Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 11-08-2019, 01:28 PM
Joey P is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 29,391
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post

In fact , your casual assertion that there was a "pedophile ring" is doubtful and unproven:

https://www.thecut.com/2019/08/jeffr...mes-house.html
From your site:
"The island has, over the years, gained a handful of sinister nicknames: “Orgy Island,” “Pedophile Island,” and “Island of Sin.”"

"He allegedly ran his trafficking ring there."

"According to Fox News, Epstein had a dedicated team of workers on the island who trafficked girls as young as 12 to his clients"

"Once on the island, the underage girls and women say they were coerced into sexual encounters and, in some cases, even held hostage"

"Scully said that he frequently saw groups of girls who “couldn’t have been more than 15 or 16 years old” riding ATVs and bathing topless."


I supposed it depends on your definition of 'ring' and I understand that a lot of these statements are 'alleged', but there was clearly something going on and your casual assertion that there wasn't is a slap in the face to the victims.
  #52  
Old 11-08-2019, 06:19 PM
Great Antibob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P View Post
but there was clearly something going on and your casual assertion that there wasn't is a slap in the face to the victims.
I don't see where that assertion was made at all.

There are 2 different things floating here:

1) Epstein was human garbage and ran an operation that trafficked in women, some incredibly underage. Doesn't seem like anybody is doubting this part, including DrDeth if you read the first sentence of that last post.

2) Epstein ran this operation with several other wealthy people, including Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton. There's not a lot of evidence of this part but plenty of conspiracy theories asserting it anyway.

And that second point is what DrDeth was noting. While there's scant doubt Epstein was up to no good, there's much less evidence he conspired with all these other public figures to do so.

Last edited by Great Antibob; 11-08-2019 at 06:21 PM.
  #53  
Old 11-08-2019, 10:22 PM
Personal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: The Beach
Posts: 2,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post

and in fact your cite has been specifically debunked by Snopes:
https://www.snopes.com/ap/2019/11/05...-ready-to-air/

[/url]
Was this meant to link to a different article?
  #54  
Old 11-08-2019, 11:52 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey P View Post
From your site:
"The island has, over the years, gained a handful of sinister nicknames: “Orgy Island,” “Pedophile Island,” and “Island of Sin.”"

"He allegedly ran his trafficking ring there."

"According to Fox News, Epstein had a dedicated team of workers on the island who trafficked girls as young as 12 to his clients"

"Once on the island, the underage girls and women say they were coerced into sexual encounters and, in some cases, even held hostage"

"Scully said that he frequently saw groups of girls who “couldn’t have been more than 15 or 16 years old” riding ATVs and bathing topless."


I supposed it depends on your definition of 'ring' and I understand that a lot of these statements are 'alleged', but there was clearly something going on and your casual assertion that there wasn't is a slap in the face to the victims.
At no time did I make any assertion that that wasnt something going on. As i said "No one doubts that Epstein did some horrible things." That's different than a organized 'pedophile ring". Epstein took advantage of underage girls, that is proven. He was a scumbag, imho. I am sure Epstein had quite a few victims. But that's different than Trump and Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton and the Pope all getting together to have pedophile sex orgies.

I hope you can see the difference that Epstein being a proven sexual predator and rapist and the vague unproven allegations of there being a organized pedophile sex ring for the rich & famous.
  #55  
Old 11-08-2019, 11:55 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great Antibob View Post
I don't see where that assertion was made at all.

There are 2 different things floating here:

1) Epstein was human garbage and ran an operation that trafficked in women, some incredibly underage. Doesn't seem like anybody is doubting this part, including DrDeth if you read the first sentence of that last post.

2) Epstein ran this operation with several other wealthy people, including Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton. There's not a lot of evidence of this part but plenty of conspiracy theories asserting it anyway.

And that second point is what DrDeth was noting. While there's scant doubt Epstein was up to no good, there's much less evidence he conspired with all these other public figures to do so.
Right.

One is proven and the second is tinfoil hat territory, since we know Bill never even visited that island, altho Trump maybe did. He did accept a few free plane rides back in 2002.
  #56  
Old 11-09-2019, 09:47 AM
LAZombie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 329
One of the reasons the Drudge Report became so successful is that it published the accusations of the Bill Clinton/ Monica Lewinsky affair while the main stream news outlets decided the bury the story. So liberal media news outlets have a history of doing this.
  #57  
Old 11-09-2019, 09:51 AM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 82,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
One of the reasons the Drudge Report became so successful is that it published the accusations of the Bill Clinton/ Monica Lewinsky affair while the main stream news outlets decided the bury the story. So liberal media news outlets have a history of doing this.
Yeah, the liberal media has a history of waiting for evidence. The conservative media doesn't let a lack of evidence hold them back.
  #58  
Old 11-09-2019, 11:17 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Great Antibob View Post
...
[Alleged allegation:] 2) Epstein ran this operation with several other wealthy people, including Prince Andrew and Bill Clinton. There's not a lot of evidence of this part but plenty of conspiracy theories asserting it anyway....
Is there an allegation that Prince Andrew or Bill Clinton "ran the operation" with Epstein?

I thought the allegation was just that Prince Andrew was a "john" (and possibly blackmailee).

What about Clinton? He probably didn't partake in illicit treats: Prince Andrew might pass for "rich Brit you never heard of," but Clinton is recognizable around the world. No matter how evil or horndoggy Clinton might be, any involvement would be too insecure.

Last edited by septimus; 11-09-2019 at 11:17 AM.
  #59  
Old 11-09-2019, 12:26 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
So, in order to back up this Extraordinary claims we require extraordinary evidence, and Project Veritas doesnt count- as being extraordinarily UNrelaible is not what is meant by extraordinary evidence.
Veritas didn't make the claim. A reporter for ABC made the claim after investigating it as well as the claim it was shut down by ABC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
And other that Bill Clinton availed himself of a few free flights on a private jet back in 2002 and 2003, there is nothing linking him to any sort of "pedophile ring". Trump also had dealings with Epstein- and much more recently.
it wasn't a few flights. It was between 11 and 26 flights and Clinton ditched the secret service on at least 5 of them. Cite. I can't imaging why Bill "I like them young" Clinton would ditch the secret service on trips to pedo-island.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
In fact , your casual assertion that there was a "pedophile ring" is doubtful and unproven:
He's a convicted sex offender and paid compensation to dozens of under-aged girls. It's far from doubtful. It's highly likely.
  #60  
Old 11-09-2019, 01:01 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Veritas didn't make the claim. A reporter for ABC made the claim after investigating it as well as the claim it was shut down by ABC.
As noted already, the claim is reported with no context, other sources from information also looked away for lack of testimonies and right wing conspiracy tabloids or wealthy guys paid many for their silence. The point to dismiss groups like Veritas is precisely for that lack of context and very likely editing of their videos obtained with a lot of leading or "hypothetical" questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
it wasn't a few flights. It was between 11 and 26 flights and Clinton ditched the secret service on at least 5 of them. Cite. I can't imaging why Bill "I like them young" Clinton would ditch the secret service on trips to pedo-island.
Actually that shows a lack of reading the source. It is in the end innuendo, but close to the issue:

https://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-c...lio-1681039971
Quote:
Bill Clinton took repeated trips on the " Lolita Express"—the private passenger jet owned by billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein—with an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Epstein's address book under an entry for "massages," according to flight logbooks obtained by Gawker
As the facts found by others showed later, in reality Clinton attempted to hide a lot of sexual improprieties, but it was not with underage kids.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
He's a convicted sex offender and paid compensation to dozens of under-aged girls. It's far from doubtful. It's highly likely.
Again, a Monday morning quarterbacking point.
  #61  
Old 11-09-2019, 01:07 PM
LAZombie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 329
Amy Robach - "She told me everything. She had pictures. She had everything. She was in hiding for 12 years. We convinced her to come out. We convinced her to talk to us. It was unbelievable, what we had. Clinton, we had everything. I tried for three years to get it on, to no avail. And now it's all coming out, and it's like these new revelations, and I freaking had all of it. I'm so pissed right now. Like, every day I get more and more pissed, 'cause I'm just like, oh my God. What we had was unreal. Other women backing it up..."

There appears to be plenty of evidence to run this story according to the leaked tape. I thought ALL women should be heard.
  #62  
Old 11-09-2019, 01:20 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
Amy Robach - "She told me everything. She had pictures. She had everything. She was in hiding for 12 years. We convinced her to come out. We convinced her to talk to us. It was unbelievable, what we had. Clinton, we had everything. I tried for three years to get it on, to no avail. And now it's all coming out, and it's like these new revelations, and I freaking had all of it. I'm so pissed right now. Like, every day I get more and more pissed, 'cause I'm just like, oh my God. What we had was unreal. Other women backing it up..."

There appears to be plenty of evidence to run this story according to the leaked tape. I thought ALL women should be heard.
As the evidence of how many witnesses were bought or threatened, your conclusion is incomplete still. Even on your bolded part the other women were in reality not so willing to back it up back then.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-09-2019 at 01:21 PM.
  #63  
Old 11-09-2019, 01:57 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 85,514
Yes, the video is all over the Internet. But what is the source? The OP tells us that the source is a known liar and felon. If a bunch of other sites copy a faked video, that doesn't make it any less faked.

So, again, does this video exist from any other source?
  #64  
Old 11-09-2019, 02:04 PM
Great Antibob is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,373
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Is there an allegation that Prince Andrew or Bill Clinton "ran the operation" with Epstein?
Outside the realm of wild speculation and conspiracy theory?

Nope.

But you have only to take a look at a few of the responses in this thread to see wild speculation and conspiracy theories are alive and well.
  #65  
Old 11-09-2019, 03:13 PM
LAZombie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Yes, the video is all over the Internet. But what is the source? The OP tells us that the source is a known liar and felon. If a bunch of other sites copy a faked video, that doesn't make it any less faked.

So, again, does this video exist from any other source?
If it is faked, why doesn't ABC simply say that and provide the original unedited footage?

Last edited by LAZombie; 11-09-2019 at 03:13 PM.
  #66  
Old 11-09-2019, 03:23 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
...
it wasn't a few flights. It was between 11 and 26 flights and Clinton ditched the secret service on at least 5 of them. .... I can't imaging why Bill "I like them young" Clinton would ditch the secret service on trips to pedo-island.

He's a convicted sex offender and paid compensation to dozens of under-aged girls. It's far from doubtful. It's highly likely.
So? Free flights on a private jet, why not? And none to Epsteins little island. I notice you ignore trumps close relationship with Epstein.


It's not only likely but pretty well proven Epstein had sex with underaged girls. There no evidence at all he had pedophile parties with trump, clinton, Prince A and the pope or whoever's name they want to blacken.
  #67  
Old 11-09-2019, 03:45 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZombie View Post
If it is faked, why doesn't ABC simply say that and provide the original unedited footage?
I would think that Chronos is referring to the past known behavior of O'Keefe and stooges, a lot of editing can be done to eliminate the context, while the tape is original. Removing the context and refusing to hear explanations from the ones recorded by O'Keefe and others is made precisely to mislead others. In this case it is likely that that took place when Veritas tries to lift what in the end is the frustrated opinion of a reporter as if it were the facts.

From Amy Robach herself about the recording:

https://people.com/tv/amy-robach-wal...epstein-video/
Quote:
“As a journalist, as the Epstein story continued to unfold last summer, I was caught in a private moment of frustration,” Robach, 46, said in a statement. “I was upset that an important interview I had conducted with Virginia Roberts [Giuffre] didn’t air because we could not obtain sufficient corroborating evidence to meet ABC’s editorial standards about her allegations.”

“My comments about Prince Andrew and her allegation that she had seen Bill Clinton on Epstein’s private island were in reference to what Virginia Roberts [Giuffre] said in that interview in 2015,” she added. “I was referencing her allegations — not what ABC News had verified through our reporting. The interview itself, while I was disappointed it didn’t air, didn’t meet our standards. In the years since no one ever told me or the team to stop reporting on Jeffrey Epstein, and we have continued to aggressively pursue this important story.”
  #68  
Old 11-09-2019, 04:17 PM
Ají de Gallina's Avatar
Ají de Gallina is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lima, Perú
Posts: 4,540
#believeSOMEwomen should be the title of this thread.
The amount of people who went out to bat for Epstein has my jaw firmly on the ground.
  #69  
Old 11-09-2019, 04:22 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 8,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ají de Gallina View Post
#believeSOMEwomen should be the title of this thread.
The amount of people who went out to bat for Epstein has my jaw firmly on the ground.
Please point to the people who are doing that. I don't see anyone doing that.
__________________
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.
  #70  
Old 11-09-2019, 04:37 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ají de Gallina View Post
#believeSOMEwomen should be the title of this thread.
The amount of people who went out to bat for Epstein has my jaw firmly on the ground.
Says the guy who dismisses allegations when they're against someone he supports...
__________________
My new novel Spindown

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-09-2019 at 04:37 PM.
  #71  
Old 11-09-2019, 04:40 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Is there an allegation that Prince Andrew or Bill Clinton "ran the operation" with Epstein?

I thought the allegation was just that Prince Andrew was a "john" (and possibly blackmailee).

What about Clinton? He probably didn't partake in illicit treats: Prince Andrew might pass for "rich Brit you never heard of," but Clinton is recognizable around the world. No matter how evil or horndoggy Clinton might be, any involvement would be too insecure.
Yeah, if only there was some kind of private island for people like that.
  #72  
Old 11-09-2019, 05:24 PM
Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
As the facts found by others showed later, in reality Clinton attempted to hide a lot of sexual improprieties, but it was not with underage kids.
No, it was barely legal women, so he's got that going for him. Maybe Epstein kept a few 18 year olds around so his buddies qualified for nternet absolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Again, a Monday morning quarterbacking point.
The thread is about ABC squashing a story. It was a big story which is something they should have continued to pursue.

As for Monday morning quarterbacking we could ask the Secret Service Agency. But they would probably just say it was one of things where you had to be there.
  #73  
Old 11-09-2019, 05:49 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ají de Gallina View Post
#believeSOMEwomen should be the title of this thread.
The amount of people who went out to bat for Epstein has my jaw firmly on the ground.
No one here is going to bat for Epstein. And if you find us direct testimony from a woman, we will believe her. But not hearsay and not some bad site that is known for bullshit. Even Robach herself agrees- she couldnt verify. Why dont you believe HER?
  #74  
Old 11-09-2019, 05:56 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Yeah, the liberal media has a history of waiting for evidence. The conservative media doesn't let a lack of evidence hold them back.
Well, except for Brett Kavanaugh, The Covington Kids, and 'leaks' against Trump by anonymous single sources. Then the media will run with whatever thin sliver of bullshit they can find.

The media's requirements for corroboration depend very much on whether their target is a Republican or a Democrat.
  #75  
Old 11-09-2019, 06:11 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
No, it was barely legal women, so he's got that going for him. Maybe Epstein kept a few 18 year olds around so his buddies qualified for nternet absolution.
So, as reported, sleazy; but legal. Not what I would approve anyhow, but still, there was no corroboration as to Clinton being involved in sex acts. Epstein was more likely doing illegal things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
The thread is about ABC squashing a story. It was a big story which is something they should have continued to pursue.
And that is why it was pointed that there were good reasons why it was "squashed" (as pointed out, in hindsight, it would have been the right thing to do, but at the time it was not when witnesses were suddenly becoming quiet thanks to threats and payouts. The word you should be using is cover-up, and clearly ABC was not doing that) and a lot of the time witnesses were silenced thanks to the help of the tabloids, tabloids that were not apolitical at all, but in cahoots with Trump and other powerful people. The squashing you are pointing at is grossly incomplete or misleading if that is not pointed at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
As for Monday morning quarterbacking we could ask the Secret Service Agency. But they would probably just say it was one of things where you had to be there.
As pointed before by conservative sources, with the clear intent of continuing with the innuendo, Clinton avoided* the Secret Service, so to ask them would be a useless effort.






And to make it more moot, what FOX reported then that that was not so clear, the word they used was "'apparently' avoided" that is a weasel way to pump up just allegations that Clinton ditched the secret service.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-09-2019 at 06:12 PM.
  #76  
Old 11-09-2019, 06:16 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Well, except for Brett Kavanaugh, The Covington Kids, and 'leaks' against Trump by anonymous single sources. Then the media will run with whatever thin sliver of bullshit they can find.

The media's requirements for corroboration depend very much on whether their target is a Republican or a Democrat.
Please read again and notice that the right wing media and other powerful guys (like the Trump allied National Enquirer) were involved in the spiking of reports or the silencing of witnesses, hence making the task of other mainstream sources of information to come up with little, as it happened to ABC and others.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-09-2019 at 06:19 PM.
  #77  
Old 11-09-2019, 06:44 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
So, as reported, sleazy; but legal. Not what I would approve anyhow, but still, there was no corroboration as to Clinton being involved in sex acts. Epstein was more likely doing illegal things. ....
There no evidence clinton was even on that island.

For example :In 2002, as New York has reported, Clinton recruited Epstein to make his plane available for a week-long anti-poverty and anti-AIDS tour of Africa with Kevin Spacey, Chris Tucker, billionaire creep Ron Burkle, Clinton confidant Gayle Smith (who now serves on Barack Obama's National Security Council), and others. The logs from that trip show that Maxwell, Kellen, and a woman named Chauntae Davis joined the entourage for five days.
https://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-c...lio-1681039971

However, there were quite a few people on that plane. No allegation any funny stuff went on, no underage women even.

Only that Clinton got a free plane for week-long anti-poverty and anti-AIDS tour of Africa . That's a Good Thing.
  #78  
Old 11-09-2019, 06:49 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,462
and here:
https://www.vox.com/2019/7/9/2068634...p-bill-clinton
Clinton has not been accused of any specific sexual misconduct connected to Epstein. As for Trump: During the 2016 campaign, Trump was sued by an anonymous woman who claimed he raped her at an Epstein party when she was 13 years old. However, several journalists who dug into this allegation back then came away voicing caution or downright skepticism, and the accuser withdrew her lawsuit shortly before the election.

So there hasn’t yet been corroboration of Epstein-related wrongdoing on Trump’s part by media outlets, or any accusation against Clinton at all.


So, why is Clintons name being brought up, and not trumps? Clinton has absolutely no allegations at all, while trump is alleged to have raped a 13 yo girl Epstein provided.
  #79  
Old 11-09-2019, 06:51 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
Please read again and notice that the right wing media and other powerful guys (like the Trump allied National Enquirer) were involved in the spiking of reports or the silencing of witnesses, hence making the task of other mainstream sources of information to come up with little, as it happened to ABC and others.
And that's what happened to Brett Kavanaugn and the Covington Kids? The media ran every piece of bullshit that Avenatti fed them. Not only did they lack corroboration, they had witnesses who said the stuff never happened. They ran it anyway. They smeared a kid on nothing more than what looked like a smug smile in a photo.

In the meantime, they were sitting on a mountain of evidence against Epstein, including documentation, multiple witnesses, etc. The same evidence that was recently used to jail him. And they sat on it, even though the abuses were ongoing and other women were hurt in the interim.

The same people who thought that every salacious allegation against Trump, no matter how thinly sourced, should be aired in the public interest, also sat on persuasive evidence that Bill Clinton had been inserting cigars into the vagina of an intern in the oval office because the president's private life was no one's concern.
  #80  
Old 11-09-2019, 07:04 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Yes, the video is all over the Internet. But what is the source? The OP tells us that the source is a known liar and felon. If a bunch of other sites copy a faked video, that doesn't make it any less faked.

So, again, does this video exist from any other source?
More specifically, the source is a felon who was convicted specifically for making fake videos to push a political point of view.

So the null hypothesis is that any video sourced from Project Veritas is fake, and it's up to those who claim otherwise to provide contrary evidence. The most obvious form would be to find someone else releasing the original, unedited video. Another would be just finding people involved at the time who could corroborate the story.

Both mean finding another source--one that can be trusted.

This is like Trump saying he didn't cheat on his taxes, and then citing people quoting Trump saying he didn't cheat on his taxes as proof that he is telling the truth. No, you need another source.
  #81  
Old 11-09-2019, 07:05 PM
KidCharlemagne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
One big mystery is:
How did Epstein get his huge wealth in the first place?

Nobody seems to know. He was a failed nobody with expensive tastes and suddenly started throwing huge parties. Maybe the IRS should know where his money came from, but they aren't talking. I just watched the FoxNews video; Amy Robach says that Epstein "made his whole living blackmailing people." Occam's Razor says she's right. Wikipedia suggests Epstein's business was rather like Madoff's. Voluntarily being fleeced ŕ la Madoff is one way for a rich man to funnel large sums to Epstein without leaving an undesirable paper trail.



I hardly know the Covington details, and would be guessing to venture at Prince Andrew's guilt. But lumping in the hideous harasser Kavanaugh, along with "unproven/disproven" tells me what I need to know about your opinions.



Wow! Just wow!!!! I guess FoxNews/Limbaugh/Infowars are responsible media who would never impugn the Clintons. But ABC is a Lie Machine that would jump all over Trump or Pence. Is that it? WOW!
I'm a semi-retired NYC hedge fund guy, and no one I know has ever done a trade with him. It's a scam pure and simple. I remember when Madoff's returns came across my desk and I asked someone to find out what kind of arbitrage he was doing because his Sharpe Ratio (measure of risk/reward) was 3 - which you just don't get without some sort of arbitrage strategy. They came back and said he sold covered calls. I told him either his information was wrong or it's a scam. It's not like I was particularly prescient - there isn't a single professional trader in history who would believe his returns were plausible. How he didn't get caught before he did is completely outside my realm of comprehension. Can't wait to hear what Epstein's scam was. With all those cameras I'm guessing it was blackmail.

Last edited by KidCharlemagne; 11-09-2019 at 07:08 PM.
  #82  
Old 11-09-2019, 07:42 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Democrats shouldn't be defending Bill Clinton, here or anywhere. Every allegation should be treated seriously, and the allegations against Bill Clinton in the past weren't taken seriously. The party has actually improved on this issue, unlike the Republicans who have actually regressed (now, it's pretty much routine for Republican officials to dismiss allegations of rape and celebrate/elevate admitted and credibly accused sexual abusers). But improving isn't nearly enough. We should be taking every allegation seriously, and there's no reason at all for credibly accused sexual abusers in the party to be defended.

The Republican party is the Party of Rape and the Party of Rapists. In order to beat them in the long term (and to have a chance at improving the abominable way that our society treats women and girls and victims/survivors in general), we need to be the party that moves past rapists and sexual abusers, including those credibly accused. We have plenty of good candidates and advocates with no credible allegations against them.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-09-2019 at 07:43 PM.
  #83  
Old 11-09-2019, 07:52 PM
madsircool is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Democrats shouldn't be defending Bill Clinton, here or anywhere. Every allegation should be treated seriously, and the allegations against Bill Clinton in the past weren't taken seriously. The party has actually improved on this issue, unlike the Republicans who have actually regressed (now, it's pretty much routine for Republican officials to dismiss allegations of rape and celebrate/elevate admitted and credibly accused sexual abusers). But improving isn't nearly enough. We should be taking every allegation seriously, and there's no reason at all for credibly accused sexual abusers in the party to be defended.

The Republican party is the Party of Rape and the Party of Rapists. In order to beat them in the long term (and to have a chance at improving the abominable way that our society treats women and girls and victims/survivors in general), we need to be the party that moves past rapists and sexual abusers, including those credibly accused. We have plenty of good candidates and advocates with no credible allegations against them.
This is an utterly myopic post, especially from someone from Virginia. Who is the Party of Rapists again?
  #84  
Old 11-09-2019, 08:12 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
And that's what happened to Brett Kavanaugn and the Covington Kids?
Whataboutism, like Monday morning quarterbacking is not a good argument.

As the rest of your post showed, it is clear that you do want to ignore the evidence that shows how the powerful (and specially tabloid right wing media) spiked and prevented other outfits to get corroborating evidence.
  #85  
Old 11-09-2019, 08:16 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
This is an utterly myopic post, especially from someone from Virginia. Who is the Party of Rapists again?
The Republicans, quite obviously, who continuously celebrate and elevate admitted and credibly accused sexual abusers. If the Democratic party celebrates and elevates Justin Fairfax, then maybe you'd have a tiny smidgen point, but it seems pretty clear to me that he has absolutely no future in the Democratic party. Perhaps he'll become a Republican -- I'm sure they'd welcome him with open arms.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-09-2019 at 08:17 PM.
  #86  
Old 11-09-2019, 08:27 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
This is an utterly myopic post, especially from someone from Virginia. Who is the Party of Rapists again?
IIRC, many Democrats in the General Assembly in Virginia asked Justin Fairfax to resign, until more comes out I still think that more pressure is needed to investigate the incidents, and he had to leave his post as chairman of the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association.

FWIW the Republicans in a lot of their ads did play a lot on the rape allegations, as it turned out, it was really hard to gain traction in Virginia with those accusations, when the fearless Republican leader has many, many more and the number of Republicans demanding that he resigns because of those allegations is...

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-09-2019 at 08:29 PM.
  #87  
Old 11-09-2019, 08:31 PM
madsircool is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
The Republicans, quite obviously, who continuously celebrate and elevate admitted and credibly accused sexual abusers. If the Democratic party celebrates and elevates Justin Fairfax, then maybe you'd have a tiny smidgen point, but it seems pretty clear to me that he has absolutely no future in the Democratic party. Perhaps he'll become a Republican -- I'm sure they'd welcome him with open arms.
The Dems still celebrate and elevate JFK.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-d...-the-president

Ohhh..the Dems who control Virginia could impeach him but party before justice, right?

But this is a moronic debate because press coverage of Dems and Reps is not equal and it obviously favors and protects Dems. So we wont be getting equal and fair coverage of this issue. And your use of loaded language isnt helping.
  #88  
Old 11-09-2019, 08:35 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
The Dems still celebrate and elevate JFK.
JFK is long dead. And yes, the Democratic party used to be a Party of Rape and a Party of Rapists. But they've actually started to change. The Republican party was the same... and now they've gotten even worse. Much, much worse.

Quote:
Ohhh..the Dems who control Virginia could impeach him but party before justice, right?
The Democrats do not, in fact, control Virginia. Soon they'll take control of the legislature, and we'll see what they do. If they celebrate and elevate Fairfax like the Republicans have celebrated/elevated Trump, Kavanaugh, and others, then you'll have a point and I'll come back and congratulate you.

Quote:
But this is a moronic debate because press coverage of Dems and Reps is not equal and it obviously favors and protects Dems. So we wont be getting equal and fair coverage of this issue. And your use of loaded language isnt helping.
I'm just looking at the facts, and the words of the GOP President. The GOP elevated and celebrates Trump, continuously, when he has bragged about sexual assault and violations of consent on multiple occasions, and has numerous credible allegations of rape and sexual assault against him. The GOP is the Party of Trump -- the Party of Sexual Abuse.
  #89  
Old 11-09-2019, 08:38 PM
madsircool is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post
IIRC, many Democrats in the General Assembly in Virginia asked Justin Fairfax to resign, until more comes out I still think that more pressure is needed to investigate the incidents, and he had to leave his post as chairman of the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association.

FWIW the Republicans in a lot of their ads did play a lot on the rape allegations, as it turned out, it was really hard to gain traction in Virginia with those accusations, when the fearless Republican leader has many, many more and the number of Republicans demanding that he resigns because of those allegations is...
This is fair enough. Who is the fearless Rep leader? Trump? I predict that the Reps will pursue a 25th Amendment solution to the Trump nightmare and he will be out before Christmas. No one likes him. No one respects him. And politically he is a Rep in name only. Ideologically, he is apolitical and only pursued office to pursue his own narcissistic goals and achieve what he imagines will be greatness.
  #90  
Old 11-09-2019, 08:42 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
The Dems still celebrate and elevate JFK.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-d...-the-president

Ohhh..the Dems who control Virginia could impeach him but party before justice, right?


Not sure about using that example, I would have thought that getting a bullet to his head would have been an excessive punishment. But more seriously, I only point at that as an explanation why in part is that he is elevated, if Kennedy had survived I would expect rape allegations to have been more prominently mentioned.

Of course also being very capable and helping avoid a nuclear holocaust and thus allowing me and you to post on the internet now is also something to take into account.

BTW, just try to see a documentary on the Cuban Missile Crisis and picture the current rapist/moron in power in the place of Kennedy back then, I do think that you will not sleep soundly at night...

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-09-2019 at 08:46 PM.
  #91  
Old 11-09-2019, 09:09 PM
Ají de Gallina's Avatar
Ají de Gallina is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lima, Perú
Posts: 4,540
Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and kicking. That guy lives rent-free in so many people's heads, everything is about him.
  #92  
Old 11-09-2019, 09:15 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ají de Gallina View Post
Trump Derangement Syndrome is alive and kicking. That guy lives rent-free in so many people's heads, everything is about him.
It might be hard to understand that some people really think sexual abuse of women and girls is a truly terrible thing, and actually transcends politics... but it's true. Some of us really oppose sexual assault and rape, even in our own party!

I heartily recommend the stance for others. Why not try it?

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 11-09-2019 at 09:15 PM.
  #93  
Old 11-09-2019, 09:28 PM
madsircool is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post


Not sure about using that example, I would have thought that getting a bullet to his head would have been an excessive punishment. But more seriously, I only point at that as an explanation why in part is that he is elevated, if Kennedy had survived I would expect rape allegations to have been more prominently mentioned.

Of course also being very capable and helping avoid a nuclear holocaust and thus allowing me and you to post on the internet now is also something to take into account.

BTW, just try to see a documentary on the Cuban Missile Crisis and picture the current rapist/moron in power in the place of Kennedy back then, I do think that you will not sleep soundly at night...
While I dont disagree with your post, and agree that Kennedy did a good job managing the crisis, Khrushchev was bluffing and both the Americans and Soviets blundered badly by letting things get so far. The fact that a lone Soviet nuclear sub commander came the closest to starting a nuclear war says it all. How US intelligence agencies let 40K battle hardened Soviet soldiers enter Cuba without being detected was a massive intelligence failure. That Kennedy didnt have a good working relationship with Khrushchev was another blunder that brought both countries to the brink of war.

https://www.archives.gov/publication...-missiles.html

https://www.history.com/news/kennedy...t-meeting-1961
  #94  
Old 11-09-2019, 11:31 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Indeed, blinders were made by both sides, but the point stands as it was about how to get out of a crisis like that needs a capable hand.

We are still lucky that such a crisis has not come while we have this current administration, but we are close to that IMHO.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...mn/3678884002/
Quote:
We have a president who doesn’t believe in facts, dismisses his intelligence advisers, places his faith in dictators and gets his news from blow-dried bootlickers on Fox & Friends. What happens when a true crisis erupts? If Kim resumes testing of long-range missiles? If Russia makes a move on the Baltics, which are now members of NATO? If climate change spawns deadlier, more frequent storms, fires and drought, and more global migration?

And what happens if you appear to make decisions not in terms of what’s best for the country but what’s best for you? This is what sets Trump apart from his predecessors. We’ve certainly questioned past presidents and their handling of crises — notably and most recently George W. Bush’s overreliance on what turned out to be faulty intelligence leading to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But we’ve never seriously wondered whether Bush, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln,.Franklin Roosevelt or any other presidents cared about themselves more than the country, or were somehow selling out or beholden to a foreign power. It is extraordinary, and disturbing, that such questions continue to be asked of our current president.
As for the matter at hand, The National Enquirer is still pointed out as one group that stopped and prevented accusers to come forward.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-teen-...ne-doe-1465652
  #95  
Old 11-10-2019, 12:32 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,016
Can someone please link to The Video that everyone is talking about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Yeah, if only there was some kind of private island for people like that.
Maybe Clinton is very guilty. I wrote my comment before reading posts asserting visits to Pedo Island with the Secret Service ditched behind.

OTOH:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
Well, except for Brett Kavanaugh ...Then the media will run with whatever thin sliver of bullshit they can find.
If you had to bet, would you guess Blasey Ford (his principal accuser) speaks the truth or not? I am NOT asking whether proof was 'beyond a reasonable doubt' (or whatever you think the standard is for Scotus appointment). I am NOT asking whether you think frat-boy pranks should disqualify. I just wonder what your judgment is of the likelihood Ford was truthful. (Yes, this is a test. )

I know the party line for "conservatives" ( ) is that Ford was lying. My knowledge of human nature tells me they're probably wrong. Recall that Ford isn't an hysterical Trump-hater; she's a respected academic who came forward reluctantly.

In another thread you refused to make a probability estimate. Are you going to go with that cop-out again?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
I hope you can see the difference that Epstein being a proven sexual predator and rapist and the vague unproven allegations of there being a organized pedophile sex ring for the rich & famous.
Very large parties; large buildings on Pedophile Island; large numbers of girls. What does Occam's Razor tell you?

Recall that Jane Doe claims she was threatened with death if she pursued her rape charge against Trump. Maybe she was, maybe not. But it is quite naďve to doubt that men like Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Mohammad bin Salman (and yes, perhaps Epstein or Clinton) have thugs they can turn to to make or complete a death threat.
  #96  
Old 11-10-2019, 02:24 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIGObuster View Post


Not sure about using that example, I would have thought that getting a bullet to his head would have been an excessive punishment. But more seriously, I only point at that as an explanation why in part is that he is elevated, if Kennedy had survived I would expect rape allegations to have been more prominently mentioned.
...
JFK had lots of very consensual sex. Times were different. It wasnt even much of a secret.

No "rapes", no underaged girls.
  #97  
Old 11-10-2019, 09:39 AM
Ají de Gallina's Avatar
Ají de Gallina is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lima, Perú
Posts: 4,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
It might be hard to understand that some people really think sexual abuse of women and girls is a truly terrible thing, and actually transcends politics... but it's true. Some of us really oppose sexual assault and rape, even in our own party!

I heartily recommend the stance for others. Why not try it?
You win 20 Virtue points. When you get to 150 you can exchange them for an ice-cream, one scoop.

My point with DRS is not that he is guilty or not, is that some people have to make absolutely everything about him. This thread is about ABC and Epstein and why they hid the story and you want to make it about Trump.
  #98  
Old 11-10-2019, 09:45 AM
Ají de Gallina's Avatar
Ají de Gallina is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Lima, Perú
Posts: 4,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
OTOH:

If you had to bet, would you guess Blasey Ford (his principal accuser) speaks the truth or not? I am NOT asking whether proof was 'beyond a reasonable doubt' (or whatever you think the standard is for Scotus appointment). I am NOT asking whether you think frat-boy pranks should disqualify. I just wonder what your judgment is of the likelihood Ford was truthful. (Yes, this is a test. )

I know the party line for "conservatives" ( ) is that Ford was lying. My knowledge of human nature tells me they're probably wrong. Recall that Ford isn't an hysterical Trump-hater; she's a respected academic who came forward reluctantly.

In another thread you refused to make a probability estimate. Are you going to go with that cop-out again?
(snipped, my bolding)
So, that's the rule, "knowledge of human nature" for a rape accusation? Even when everyone else in the story says it's wrong? Would you accept it against you?
  #99  
Old 11-10-2019, 09:48 AM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ají de Gallina View Post
You win 20 Virtue points. When you get to 150 you can exchange them for an ice-cream, one scoop.

My point with DRS is not that he is guilty or not, is that some people have to make absolutely everything about him. This thread is about ABC and Epstein and why they hid the story and you want to make it about Trump.
As already shown with many examples, it is about the how rightist media was also part of the efforts to cover up this, causing extreme frustration to media like ABC. That the coverup was to protect Trump also is an important thing to notice.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-10-2019 at 09:51 AM.
  #100  
Old 11-10-2019, 10:21 AM
Steophan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 9,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
If you had to bet, would you guess Blasey Ford (his principal accuser) speaks the truth or not?
Not who you asked, but it became very clear at the hearings that she was almost certainly not telling the truth, and that it was almost certain that they were never at a party where the alleged attack could have happened.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:17 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017