• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Epstein arrested

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,635
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
That you consider Trump and Clinton are sexual predators on equal footing?

Both of them had multiple accusations. It will be interesting to see what the answer to my question is - which one comes out worse from this Epstein case. That's what I'm looking forward to finding out. With any luck it topples most of the government, and there is that possibility.

I doubt either of them would be seriously affected. Clinton because he is mostly irrelevant in politics these days, so not much of an effort will likely focus on him. Trump because most people seem to have made up his mind about him, and most of his voters will likely stick with him over an alternative, due to policy rather than personal character considerations.

It should go without saying, but a lot of people on the right seem to have forgotten (deliberately) that their chief beef with Clinton was regarding his personal character. The GOP field for the 2000 election was basically "who can wipe the stain of infidelity and impropriety from the White House and restore the dignity of the Presidency?" The party rebranded themselves as the "family values" party in large part to set them apart from the cad who had cheated on his wife. Perish the thought. And of course the impeachment came from a lie Clinton told during a case of sexual harassment. It's almost easy to forget that the investigation which kicked it all off was into a shady real estate deal.

The Democrats self-corrected. Remember John Edwards? Cheated on his wife. Political career ended. Al Franken was caught not actually touching a woman's breasts. Political career ended.

The Republicans did a 180, throwing their full weight behind a man who cheated on his first wife with his second, his second with his third, his third with a porn star (that he paid hush money to) and by the way he made his fortune in real estate deals that make Whitewater look amateurish by comparison. The fact that Trump is friends with Epstein will not hurt him with either his supporters or his party, because they've abandoned all pretense of being the "family values" standard-bearers. If it turns out he actually assaulted a young girl or two, I have serious doubts that they'll abandon him.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,151
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I doubt either of them would be seriously affected. Clinton because he is mostly irrelevant in politics these days, so not much of an effort will likely focus on him. Trump because most people seem to have made up his mind about him, and most of his voters will likely stick with him over an alternative, due to policy rather than personal character considerations.

It should go without saying, but a lot of people on the right seem to have forgotten (deliberately) that their chief beef with Clinton was regarding his personal character. The GOP field for the 2000 election was basically "who can wipe the stain of infidelity and impropriety from the White House and restore the dignity of the Presidency?" The party rebranded themselves as the "family values" party in large part to set them apart from the cad who had cheated on his wife. Perish the thought. And of course the impeachment came from a lie Clinton told during a case of sexual harassment. It's almost easy to forget that the investigation which kicked it all off was into a shady real estate deal.

The Democrats self-corrected. Remember John Edwards? Cheated on his wife. Political career ended. Al Franken was caught not actually touching a woman's breasts. Political career ended.

The Republicans did a 180, throwing their full weight behind a man who cheated on his first wife with his second, his second with his third, his third with a porn star (that he paid hush money to) and by the way he made his fortune in real estate deals that make Whitewater look amateurish by comparison. The fact that Trump is friends with Epstein will not hurt him with either his supporters or his party, because they've abandoned all pretense of being the "family values" standard-bearers. If it turns out he actually assaulted a young girl or two, I have serious doubts that they'll abandon him.

The evidence is pretty clear that he's assaulted women in the past. "She's not my type" rather than "I respect the consent of women" or even "I don't rape, that's disgusting and wrong".

Just "I've known Epstein a long time and he likes em young!"

And we have at least one apologist for him in here regularly trying to muddy the waters "it's not pedophilia, she was 14", and "it's just an accusation don't end lives over mere accusations".

I think I'm going to do some digging today for some threads where a certain poster is demonizing a woman or a black person based on accusations, anyone else down?
 

J842P

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
4,137
Location
USA, California
Basic Beliefs
godless heathen
It's adorable that you think people believe you when you claim you are not a partisan Republican.

Let's see, I said both a Republican president and a Democrat president have a credible rape accusation. That means I support one of them over the other.

That makes sense?

That you consider Trump and Clinton are sexual predators on equal footing? Yeah, it says a lot. Neither are golden, but one is clearly worse than the other, your whataboutisms notwithstanding.
Sorry, but the accusations against both are pretty bad, I can't say either is worse. Trump is simply more vulgar.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
You defend the powerful, regardless of what they are doing to the powerless. We see you, jumping to defend predators.
Not at all. I am merely defending the truth. If Epstein is guilty of the crimes he is being charged with, he should be convicted. But that does not make him, or the other men that anonymous jpeg accused of "pedophilia" such.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
You DO know this isn't always true, correct?
Always? No. Few things are always true. There are usually long tales of the distribution.
But vast majority of girls are, which is my point.

By the way, what do you think the age of consent should be? Because 16 is legal in many US states, all of Canada and almost all of Europe. Do you think all these jurisdictions are wrong and that people (like John Casablancas, one of the men mentioned in that anonymous jpeg) having a sexual relationship with 16 year olds are "pedophiles"?
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Imagine being such an authority fellator
Ad hominem, but then again I expect nothing more from you.

that you'd rather split hairs on what age is ok to rape children
It's not ok to rape anybody at any age. If Epstein is guilty of rape and the feds can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, he should be convicted.
However, the anonymous jpeg I was replying about accused people other than Epstein of being "pedophiles".
Including one who had a consensual sexual relationship with a 16 year old model. That is not rape, is not pedophilia and is actually perfectly legal in many places.

than to just stand up for the powerless and hold power accountable.
Epstein can't be that powerful if he could not even be tipped off that the feds were investigating again and were ready to arrest him again.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
The rape allegation against BC is not credible. Juanita Broadrick, when forced to tell her tale under oath, said it never happened.
Can't keep track of all accusations against Trump, but have any of them even testified under oath? I know this E. Jean "sexy rape" Carroll has not.
Also, isn't it an article of faith on the Left these days that women must automatically be believed?
Or are we to believe all accusations against say Brett Kavenaugh, but not say against Justin Fairfax?
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
He's had minor dealings with a lot of people but the names aren't just one-shot cases.

Not being one-shot doesn't mean they are friends either. People can have decades long business relationships without being friends.
Also, the accusation that these men are "pedophiles" is BS.
I looked up one of them - John Casablancas. Consensual relationship with a 16 year old model. Not even close to pedophilia, and if fact legal in most of the developed world.

So that anonymous jpeg is bullshit. I get not liking Trump, but that does not mean one must accept every bit of anonymous internet propaganda against him. Especially since even if it were all true, it would only be "guilt by association".
 

Don2 (Don1 Revised)

Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
11,631
Location
USA
Basic Beliefs
Nonpracticing agnostic
I looked up one of them - John Casablancas. Consensual relationship with a 16 year old model. Not even close to pedophilia, and if fact legal in most of the developed world.

A common excuse is that she was 16 when the relationship started. She could have been 14.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
The Democrats self-corrected. Remember John Edwards? Cheated on his wife. Political career ended. Al Franken was caught not actually touching a woman's breasts. Political career ended.

The Dems did not self-correct, they over-corrected. Badly.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,930
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
I looked up one of them - John Casablancas. Consensual relationship with a 16 year old model. Not even close to pedophilia, and if fact legal in most of the developed world.

A common excuse is that she was 16 when the relationship started. She could have been 14.

Yeah, a forty + year old guy with a sixteen year old girl. Nothing wrong or wierd about that.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
Yeah, a forty + year old guy with a sixteen year old girl. Nothing wrong or wierd about that.
Of course it's weird! Nobody claimed otherwise.

But the claim in the anonymous jpeg you posted wasn't that it was weird, but that it was "pedophilia". Which it most certainly isn't.
It is also legal in most of the Western, developed world.

By the way, 41 year old in a relationship with an 18 year old is almost as weird. Would you argue then that it should be illegal or that it should be labeled as "pedophilia"?
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,151
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Yeah, a forty + year old guy with a sixteen year old girl. Nothing wrong or wierd about that.
Of course it's weird! Nobody claimed otherwise.

But the claim in the anonymous jpeg you posted wasn't that it was weird, but that it was "pedophilia". Which it most certainly isn't.
It is also legal in most of the Western, developed world.

By the way, 41 year old in a relationship with an 18 year old is almost as weird. Would you argue then that it should be illegal or that it should be labeled as "pedophilia"?

You are attempting to make a weak semantic argument and nobody here is going to accept it except maybe pedophiles.

This is because pedophilia is wrong for a reason.

It is not wrong strictly as a function of the victim's age but rather as a function of the possibility of symmetrical informed consent. How much does the person know about the risks, what does a person know about the implications, vs the other person. If one party to an act is incapable of being elevated to the level of the other party, to the point that both parties can make an even exchange, then there is a lack of symmetry, even in the case of consent, and this lack of symmetry invalidates consent.

In modern language, pedophilia refers generally to an attraction, any attraction, where there can be no symmetrical informed consent due to differences in experience due to differences in the very opportunity to gain exoerience.

Or, imagine a man and a little boy have had their brains swapped. The little boy is now man shaped, and the man is now little-boy-shaped.

It would be pedophilia to fuck the man-shaped-boy.

It would not be pedophilia to fuck the boy-shaped-man.

This is what pedophilia means to modern people. Quit complaining at us about how you think language shouldn't change. Language changes to suit modern understanding.
 

Sarpedon

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Messages
2,976
Location
MN, US
Basic Beliefs
the Philosophy of Not Giving a Damn
Holy Fucking Shit.

Just look at everyone he's connected to. This is the scandal of the century.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,838
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This is because pedophilia is wrong for a reason.

It is not wrong strictly as a function of the victim's age but rather as a function of the possibility of symmetrical informed consent. How much does the person know about the risks, what does a person know about the implications, vs the other person. If one party to an act is incapable of being elevated to the level of the other party, to the point that both parties can make an even exchange, then there is a lack of symmetry, even in the case of consent, and this lack of symmetry invalidates consent.

In modern language, pedophilia refers generally to an attraction, any attraction, where there can be no symmetrical informed consent due to differences in experience due to differences in the very opportunity to gain exoerience.

While I agree with the reasoning that's not what pedophilia means. Sexual relationships involving too much power imbalance are a bad thing, we only ban the most extreme cases but we should probably go farther.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,729
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
This is because pedophilia is wrong for a reason.

It is not wrong strictly as a function of the victim's age but rather as a function of the possibility of symmetrical informed consent. How much does the person know about the risks, what does a person know about the implications, vs the other person. If one party to an act is incapable of being elevated to the level of the other party, to the point that both parties can make an even exchange, then there is a lack of symmetry, even in the case of consent, and this lack of symmetry invalidates consent.

In modern language, pedophilia refers generally to an attraction, any attraction, where there can be no symmetrical informed consent due to differences in experience due to differences in the very opportunity to gain exoerience.

While I agree with the reasoning that's not what pedophilia means. Sexual relationships involving too much power imbalance are a bad thing, we only ban the most extreme cases but we should probably go farther.

Which is why there are statutory rape laws in place now. In addition to the statuatory rapes that already virtually certain to have occurred, it is credibly claimed by multiple victoms that the rape was forceable and violent.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,235
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
Holy Fucking Shit.

Just look at everyone he's connected to. This is the scandal of the century.

I hope so.

And I'm going to get whiplash watching the reaction to it as which party is more guilty changes back and forth as the story grows.

I was accused of supporting the Republicans when I pointed out this potentially catches both Clinton and Trump.
 

Tom Sawyer

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Messages
17,030
Location
Toronto
Basic Beliefs
That I'm God
Holy Fucking Shit.

Just look at everyone he's connected to. This is the scandal of the century.

I hope so.

And I'm going to get whiplash watching the reaction to it as which party is more guilty changes back and forth as the story grows.

I was accused of supporting the Republicans when I pointed out this potentially catches both Clinton and Trump.

That is such a Democrat thing to say. :mad:
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,145
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Liberals are already lining up to condemn Clinton if the evidence shows he is involved.

That's the difference between authority fellators and the rest of us - they worship authority, the rest of us have principles.
 

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,635
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
Holy Fucking Shit.

Just look at everyone he's connected to. This is the scandal of the century.

You'd think.

Yet a decade ago he was caught. Arrested. Charged. Child molestation. Rape. Sex trafficking. They had him dead to rights. His punishment?

13 months in jail. But not really. 6 out of 7 days a week he was able to go home. You know, because he had important work to do. The sort of sentence that you'd get for blowing a .09 on a breathalyzer in a state where .08 was DUI.

All the people associated with his sex trafficking ring? "We're not going to talk about that." The person in charge of the whole shebang is now a Cabinet Secretary. A Cabinet Secretary in an administration that has an Attorney General hired explicitly to absolve the Chief Executive of any crimes, and one that has for all intents and purposes flipped a middle finger to their hand-picked Supreme Court when said court opined that "you can't actually do that" in regards to the census.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
29,930
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Holy Fucking Shit.

Just look at everyone he's connected to. This is the scandal of the century.

I hope so.

And I'm going to get whiplash watching the reaction to it as which party is more guilty changes back and forth as the story grows.

I was accused of supporting the Republicans when I pointed out this potentially catches both Clinton and Trump.

66618827_2370204546580221_7218073667735912448_n.jpg
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,235
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
Liberals are already lining up to condemn Clinton if the evidence shows he is involved.

That's the difference between authority fellators and the rest of us - they worship authority, the rest of us have principles.

Good. But it wasn't always that way.

Back in the '90's Democrats were very eager to defend Bill from the multiple rape accusations, much like Republicans today with Trump. The Clintons are yesterday's news, which is why it is safe to throw them to the mob.
 

Angry Floof

Tricksy Leftits
Staff member
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
14,145
Location
Sector 001
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Liberals are already lining up to condemn Clinton if the evidence shows he is involved.

That's the difference between authority fellators and the rest of us - they worship authority, the rest of us have principles.

Good. But it wasn't always that way.

Back in the '90's Democrats were very eager to defend Bill from the multiple rape accusations, much like Republicans today with Trump. The Clintons are yesterday's news, which is why it is safe to throw them to the mob.

Both sides are not the same, Jason, no matter how much you stomp your feet and insist so.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,729
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Liberals are already lining up to condemn Clinton if the evidence shows he is involved.

That's the difference between authority fellators and the rest of us - they worship authority, the rest of us have principles.

Good. But it wasn't always that way.

Back in the '90's Democrats were very eager to defend Bill from the multiple rape accusations, much like Republicans today with Trump. The Clintons are yesterday's news, which is why it is safe to throw them to the mob.

Not all of us disbelieved the allegations against Clinton or supported him.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,235
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
Liberals are already lining up to condemn Clinton if the evidence shows he is involved.

That's the difference between authority fellators and the rest of us - they worship authority, the rest of us have principles.

Good. But it wasn't always that way.

Back in the '90's Democrats were very eager to defend Bill from the multiple rape accusations, much like Republicans today with Trump. The Clintons are yesterday's news, which is why it is safe to throw them to the mob.

Both sides are not the same, Jason, no matter how much you stomp your feet and insist so.

One is Red and one is Blue. That's completely different.
 

Derec

Contributor
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
Messages
21,699
Location
Atlanta, GA
Basic Beliefs
atheist
You are attempting to make a weak semantic argument and nobody here is going to accept it except maybe pedophiles.
Semantics is important. Without knowing the meaning of words, verbal communication is impossible.

This is because pedophilia is wrong for a reason.
It is, when the actual meaning of the word is used. If you play fast and loose with the definition, it is not necessarily.

It is not wrong strictly as a function of the victim's age but rather as a function of the possibility of symmetrical informed consent.
You are conflating the issues of age of consent and of pedophilia.

How much does the person know about the risks, what does a person know about the implications, vs the other person. If one party to an act is incapable of being elevated to the level of the other party, to the point that both parties can make an even exchange, then there is a lack of symmetry, even in the case of consent, and this lack of symmetry invalidates consent.
Many sexual relationships, even among adults, are not symmetrical. That does not make them nonconsensual. That does not make them "pedophilia".

In modern language, pedophilia refers generally to an attraction, any attraction, where there can be no symmetrical informed consent due to differences in experience due to differences in the very opportunity to gain exoerience.
No, in modern language pedophilia refers to primary attraction to prepubescent children.
I know some people use "pedophilia" as a general insult to basically weaponize the disgust people rightly feel over it.

By the way, given your "symmetry" definition, would you say that a 50 year old having a consensual sexual relationship with a 25 year old was a "pedophile"? After all, the 50 year old has a lot more experience.

Or, imagine a man and a little boy have had their brains swapped. The little boy is now man shaped, and the man is now little-boy-shaped.
It would be pedophilia to fuck the man-shaped-boy.
It would not be pedophilia to fuck the boy-shaped-man.
Sure, let's look at "Big". Elizabeth Perkins' character being sexually attracted to 32 year old Tom Hanks is not pedophilia.
It would be wrong for her to act out on it if she knew he was really 12 of course, but she did not know it (until the end of the movie if I remember correctly).


This is what pedophilia means to modern people. Quit complaining at us about how you think language shouldn't change. Language changes to suit modern understanding.
I am still not exactly sure what this "new" definition of pedophilia is. Nothing you have written here makes the least bit of sense.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,151
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Both sides are not the same, Jason, no matter how much you stomp your feet and insist so.

One is Red and one is Blue. That's completely different.

Clinton was president when I was in high school. I didn't like him then and would describe him as a dishonest piece of shit.

Even so, all the women involved described the encounters as consensual at one point or another, though the asymmetry, as noted last year by Lewinsky, calls a lot of it into ethical question.

This is entirely different in every way from repeatedly raping 13 year old children while making them wear a wig so that they might resemble their own daughter more.

I mean fuck, I'm willing to donate to primary Pelosi right now for simply not being progressive enough, you think for a moment I, or for that matter those to my left and right, wouldn't put a Clinton in Gen Pop for raping children?
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,692
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Liberals are already lining up to condemn Clinton if the evidence shows he is involved.

That's the difference between authority fellators and the rest of us - they worship authority, the rest of us have principles.

Good. But it wasn't always that way.

Back in the '90's Democrats were very eager to defend Bill from the multiple rape accusations, much like Republicans today with Trump. The Clintons are yesterday's news, which is why it is safe to throw them to the mob.

Not all of us disbelieved the allegations against Clinton or supported him.
Right now, I'm not aware of Clinton having a connected rendezvous with Epstein like Trump has with Epstein in Florida with about 28 underaged teens in '92.
 

marc

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,812
Location
always on the move
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, skeptic, nerd
Any credibility of accusations against Clinton are severely undermined by the constant stream of phony controversies and hypocritical accusations brought against him. Travelgate, Filegate, christmas cards, Vince Foster, accusations of drug trafficing, whitewater, etc... If they ever had any real evidence against him then why not harp on that instead of so many fake offences?
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,729
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,692
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Not all of us disbelieved the allegations against Clinton or supported him.
Right now, I'm not aware of Clinton having a connected rendezvous with Epstein like Trump has with Epstein in Florida with about 28 underaged teens in '92.

I’m sorry—I wasn’t clear. I believed the allegations by Broaddrick, Jones and Wiley.

I’ve seen nothing credible about Clinton’s supposed involvement in Epstein’s ‘parties.’
I'm sorry, all opinions for liberals must be cleared through the Jason Harvestdancer Filter first.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,729
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I’m sorry—I wasn’t clear. I believed the allegations by Broaddrick, Jones and Wiley.

I’ve seen nothing credible about Clinton’s supposed involvement in Epstein’s ‘parties.’
I'm sorry, all opinions for liberals must be cleared through the Jason Harvestdancer Filter first.

Dammit! I forgot!
 

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,635
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
I’m sorry—I wasn’t clear. I believed the allegations by Broaddrick, Jones and Wiley.

I’ve seen nothing credible about Clinton’s supposed involvement in Epstein’s ‘parties.’
I'm sorry, all opinions for liberals must be cleared through the Jason Harvestdancer Filter first.

And here I thought he was just the Sole Arbiter of All Things Libertarian.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
14,729
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I’m sorry—I wasn’t clear. I believed the allegations by Broaddrick, Jones and Wiley.

I’ve seen nothing credible about Clinton’s supposed involvement in Epstein’s ‘parties.’
I'm sorry, all opinions for liberals must be cleared through the Jason Harvestdancer Filter first.

And here I thought he was just the Sole Arbiter of All Things Libertarian.

He’s obviously multi talented and multifaceted.
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
9,151
Gender
No pls.
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
I’m sorry—I wasn’t clear. I believed the allegations by Broaddrick, Jones and Wiley.

I’ve seen nothing credible about Clinton’s supposed involvement in Epstein’s ‘parties.’
I'm sorry, all opinions for liberals must be cleared through the Jason Harvestdancer Filter first.

Which apparently, as a rule, states that to be a liberal one must view violent child rape with flavors of incest as equal to questionable consent from adult women in nonviolent encounters.
 

Jason Harvestdancer

Contributor
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
7,235
Location
Lots of planets have a North
Basic Beliefs
Wiccan
I’m sorry—I wasn’t clear. I believed the allegations by Broaddrick, Jones and Wiley.

I’ve seen nothing credible about Clinton’s supposed involvement in Epstein’s ‘parties.’
I'm sorry, all opinions for liberals must be cleared through the Jason Harvestdancer Filter first.

What an imagination you have.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
35,838
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Any credibility of accusations against Clinton are severely undermined by the constant stream of phony controversies and hypocritical accusations brought against him. Travelgate, Filegate, christmas cards, Vince Foster, accusations of drug trafficing, whitewater, etc... If they ever had any real evidence against him then why not harp on that instead of so many fake offences?

Exactly. The Republicans cried wolf so often that the first reaction from the rest of us is that any new allegation was just more of the same. All they actually managed to show was that he was a womanizer, not that he was a rapist.
 

Deepak

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
2,365
Location
MA, USA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
6,142
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/07/ep...d-ny-magazine-reports-on-wall-st-speculation/

...
Convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein claims to be a billionaire hedge fund manager. But his real business may have been a blackmail scheme that could end up implicating many of his powerful friends.
“Given this puzzling set of data points, the hedge-fund managers we spoke to leaned toward the theory that Epstein was running a blackmail scheme under the cover of a hedge fund,” New York Magazine reported Thursday
...

This is about to get weird. Very weird.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,692
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/07/ep...d-ny-magazine-reports-on-wall-st-speculation/

...
Convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein claims to be a billionaire hedge fund manager. But his real business may have been a blackmail scheme that could end up implicating many of his powerful friends.
“Given this puzzling set of data points, the hedge-fund managers we spoke to leaned toward the theory that Epstein was running a blackmail scheme under the cover of a hedge fund,” New York Magazine reported Thursday
...

This is about to get weird. Very weird.
Oh goodness... please have a Michael Cohen level of recorded documentation!
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
35,692
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
President Trump 07/12/2019 said:
"Jeffrey Epstein was not somebody that I respected. I threw him out. In fact I think the great James Patterson, who’s a member of Mar-a-Lago, made a statement yesterday, that many years ago I threw him out. I’m not a fan of Jeffrey Epstein."
link

Donald Trump 2002 said:
I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it – Jeffrey enjoys his social life.
link
 

Deepak

Veteran Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
2,365
Location
MA, USA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
This is about to get weird. Very weird.

Maybe the QAnon guys were right all along
NWMROn5.gif
 
Top Bottom