Former Prince Andrew arrested

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Epstein files have become bigger than life, people are turning the files into something they want it to be rather than what they are.

We do know Epstein was "recruiting" young women and putting them in positions of availability. But it doesn't mean many of the men's named in the files did anything illegal on their end. It is not illegal to sleep with a woman you met at a party. Most of these women were of legal age. That is why prosecution is so complicated in this area.

Andrew was arrested because he apparently shared government information. That can be prosecuted. Howard Lutnick lying about his association with Epstein is not prosecutable as he didn't lie under oath.

There are also many names in the Epstein files of people who clearly knew him but there is no evidence they actually did anything wrong and their greatest crime is having been friendly with him. That's Lutnick, so far. Or the Clintons. You don't arrest people simply for being known to having been at an Epstein party. Much of the reaction right now reeks more of a sanctimonious vigilante mob and Salem Witch trial mentality. Which is a shame as there were really unethical things Epstein and Maxwell did.

Female humans who are not of legal age are called children, and there were a lot of them who were raped.

Trafficking is criminal no matter the age of the victims.

JFC. We all know this. The PP was correct that there is no concrete evidence to arrest these people for sex crimes as it is. Being mentioned in the Epstein files is not proof of criminal activity. You can't just arrest someone because you "feel" they're guilty. You have to have actual evidence of something.
DP

I would take it a step farther - which is to say, this was a clearly powerful and connected guy who got around and had a lot of friends. So what if someone was friends with him? Maybe you don't have the best judge of character but it doesn't mean you yourself are a rapist, it doesn't even imply it

Sure they weren’t all rapists, the rest were insider trading and scheming and stealing and defrauding and lots of things I cannot even fathom. You are the company you keep. Lie down with dogs, you’re gonna get fleas. FAFO!

But were they? Are you really the worst parts of all your friends and the people whom you know through work and other connections? Ever stood next to someone at a cocktail party you don't really know but see now and again because they are in your general circle, and slung your arm around them? Or pretended you were better friends with someone because it's just the social thing to do (e.g., sure let's go to dinner together)

Someone who had been convicted of and served time for sex trafficking of children? NOPE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Epstein files have become bigger than life, people are turning the files into something they want it to be rather than what they are.

We do know Epstein was "recruiting" young women and putting them in positions of availability. But it doesn't mean many of the men's named in the files did anything illegal on their end. It is not illegal to sleep with a woman you met at a party. Most of these women were of legal age. That is why prosecution is so complicated in this area.

Andrew was arrested because he apparently shared government information. That can be prosecuted. Howard Lutnick lying about his association with Epstein is not prosecutable as he didn't lie under oath.

There are also many names in the Epstein files of people who clearly knew him but there is no evidence they actually did anything wrong and their greatest crime is having been friendly with him. That's Lutnick, so far. Or the Clintons. You don't arrest people simply for being known to having been at an Epstein party. Much of the reaction right now reeks more of a sanctimonious vigilante mob and Salem Witch trial mentality. Which is a shame as there were really unethical things Epstein and Maxwell did.

Female humans who are not of legal age are called children, and there were a lot of them who were raped.

Trafficking is criminal no matter the age of the victims.

JFC. We all know this. The PP was correct that there is no concrete evidence to arrest these people for sex crimes as it is. Being mentioned in the Epstein files is not proof of criminal activity. You can't just arrest someone because you "feel" they're guilty. You have to have actual evidence of something.
DP

I would take it a step farther - which is to say, this was a clearly powerful and connected guy who got around and had a lot of friends. So what if someone was friends with him? Maybe you don't have the best judge of character but it doesn't mean you yourself are a rapist, it doesn't even imply it

Sure they weren’t all rapists, the rest were insider trading and scheming and stealing and defrauding and lots of things I cannot even fathom. You are the company you keep. Lie down with dogs, you’re gonna get fleas. FAFO!

But were they? Are you really the worst parts of all your friends and the people whom you know through work and other connections? Ever stood next to someone at a cocktail party you don't really know but see now and again because they are in your general circle, and slung your arm around them? Or pretended you were better friends with someone because it's just the social thing to do (e.g., sure let's go to dinner together)

Someone who had been convicted of and served time for sex trafficking of children? NOPE.

🎯 PPs are trying to shut down the conversation with three types of feints/straw men. But the issues aren't (a) cocktail parties where Epstein showed up, (b) randos you hardly know, pp's someone "you don't really know but see now and again", or (c) "arresting" or "convicting" Lutnick or Summers based on the evidence available today--something nobody here has actually suggested.

What's going on here is that people are *wondering out loud* what else might be in the files about the people who were so warm and friendly with Epstein for years and even after his Florida conviction. These are public figures who knew exactly who Epstein was and made some dumb choices. It's normal to talk about them, and it's a real stretch to call this "vigilante mob" or "Salem witch trial" behavior.

And before we accuse anyone here of targeting innocents, let's start with Bondi's list of 300 Epstein associates. It includes Elvis, Marilyn Monroe, Janis Joplin, AOC, and many other people who are simply Trump's enemies.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.skynews.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity-life/nothing-much-to-lose-now-royal-biographer-says-sarah-ferguson-is-writing-a-book-amid-epstein-storm/news-story/36a922b2369df13ded9afcfcc7d69550

'Nothing much to lose now’: Royal biographer says Sarah Ferguson is writing a book amid Epstein storm
Sarah Ferguson is reportedly preparing to publish a candid new memoir, as a royal biographer claims the Duchess of York believes she has little left to protect - and much to gain.

She has her two daughters and grandchildren to protect.

And she can use her $10 mn book advance to say lovely things about her daughters and leave them an inheritance. But the rest of the royal family should be very afraid because she only gets her $10mn if she spills the dirt

It's tawdry and her daughters are princesses that don't need their mother adding to their humiliation.

Snort. You think they’re not being utterly humiliated now? At least they’ll have some more money, which apparently is a problem for this branch of the royals.

They don't need their mother's money.

They need someone’s money. It’s not like their husbands are that rich.

They are doing just fine on their own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Apparently she signed off on some of the "massages." It would be great if this opened up the investigation into things like: who asked her to sign for these; and who else knew in the palaces and the royal family. But no, probably the usual thing will happen: the lower-level employee goes to jail and Andrew's expensive lawyers argue that there's no proof he was the one getting the massages.