Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Giuffere's book had already taken down a British Prince and a British aristocrat. It will also take down an American president. Judging by how quickly the two in England were downed, I don't give trump a lot of time before he toppled.
Read "Epstein: Dirty Secrets Emerge From a Painful Book — and the Powerful Squirm" on SmartNews: https://l.smartnews.com/p-6qyo76py/lKKmlz
Prince Andrew is far from taken down. What has he lost exactly? His name on a website?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Johnson saying he won't block an Epstein vote, which makes me think they bought someone off. Sad.
I guess the shutdown will end now. I mean that was the whole point, right? Buying more time to threaten someone enough to get them to cave.
Nah sounds like they’ve redacted enough to only expose Democrats.
If there were big Democrats to be exposed they would have already released the files.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Johnson saying he won't block an Epstein vote, which makes me think they bought someone off. Sad.
I guess the shutdown will end now. I mean that was the whole point, right? Buying more time to threaten someone enough to get them to cave.
Nah sounds like they’ve redacted enough to only expose Democrats.
If there were big Democrats to be exposed they would have already released the files.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Trump is on record as saying Epstein was a creep, and not allowed as his properties, before it all came out. I’m no Trump fan, but he was not his friend.
There are many photos of the two of them hanging out together though…
They went to the same parties. Doesn’t mean they are friends.
Anonymous wrote:Epstein and Giuffre both commit suicide while Trump is president? Curious.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Johnson saying he won't block an Epstein vote, which makes me think they bought someone off. Sad.
I guess the shutdown will end now. I mean that was the whole point, right? Buying more time to threaten someone enough to get them to cave.
Anonymous wrote:A few pages back someone asked if a poster had prosecutorial experience. I do, and I was specially trained on sexual assault prosecution and handled more than a few such cases. I call BS on Acosta’s assessment of the case, not least because I’ve followed the reporting closely and it is universally acknowledged that Acosta never met with any of the victims and never even read their statements. He is misrepresenting the assessment of the line prosecutors in his office were ready to move the case forward.
All prosecutors know that sexual assault cases have the lowest conviction rate, it IS a crap shoot no matter the strength of the evidence because jurors bring ugly biases to these cases that are part of our societal sickness regarding crimes against women and children, who are the primary victims of sexual assault. They also disbelieve male children when they testify about sexual assault. Diddy’s case is one recent example but there are many others. SA cases have only a 50% conviction rate and only 1% of cases ever go to trial. It’s awful. As a society, we essentially condone the sexual exploitation of women and children.
And yes, I have zero doubt that there are men from all along the political spectrum in those files and that we will all be dismayed if we ever get to see them. As a prosecutor I lost all my remaining illusions about people when I saw the kinds of upstanding citizens grandpas who were molesting and raping their own granddaughters and how communities would rally around such people and vilify the victims because most people DON’T REALLY WANT TO KNOW.
Anytime I had a SA case, I would have a brutal heart to heart with the victim. I would tell them the odds and the reasons for them. I would tell them that the trial process would be like being raped again even if I did my very best to enforce all rules of procedure designed to protect victims. I would promise to fight like hell and always have their backs, win or lose. And I would ask them to go home and think about it, talk to their family, their therapist, their confidants and then come back and give me my orders and I would follow them as they wished.
I don’t believe that all the victims refused to cooperate - they weren’t even given the option if you believe what they are saying now about how it all went down - and I for one DO believe them. They were sold out because at very least, Acosta is the kind of man (like SOOOOOO many men) who believes teen girls want it and are lying when they say they don’t. Especially poor white trash teen girls.
I suspect there is some truth to the conspiracy theories about next level dealings, possibly including intelligence assets, in the Epstein trafficking scheme. But even if not, it’s very much like the sexual abuse scandals of the Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Boy Scouts of America, etc. There are a LOT of predators in our midst, some of them are in our own families, and predators cover for other predators because they don’t want it coming home to roost.
Anonymous wrote:A few pages back someone asked if a poster had prosecutorial experience. I do, and I was specially trained on sexual assault prosecution and handled more than a few such cases. I call BS on Acosta’s assessment of the case, not least because I’ve followed the reporting closely and it is universally acknowledged that Acosta never met with any of the victims and never even read their statements. He is misrepresenting the assessment of the line prosecutors in his office were ready to move the case forward.
All prosecutors know that sexual assault cases have the lowest conviction rate, it IS a crap shoot no matter the strength of the evidence because jurors bring ugly biases to these cases that are part of our societal sickness regarding crimes against women and children, who are the primary victims of sexual assault. They also disbelieve male children when they testify about sexual assault. Diddy’s case is one recent example but there are many others. SA cases have only a 50% conviction rate and only 1% of cases ever go to trial. It’s awful. As a society, we essentially condone the sexual exploitation of women and children.
And yes, I have zero doubt that there are men from all along the political spectrum in those files and that we will all be dismayed if we ever get to see them. As a prosecutor I lost all my remaining illusions about people when I saw the kinds of upstanding citizens grandpas who were molesting and raping their own granddaughters and how communities would rally around such people and vilify the victims because most people DON’T REALLY WANT TO KNOW.
Anytime I had a SA case, I would have a brutal heart to heart with the victim. I would tell them the odds and the reasons for them. I would tell them that the trial process would be like being raped again even if I did my very best to enforce all rules of procedure designed to protect victims. I would promise to fight like hell and always have their backs, win or lose. And I would ask them to go home and think about it, talk to their family, their therapist, their confidants and then come back and give me my orders and I would follow them as they wished.
I don’t believe that all the victims refused to cooperate - they weren’t even given the option if you believe what they are saying now about how it all went down - and I for one DO believe them. They were sold out because at very least, Acosta is the kind of man (like SOOOOOO many men) who believes teen girls want it and are lying when they say they don’t. Especially poor white trash teen girls.
I suspect there is some truth to the conspiracy theories about next level dealings, possibly including intelligence assets, in the Epstein trafficking scheme. But even if not, it’s very much like the sexual abuse scandals of the Catholic Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Boy Scouts of America, etc. There are a LOT of predators in our midst, some of them are in our own families, and predators cover for other predators because they don’t want it coming home to roost.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Johnson saying he won't block an Epstein vote, which makes me think they bought someone off. Sad.
I guess the shutdown will end now. I mean that was the whole point, right? Buying more time to threaten someone enough to get them to cave.
Nah sounds like they’ve redacted enough to only expose Democrats.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Johnson saying he won't block an Epstein vote, which makes me think they bought someone off. Sad.
I guess the shutdown will end now. I mean that was the whole point, right? Buying more time to threaten someone enough to get them to cave.