Epstein arrested

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Yet another unjustified projection accusation of pedophilia against libertarians. The projection is tedious.

"Epstein did nothing wrong," could have meant he's innocent and it's a government conspiracy to arrest him, but you've jumped to only one interpretation. For some reason.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Yet another unjustified projection accusation of pedophilia against libertarians. The projection is tedious.

"Epstein did nothing wrong," could have meant he's innocent and it's a government conspiracy to arrest him, but you've jumped to only one interpretation. For some reason.

Because this is not the first time PyramidHead has tried to get libertarians to legalize his preferences.

 

[PyramidHead]

Yet another unjustified projection accusation of pedophilia against libertarians. The projection is tedious.

"Epstein did nothing wrong," could have meant he's innocent and it's a government conspiracy to arrest him, but you've jumped to only one interpretation. For some reason.

Look for fellow completely coincidental libertarian Alan Dershowitz to get out in front of the Epstein scandal he is deeply embroiled in:

The piece, titled "Statutory Rape Is an Outdated Concept," which was published over 20 years ago in the Los Angeles Times, detailed Dershowitz's views on the constitutionality of statutory rape allegations when contrasted with the demand for legal abortions for 16-year-olds.

Responding to a tweet with a screen capture of Dershowitz's 1997 article, the lawyer and professor emeritus of Harvard Law School said, "I stand by the constitutional (not moral) argument I offered in my controversial oped: if a 16 year old has the constitutional right to have an abortion without state or parental interference, how could she not have the constitutional right to engage in consensual sex?"

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Oh goody, you found one Democrat who wants the same thing you want. Obviously that means that all libertarians want what you want.

 Alan Dershowitz

Dershowitz has said he is a member of the Democratic Party. However, in 2016, he stated that he would cancel his party membership if Keith Ellison was appointed party chair;[37] Tom Perez was appointed instead. Dershowitz endorsed Hillary Clinton in the 2008 presidential election, and later endorsed the party nominee, Barack Obama.[38]

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/08/tr...esting-bill-clinton-murdered-jeffrey-epstein/

...
President Donald Trump is spreading a right-wing conspiracy theory suggesting former President Bill Clinton murdered Jeffrey Epstein.
From his golf vacation at his Bedminster Club, Trump retweeted Terrence K. Williams, who asked people to retweet his message if they agreed and were not surprised by his contention that Clinton had Epstein killed.
...

President Kook sounds off.

Actually, it's par for his course and strong evidence that he was behind it (or knew/supports whoever was). Trump did the exact same thing in regard to the "rigging" of the 2016 election and then the exact same thing in regard to Russian involvement in the "rigging" of the 2016 election, etc., etc.

It's what guilty people do all the time, particularly those who believe themselves to be (and pattern themselves after) mafia bosses; immediately (and preemptively) blame someone else for their own crimes.

And, of the two (Trump or Clinton), it is far more likely that Trump was a client of Epstein's than Clinton. Look at Clinton's mistresses over the years as compared to Trump's. Clinton tended to be attracted to the abundant, free, low hanging fruit, whereas Trump's tastes run to higher end and extremely expensive.

It's the difference between an egotist and a narcissist and it's a safe bet that Epstein's fees were on the extremely expensive side. How does an egotist hide such expenses and why, when, again, there is abundant, free, low hanging fruit? A narcissist simply doesn't give a shit about hiding such things from his irrelevant trophy wives and always needs to have the most expensive, most difficult fruit (because, in their sociopathy, they deserve it).

And while Clinton was no saint and did some remarkably stupid things when it came to affairs, they were by no means in the league of something like Epstein was allegedly running. Trump, otoh, would have been the perfect client for someone like Epstein.

Which, again, ties into Trump's pre-emptive attack.

 

[Elixir]

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/08/tr...esting-bill-clinton-murdered-jeffrey-epstein/

...
President Donald Trump is spreading a right-wing conspiracy theory suggesting former President Bill Clinton murdered Jeffrey Epstein.
From his golf vacation at his Bedminster Club, Trump retweeted Terrence K. Williams, who asked people to retweet his message if they agreed and were not surprised by his contention that Clinton had Epstein killed.
...

President Kook sounds off.

Actually, it's par for his course and strong evidence that he was behind it (or knew/supports whoever was). Trump did the exact same thing in regard to the "rigging" of the 2016 election and then the exact same thing in regard to Russian involvement in the "rigging" of the 2016 election, etc., etc.

It's what guilty people do all the time, particularly those who believe themselves to be (and pattern themselves after) mafia bosses; immediately (and preemptively) blame someone else for their own crimes.

And, of the two (Trump or Clinton), it is far more likely that Trump was a client of Epstein's than Clinton. Look at Clinton's mistresses over the years as compared to Trump's. Clinton tended to be attracted to the abundant, free, low hanging fruit, whereas Trump's tastes run to higher end and extremely expensive.

It's the difference between an egotist and a narcissist and it's a safe bet that Epstein's fees were on the extremely expensive side. How does an egotist hide such expenses and why, when, again, there is abundant, free, low hanging fruit? A narcissist simply doesn't give a shit about hiding such things from his irrelevant trophy wives and always needs to have the most expensive, most difficult fruit (because, in their sociopathy, they deserve it).

And while Clinton was no saint and did some remarkably stupid things when it came to affairs, they were by no means in the league of something like Epstein was allegedly running. Trump, otoh, would have been the perfect client for someone like Epstein.

Which, again, ties into Trump's pre-emptive attack.

Yup. Good post. Without exception, everything of which Trump accuses others (esp. Hillary) is some act he has already committed or intends to commit.
The mystifying thing to me is how people go fully autistic around him - they're suddenly unable read character or intent, no matter how obvious.
It's not like he hides it.

 

[repoman]

How many of these girls will be infertile from chlamydia or dead from HPV derived cervical cancer by the age of 35 because of Epstein and his posse?

 

[Jarhyn]

How many of these girls will be infertile from chlamydia or dead from HPV derived cervical cancer by the age of 35 because of Epstein and his posse?

That would be an interesting question. Seeing how germs and virii have testable genetics, could we potentially test allegations by seeing whether they share some bugs with the accused?

 

[lpetrich]

Let's see where we are now.

A few weeks ago, Jeffrey Epstein tried to commit suicide in his jail cell. He was put on suicide watch for 6 days, but for the next 12 days, he was off of suicide watch. He committed suicide by hanging himself, tying a bedsheet to the top of a bunk bed and using it as a noose. During those days, he was at "special observation status", which meant that two guards were to check on him every 30 minutes, but that procedure was not followed. He also was to have a cellmate, but he did not have one at the time of his suicide.

Jeffrey Epstein hanged himself with prison bedsheet: source - New York Post

There were also no video cameras in action in JE's cell.

What was going on here? It seems like major-league negligence. Or else some of his jailers wanted to let him get himself out of the way, and save them from unpleasant visibility or whatever they might be worried about.

 

[Derec]

Look for fellow completely coincidental libertarian Alan Dershowitz to get out in front of the Epstein scandal he is deeply embroiled in:

The piece, titled "Statutory Rape Is an Outdated Concept," which was published over 20 years ago in the Los Angeles Times, detailed Dershowitz's views on the constitutionality of statutory rape allegations when contrasted with the demand for legal abortions for 16-year-olds.

Responding to a tweet with a screen capture of Dershowitz's 1997 article, the lawyer and professor emeritus of Harvard Law School said, "I stand by the constitutional (not moral) argument I offered in my controversial oped: if a 16 year old has the constitutional right to have an abortion without state or parental interference, how could she not have the constitutional right to engage in consensual sex?"

Age of consent at 16 has zero to do with "pedophilia". In fact, 16 is the age of consent in most US states as well as all of Canada and 16 (or lower) is age of consent in most of Europe as well.

 

[Toni]

Look for fellow completely coincidental libertarian Alan Dershowitz to get out in front of the Epstein scandal he is deeply embroiled in:

The piece, titled "Statutory Rape Is an Outdated Concept," which was published over 20 years ago in the Los Angeles Times, detailed Dershowitz's views on the constitutionality of statutory rape allegations when contrasted with the demand for legal abortions for 16-year-olds.

Responding to a tweet with a screen capture of Dershowitz's 1997 article, the lawyer and professor emeritus of Harvard Law School said, "I stand by the constitutional (not moral) argument I offered in my controversial oped: if a 16 year old has the constitutional right to have an abortion without state or parental interference, how could she not have the constitutional right to engage in consensual sex?"

Age of consent at 16 has zero to do with "pedophilia". In fact, 16 is the age of consent in most US states as well as all of Canada and 16 (or lower) is age of consent in most of Europe as well.

It's not the age of consent with someone in their 30's or 40's or 50's or 60's or 70's.

Beyond that, it doesn't sound consensual, period.

 

[Derec]

That would be an interesting question. Seeing how germs and virii have testable genetics, could we potentially test allegations by seeing whether they share some bugs with the accused?

For fast-mutating viruses I would say that would be possible. You'd have to do full sequencing, but it should be possible. Of course, it would only prove that sex took place (or at least some mixing of precious bodily fluids), not the lack of consent, and it would rely on Epstein carrying a virus (Epstein-Barr perhaps?) and also infecting any sex partners, neither of which is a given.

 

[Derec]

It's not the age of consent with someone in their 30's or 40's or 50's or 60's or 70's.

It is. If age of consent is 16, than a 16 year old can decide to have sex with anybody, even if they are much older.
You are confusing age of consent with close age exemptions, often dubbed "Romeo and Juliet" provisions.

Beyond that, it doesn't sound consensual, period.

Lack of consent is a matter different than age, and should have to be proven separately, not just assumed.
Also, advocating for a lowering of age of consent below 18 is hardly advocating "pedophilia" contrary to what some here are claiming.

 

[Jarhyn]

That would be an interesting question. Seeing how germs and virii have testable genetics, could we potentially test allegations by seeing whether they share some bugs with the accused?

For fast-mutating viruses I would say that would be possible. You'd have to do full sequencing, but it should be possible. Of course, it would only prove that sex took place (or at least some mixing of precious bodily fluids), not the lack of consent, and it would rely on Epstein carrying a virus (Epstein-Barr perhaps?) and also infecting any sex partners, neither of which is a given.

The lack of consent is indicated by the observable genetic drift in the viral load indicating age at time of sex, or testimony and circumstances of the timeline of possible events.

Or in other words, the validity (or possibility) of consent is a function of symmetry of understanding and information, and the asymmetry that exists between a geriatric fuckwit like Trump or Epstien and a 16 (or less) year old girl makes any such interaction rape. Hence the existence of statutory rape in the criminal code.

 

[lpetrich]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "We need answers. Lots of them. https://t.co/4DMckiZnVB" / Twitter
She is in the House Oversight Committee, and since JE offed himself in a Federal jail, she might end up asking lots of questions of his jailers. We can see how it might go by looking at what she has done so far.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez turns committee hearings into appointment viewing - Washington Times

Some members of Congress read their questions from prepared scripts during hearings. Others veer off into non sequiturs or ask ill-conceived questions that witnesses clearly cannot be expected to answer.

But that’s not Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

The freshman Democrat from New York, in Congress for less than six months, has become appointment viewing when she takes over the questioning in her committee hearings — and for good reason. She is on point and relentless to get what she’s after.

...
“I find her questioning to be thoughtful, rooted in facts, statistics, to make an overarching point,” said Rep. Madeleine Dean, Pennsylvania Democrat and a fellow freshman. “I think she’s a skilled questioner.”

...
When Michael Cohen, the onetime personal attorney to President Trump, appeared before the oversight committee before heading to prison for fraud and lying to Congress, most panel members used their five minutes of questions as a chance to argue about crimes and impeachment.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, however, used her time to ask pointed questions of Mr. Trump’s former fixer on the financial details of Mr. Trump’s businesses and where Congress had to look to find the answers he couldn’t provide.

...
“What makes her so effective is that she actually asks questions instead of making a speech. She is very methodical. It reminds me of a good trial lawyer,” said Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat and senior liberal who also serves on the oversight panel.

With some hearing witnesses, she did an exercise in how to be very corrupt, accepting money from political action committees funded by secret donors. Another masterful performance.

 

[Toni]

It's not the age of consent with someone in their 30's or 40's or 50's or 60's or 70's.

It is. If age of consent is 16, than a 16 year old can decide to have sex with anybody, even if they are much older.
You are confusing age of consent with close age exemptions, often dubbed "Romeo and Juliet" provisions.

You're the one who is confused.
https://legaldictionary.net/romeo-and-juliet-laws/

According to federal law, it is illegal to have sexual relations with anyone between the ages of 12 and 18, if that person is four or more years younger than the perpetrator. Each state has specific legal age of consent laws, which vary from 10 to 18 years of age.

Some states do not have a Romeo and Juliet law, instead setting a specific age of consent. If any person engages in consensual sex prior to that age, they have committed a crime, regardless of how close in age the parties are.

Beyond that, it doesn't sound consensual, period.

Lack of consent is a matter different than age, and should have to be proven separately, not just assumed.
Also, advocating for a lowering of age of consent below 18 is hardly advocating "pedophilia" contrary to what some here are claiming.

I was talking about lack of consent, period.

But since you mentioned it, if someone is under the age of consent, consent is impossible, except within some limited age range in about half of the US states.

It's pedophilia the same way that you blow your nose on a kleenex.

 

[lpetrich]

Jeffrey Epstein death: Warden at prison temporarily reassigned - CNNPolitics

The top official at the New York prison that had housed Jeffrey Epstein before his apparent suicide is being moved temporarily as the FBI and the Justice Department's inspector general investigate the circumstances of the death.

Two employees at the Metropolitan Correctional Center who had been assigned to Epstein's unit are also being placed on administrative leave, Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said, adding that "additional actions may be taken as the circumstances warrant."

His jailers deserve to be embarrassed. Very embarrassed.

 

[Derec]

You're the one who is confused.

I do not see how.

I was talking about lack of consent, period.

Well yeah, but that has to be proven, not assumed.

But since you mentioned it, if someone is under the age of consent, consent is impossible, except within some limited age range in about half of the US states.

But in most US states that age is 16, not 18. So what's wrong with

It's pedophilia the same way that you blow your nose on a kleenex.

Pedophilia means sexual attraction to a prepubescent child.

 

[repoman]

There is also the aspect of old(er) guys industrially having a sex safari with girls that in the deep pre civilization past would probably be forming longish pair bonds with boys of similar age.

How these girls approach relationship may be damaged from this, that is in addition to possible stigma.

A 16 year old boy having a short or long term 14 year old girl is likely to be healthy. He is not a pedophile, not or the old creepy guy who will cause damage. A 16 year old who is into 8 year old girls needs some serious intervention that may be early enough to fix him. A 55 year old into 8 year old is too old to be fixed.

 

[Jarhyn]

I do not see how.

Well yeah, but that has to be proven, not assumed.

But since you mentioned it, if someone is under the age of consent, consent is impossible, except within some limited age range in about half of the US states.

But in most US states that age is 16, not 18. So what's wrong with

It's pedophilia the same way that you blow your nose on a kleenex.

Pedophilia means sexual attraction to a prepubescent child.

It's been a while since I saw someone argue against evolution of language. Pedophilia has changed usage without changing ethical implications, as an understanding of symmetrical consent has proliferated quietly through society.

Pedophilia has "eaten" the more obscure cutout that used to exist for ephebophilia, because we realize there is no ethical need to separate the two: adults having sex with children is abhorrent, as is anyone who tries to distract from, justify, or normalize such acts.

It's pedophilia. And anyone who wants to have sex with 16 year olds, other than ~16 year olds, is a pedophile.