and Trump doesn't figure in it that much, so people aren't all that interested.


I hope people DO pay attention. It's a sad, sad story.

Uh, maybe he was "forced" into the administration BECAUSE of the story?

I becoming more and more amenable to this theory. Trump specifically wants compromised individuals within his orbit. Mutually assured destruction is a good deterrent from speaking out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“The investigation will show that Acosta followed the rules.”
- Alan Dershowitz on Twitter three weeks ago

Dershowitz and Trump are sure hoping their ephebophile rapes don’t get out there where they have no more plausible deniability.

I sure hope this case and all the perpetrators get ALL the sunlight they deserve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“The investigation will show that Acosta followed the rules.”
- Alan Dershowitz on Twitter three weeks ago

Dershowitz is a cuckoo.