Deleted User wrote: » FartyBlartFast wrote: » I'm curious why it is that you (or Trump supporters generally) seem to feel it is your duty to defend Trump without knowledge of the facts? You're arguing without facts. Accusations of child rape require facts. Defence of that accusation does not.
FartyBlartFast wrote: » I'm curious why it is that you (or Trump supporters generally) seem to feel it is your duty to defend Trump without knowledge of the facts?
FartyBlartFast wrote: » There are plenty of facts. Epstein had Clinton on his plane 26 times - this is a fact. Epstein was a regular at maralago which he used as a recruiting ground while having private parties with just him and Trump and some lady friends, and Trump has commented on Epstein liking them young. Clinton has many past allegations of sexual abuse and has been caught lying about previous relationships (Lewinsky), while Trump also has many past allegations of sexual abuse, and is on camera bragging about molesting women. He also hired the guy who gave Epstein a sweetheart deal as his secretary of labour. Both Clinton and Trump have rushed out to get ahead of this story also, as soon as Epstein was arrested. Like I said, I am not claiming either are guilty or innocent until we know the full facts, but there is quite a bit of smoke surrounding both of them here. Trying to claim one is innocent while the other is guilty on the basis of the info we have is nothing short of dishonest.
BorneTobyWilde wrote: » What are charges against him this time? Seems no one knows exactly why he's being held. They found some photos in his New York home>? Photos of someone that made be under 18, so it sounds like she's late teens. I don't see him doing much time for this.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » I wouldn't trust anybody in authority when it comes to determining the age of naked females if previous cases are anything to go by at least. There was a case here in Northern Ireland of someone being charged for possession of CP but it turned out the images were all of an American porn star. Can't remember off hand which porn star the pics were of, so can't link the case, but I'll post it up if it comes to mind. A similar one was that of a New York pediatrician who bought a porno DVD on vacation in Venezuela. On his return passing through Puerto Rico he was arrested and charged with distribution and possession of CP and banged up to await trial. In the meantime his lawyers contacted the pornstar (Little Lupe) and she agreed to fly to Puerto Rico and be a witness at his trial. She did and he was released. Now that's a happy ending.
Harvey Weinstein wrote: » Is it not the case that Acosta was informed by his higher ups that Epstein was an Intelligence Asset and that was the reason for the Non Prosecution deal?
Cheerful Spring2 wrote: » A women journalist who has investigated Epstein for over a decade claimed Acosta was told to back off because Esptein was an intelligence asset. She highly credible. Acosta was asked this and he waffled and did not deny,he just siad don't go down rabbit holes. There plenty of rabbit holes to look into though. Where did he earn 500 million dollars, noboby seems to have an idea. Speculation is he was involved in major blackmailing scam, to intrap famous and world leaders. Again we see where it all leads eventually. Again i would hope they be no cover up, but if Epstein was running an intelligence operation for decades, some very important people will want to keep it secret and never come out.
Matt Barrett wrote: » We know for a fact the children were 14/15. The authorities know this. We know for a fact he has previous for same with children. This isn't #ibelieveher he has a record. There are actual underage children being questioned.
mcmoustache wrote: » There were charges, guilty pleas, depositions, admissions and all sorts of stuff. I don't know how anyone can consider this a he-said/she-said situation.
MadYaker wrote: » For which agency I wonder? Could get very interesting if what you say about entrapping world leaders is true. Either way this guys protection is obviously starting to wear off.
Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: » Whats happening here now? Aren’t names supposed to be released soon.
Cheerful Spring2 wrote: » https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-21/epstein-saga-enters-new-phase-will-anyone-else-be-ensnared 24th of July we hear something about this maybe. Ghislaine Maxwell was Esptein chief pimp, she recruited the girls. She also the daughter of Robert Maxwell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Maxwell who was alleged to be a Mossad agent. Lots of links to the rich and famous,
secondrowgal wrote: » "Maxwell, daughter of the late British publisher Robert Maxwell, asked on July 17 that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reconsider the unsealing order, saying the media’s “furious feeding frenzy” over Epstein justifies keeping the documents under wraps." hahahahahahahahaha - the irony!!!
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Attempted suicide apparently.https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Jeffrey-Epstein-Found-Injured-in-NYC-Jail-Cell-After-Possible-Suicide-Attempt-or-Assault-Sources-513174311.html
notobtuse wrote: » Sadly, I think Epstein will get off with a rather lenient sentence… another plea deal, perhaps The plea deal in 2008 makes prosecution problematic in federal court because of the Constitution’s rules of guarantee against double jeopardy. Democrats just want this to go away as they have no interest in exploring the behavior of their own party who are neck-deep in a pedophile’s activities. The best bet prosecutors would have for a successful prosecution is if they can find new offenses committed since the plea deal of 2008 was made.