Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
I do appreciate how it seems nobody is accepting the official story. This is a serious blow to government credibility.
So, if this was a drug kingpin on suicide watch (or just taken off it) and this happened, would not the FBI be brought in and the body not leave the cell until a truly massive amount of information was taken? The cell also put under immense security.
Yet another unjustified projection accusation of pedophilia against libertarians. The projection is tedious.
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.
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.
The piece, titled "Statutory Rape Is an Outdated Concept," which was published over 20 years ago in the Los Angeles Times, detailed Dershowitz's views on the constitutionality of statutory rape allegations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?"
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]
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.
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.
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?
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?"
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.
![]()
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.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?
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.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.
Lack of consent is a matter different than age, and should have to be proven separately, not just assumed.Beyond that, it doesn't sound consensual, period.
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.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?
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.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.
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.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.
You are confusing age of consent with close age exemptions, often dubbed "Romeo and Juliet" provisions.
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.
Lack of consent is a matter different than age, and should have to be proven separately, not just assumed.Beyond that, it doesn't sound consensual, period.
Also, advocating for a lowering of age of consent below 18 is hardly advocating "pedophilia" contrary to what some here are claiming.
His jailers deserve to be embarrassed. Very embarrassed.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."
I do not see how.You're the one who is confused.
Well yeah, but that has to be proven, not assumed.I was talking about lack of consent, period.
But in most US states that age is 16, not 18. So what's wrong withBut 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.
Pedophilia means sexual attraction to a prepubescent child.It's pedophilia the same way that you blow your nose on a kleenex.
I do not see how.
Well yeah, but that has to be proven, not assumed.
But in most US states that age is 16, not 18. So what's wrong withBut 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.
Pedophilia means sexual attraction to a prepubescent child.It's pedophilia the same way that you blow your nose on a kleenex.
I do not see how.
Well yeah, but that has to be proven, not assumed.
But in most US states that age is 16, not 18. So what's wrong with
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.
That word salad doesn't mean much. Yes, some people misuse the word, often deliberately, like the dishonest attack on Derschowitz.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 not. And again, 16 is legal in most US states, all of Canada, and most of Europe (and in many countries aoc is in fact even lower than 16!) To equate that with sex with prepubescent children is sick frankly.It's pedophilia. And anyone who wants to have sex with 16 year olds, other than ~16 year olds, is a pedophile.
That word salad doesn't mean much. Yes, some people misuse the word, often deliberately, like the dishonest attack on Derschowitz.
There certainly is. There is a huge difference between being sexually attracted to a 16 year old vs. an 8 year old. And a person who can't comprehend the difference is too far gone the rabbit hole of mindless moralizing to be helped.
.It's not. And again, 16 is legal in most US states, all of Canada, and most of Europe (and in many countries aoc is in fact even lower than 16!) To equate that with sex with prepubescent children is sick frankly.It's pedophilia. And anyone who wants to have sex with 16 year olds, other than ~16 year olds, is a pedophile.
I repeat, it's not.I repeat, it's pedophilia.
If you have to accuse people of wanting to "groom young teenagers" just for disagreeing with you, then maybe your arguments are as weak as a wet paper towel.The only ones who I generally see try to claim it isn't, who fight this, are pedophiles who want to groom young teenagers.
That word salad doesn't mean much. Yes, some people misuse the word, often deliberately, like the dishonest attack on Derschowitz.
There certainly is. There is a huge difference between being sexually attracted to a 16 year old vs. an 8 year old. And a person who can't comprehend the difference is too far gone the rabbit hole of mindless moralizing to be helped.
.It's not. And again, 16 is legal in most US states, all of Canada, and most of Europe (and in many countries aoc is in fact even lower than 16!) To equate that with sex with prepubescent children is sick frankly.It's pedophilia. And anyone who wants to have sex with 16 year olds, other than ~16 year olds, is a pedophile.
I repeat, it's pedophilia. The only ones who I generally see try to claim it isn't, who fight this, are pedophiles who want to groom young teenagers.
The big problem with what they did was lack of consent, not age. No, they were not pedophiles. They (or Epstein) do not have to be pedophiles for what they did to be wrong.So the Rotheram gang were dirty old men and not pedophile?
Despite Derec's pedophilia red herring, some victims were less than 16.
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.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?
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.
Lack of consent is a matter different than age, and should have to be proven separately, not just assumed.Beyond that, it doesn't sound consensual, period.
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.
The two Manhattan jail guards tasked with monitoring Jeffrey Epstein before he died fell asleep on the job and fudged the log entries to show they checked on him and other inmates when they actually didn’t, according to reports.
Surveillance video reviewed after Epstein’s death showed the guards at the Metropolitan Correctional Center never made some of the inspections noted in the log, sources told The Post late Tuesday.
On the morning of Jeffrey Epstein's death there was shouting and shrieking from his jail cell, a source familiar with the situation told CBS News. Corrections officers attempted to revive him while saying "breathe, Epstein, breathe."
Congress is the latest to start investigating Epstein's apparent suicide over the weekend, with new reports raising questions about the federal jail where he was being held. One of Epstein's guards at the Metropolitan Correctional Center on the night he died was reportedly not a regular corrections officer.
Jail guards assigned to watch Epstein were sleeping before his death
The two Manhattan jail guards tasked with monitoring Jeffrey Epstein before he died fell asleep on the job and fudged the log entries to show they checked on him and other inmates when they actually didn’t, according to reports.
Surveillance video reviewed after Epstein’s death showed the guards at the Metropolitan Correctional Center never made some of the inspections noted in the log, sources told The Post late Tuesday.
Jeffrey Epstein death: Shrieking heard from jail cell the morning he died at Metropolitan Correctional Center - CBS News
On the morning of Jeffrey Epstein's death there was shouting and shrieking from his jail cell, a source familiar with the situation told CBS News. Corrections officers attempted to revive him while saying "breathe, Epstein, breathe."
Congress is the latest to start investigating Epstein's apparent suicide over the weekend, with new reports raising questions about the federal jail where he was being held. One of Epstein's guards at the Metropolitan Correctional Center on the night he died was reportedly not a regular corrections officer.
Jeffrey Epstein accuser Jennifer Araoz sues Ghislaine Maxwell, 3 other Epstein staffers - "Jennifer Araoz alleges she was repeatedly sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein at his New York townhouse when she was 14 and 15, including a 2002 rape."
Jeffrey Epstein did not work alone, so whoever assisted him will now get targeted.
I get it. Epstein is one of the most famous and controversial prisoners in the world, a focus of immense media/political attention, and recently may have attempted suicide.
Therefore, you think, it is extremely implausible that jail officials would allow him to kill himself./1