The media isn’t going to initiate a story about somebody committing a crime unless it has evidence to back it up. There’s a significant exception; if people start talking about the crime, then the media will report of the talk.
Neither candidate wanted to raise the issue of Epstein in the 2016 campaign because both were implicated. So neither candidate initiated talk on the topic. And the media didn’t have enough evidence to initiate the story.
What do we all think of Alan Dershowitz’s comments? I think Epstein would have been happy to have a top criminal lawyer owe him favors.
Dershowitz says that he kept his underwear on when an old Russian woman massaged him at Epstein’s party. But then he goes on to say that paying for sex with a 16-year old girl should be perfectly legal for the john even if the girl is guilty of prostitution. :smack:
Dersh is a disgusting scumbag. Do you have a cite for these particular comments? He’s already a disgusting scumbag based on past comments, but I’m curious about these particular ones.
My cite is my memory. It might have been a Youtube in which Dershowitz himself is seen saying these things. I could Google, but I’d be starting from the same point as you.
Actually, no.
The reality is that if it was not for the threats to and buying of silence of many involved by the Enquirer, other partisan media or other powerful groups then a lot would have been reported, and corporate media in the end does love to report about train wrecks. But, usually after the disaster can not be hidden or when someone does stick their neck first.
Unless you count Bill and Melinda Gates, Peter and Jennifer Buffett (NoVo Foundation), Fred Meyer (Meyer Foundation) and other wealthy philanthropists who’ve donated $$$ as part of efforts to combat rape and sexual abuse.
Your ridiculous generalizations are not helpful nor do I see any relevant connection to the alleged Epstein Coverup.
A few good folks don’t exculpate our society and powerful institutions, which are largely geared against victims and survivors of abuse. This has only barely begun to change, and we still have a long way to go.
Especially if it threatens their access to the British royals, or Hillary’s chances in an election.
Regards,
Shodan
Very likely so. The royals and Clintons are by no means exempt from my criticism.
No one doubts that Epstein did some horrible things.
It’s that Prince Andrew part “Project Veritas published a hot-mic speech given by Amy Robach complaining that they new about it three years ago and that ABC canned the story, apparently, because (on top of other things) prince Andrew was part of the ring and the the Royal Family won’t give them any interviews if they aired …”
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.
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.
and in fact your cite has been specifically debunked by Snopes:
https://www.snopes.com/ap/2019/11/05/abc-says-interview-with-epstein-accuser-wasnt-ready-to-air/
In fact , your casual assertion that there was a “pedophile ring” is doubtful and unproven:
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.
I don’t see where that assertion was made at all.
There are 2 different things floating here:
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.
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.
Was this meant to link to a different article?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
He’s a convicted sex offender and paid compensation to dozens of under-aged girls. It’s far from doubtful. It’s highly likely.
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 contextand very likely editing of their videos obtained with a lot of leading or “hypothetical” questions.
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-clinton-dershowitz-on-pedophile-billio-1681039971
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.
Again, a Monday morning quarterbacking point.