Donald Trump--Alan Dershowitz
Join LibraryThing to post.
As a kind of pre-second round of the Me too thread.
In the last couple/few days we've been reading and hearing about what a piece of shit Trump's Labor Secretary Alex Acosta is for letting billionaire sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein off so easily with a minimal sentence for his numerous crimes back in 2008. The thing is though that both Trump and Dershowitz are implicated in Epstein's crimes and that goes at least a ways in explaining why Dershowitz defends Trump every chance he gets.
This isn't to say that Acosta isn't a piece of shit but when we examine the deal that Epstein got--it was negotiated by former Fla. Gov. Jeb Bush and his replacement Charlie Crist--Dershowitz appears again negotiating the same deal as an attorney for Epstein along with Miami celebrity lawyer Roy Black and former Clinton prosecutor Kenneth Starr. Go fucking figure. So making Mr. Acosta the fall guy is falling far short IMO of really getting to the bottom of this injustice.
Anyone by the way interested can google Jeffrey Epstein's Black Book if they're interested in his 92 pages worth of social contacts--redacted of the actual contact information. And in the context of the Me too thing--this isn't so much about the entertainment--it's moving it into another orbit--billionaires, politicians, socialites, royalty, fashion and some entertainment personalities too. This isn't to say that everyone listed is involved in the scandal--it's still an eye opening list. The names that are circled include Trump, Prince Andrew, Dershowitz, former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, Courtney Love, Peter Soros.
Anyone on a flight log to Epstein's privately owned Little St. James Island is a strong suspect in criminality. Flights out of Palm Beach--I wonder who owns the Mar-al-Lago resort there? Why it's Epstein's good old friend and current holder of the United States presidency. Epstein also had places in NYC, Sante Fe New Mexico, Paris France.
Anyway hopefully this story breaks out and takes down a bunch of other assholes that were missed the first time around.
......apparently Fox News isn't interested. Who woulda thunk?--that all kinds of other news outlets are running this story but somehow it slipped past them.
Sure. You would rather we go back to "rule by lobbyist" and "rule by company". You think something sneaky is going on because Dershowitz defends Trump on one subject. One subject. Therefore they must be in cahoots, right? Dumb.
And of course you attack Fox because you want every news outlet to think the same way. If one is different, you excommunicate them or send them out to a firing squad.
#4--first part makes almost no sense--that's not unusual. Dershowitz implicated in some of the same crimes as Trump--negotiates deal with local Florida politicos to get Epstein off practically scot free in 2008. Years later Trump gives the prosecutor in that case--mind you the same prosecutor of his really good buddy Epstein a plum cabinet position.
By the way Epstein has been a major donor to the democratic party. You apparently missed Bill Richardson and Peter Soros's names mentioned above (but I've never found you to be a very careful reader) and there are plenty of others who fall under a lot of suspicion for their activities regarding Epstein as well--including another former POTUS.
All 24-7 news channels are trash but Fox especially so.
>2 barney67: Clinton is also on the list. https://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-clinton-dershowitz-on-pedophile-billio-168103...
This is not a partisan issue.
#7--Barney strikes me as one of those who jumps up and down and cheers at Trump rallies when Donald references this woman or that as ugly or a pig. Then he'll come on here and say we're fucked up.
But anyway a couple years ago when the Me Too thing was getting legs Barney was on here with a list of democrats who were guilty of sexual assaults and rape. I remember because we argued over some of them--basically it seemed that if some guy (and a good number of them I had no idea who they were) on his list was in the entertainment business he automatically tagged him as a democrat. Couldn't be anything else and FWIW Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailes didn't make the cut and were left off the list. He was insistent about Roman Polanski--who lived in the United States for several years but never became a citizen which would make it pretty hard for him to register to any party. When facts get in the way though he keeps on repeating his lies. I expect hypocrisy from him pretty much every time he writes anything.
>2 barney67: Such a response rarely disturbs me, but when we're talking about crimes of Epsteins' nature it actually does, even if the person, in this case Barney, is someone with a tendency to file disturbing or unwelcome news in the politically inconvenient so false file.
>6 lriley: "I've never found you to be a very careful reader"
That is a personal attack and NO ONE FUCKING FLAGGED IT. This happens nearly every time you respond to me and I am fucking sick of it. You know the rules. Follow them.
Personal attack: "Barney strikes me as one of those who jumps up and down and cheers at Trump rallies when Donald references this woman or that as ugly or a pig"
Same old bullshit on this web site and its creepy readers and moderators.
>10 barney67: That is a personal attack and NO ONE FUCKING FLAGGED IT
So flag it. It's your right to do so.
Same old bullshit on this web site and its creepy readers
Are you a reader on this web site? Does that make you full of the same old bullshit and creepy?
So anyway Dershowitz is often cited as some Jesus Christ of the American legal system. Whatever he says about legality people like Barney and Proximity suck up as gospel. He's the expert on everything and a paragon of moral integrity. He's also someone on 'the left who actually gets it' or so they would have you believe.....and when he defends the Trump presidency it can only mean one thing--he's an action hero lawyer standing up for truth, justice and the American way.
And the truth is he is not left and he never has been, he's not an upstanding legal mind and the truth also is there are several girls on that Island in the Caribbean who have implicated Dershowitz as a sexual abuser and a partaker in the criminality that went on there.
....and the deal that Alan Dershowitz helped negotiate with Acosta back in 2008 to quiet down this scandal and to keep Epstein out of prison is of very questionable legality which is why Acosta went in front of the cameras yesterday and why the Southern District of New York prosecutors are reopening the case....and if anyone would have known how shitty that deal in 2008 was in terms of meting out justice or in terms of legality that person would have been Dershowitz yet he went ahead and did it anyway and not just to protect Epstein and by extension other elites that might have been swept up in this shitshow but first and foremost to protect himself---and now that the lid is threatening to blow off we see him for what he is. So so much for his legal knowledge and so much for his moral integrity. He's a shitbird plain and simple.
>10 barney67: Barney, I think what I am implying in my #9 is far worse than calling you an unimpressive reader or speculating that you would jump up and down at a rally at which Trump engages in ugly sexist rhetoric. But you are right that Iriley's post should be flagged and I am flagging it--not for the bit about your reputation as regards your reading, as I concur on that point, and examples spring to mind that are most KINDLY explained by your not being a careful reader.
And 12 and 13.
You can't attack individuals. You can criticize their posts, their words, and opinions. What they write. That is the rule which we are supposed to follow.
You can say "This is wrong, and here's why"
You can't say "You are a hypocrite, racist, sexist, idiot, jerk, a bad reader, a person who gets hysterical jumping and down, a person who takes Dershowitz as gospel." You can't make it personal.
>15 barney67: gosh Barney, I said I flagged it, it meaning 8. You're getting hysterical. One can almost sense an up and down of jumping, which would make reading difficult.
You'd have a hard time finding 9 officially flaggable, but I do mean to say that your leap to accuse news of pedophilia as being tainted by leftism is extremely disturbing and indicates something bad that I haven't the means to identify, something like knee-jerkism to the point of amorality, for instance. That might be true of you. At any rate, a story about a rich pedophile that seems to be accurate does not seem to bother you. I don't think you approve of pedophilia, so you might want to re-think the way your posts come across.
>16 RickHarsch: I've had you blocked for I don't know how long. Guess why. I give people a chance by unblocking, but more often than not they blow it again.
You can criticize posts. You can't criticize people, as you have done in 9 and 16. Everyone here knows the rules, but not everyone follows them.
Gosh Barney, is there no grace period? No warning? No opportunities for rehabilitation?
By the way, in post 16 I do not criticize you, rather I point out how what you write could be construed.
Out goes Acosta--resigns pretty much in disgrace--not much of a story, huh? Trump will find some other dick to replace him. Should just leave it vacant. The Labor Secretary is always anti-union anyway--his job is to keep the minimum wage as low as possible.
>19 RickHarsch: So you think saying "You're getting hysterical" isn't a criticism of me? It doesn't say "your post is hysterical" or "your opinion is wrong". It's talking about me, not my post. That's a violation.
Your post says "knee-jerkism to the point of amorality, for instance. That might be true of you". That's personal. "You" refers to me. It's about me. It doesn't say "That might be true of your post" or "what your wrote on Thursday".
"At any rate, a story about a rich pedophile that seems to be accurate does not seem to bother you."
It doesn't? That's a dumb thing to say.
You see the difference? I said what you wrote is dumb. You said "doesn't seem to bother you". You. That is to say, me. A criticism of me. Not my post.
If politics weren't taken personally by people on the left, this problem might not exist. But lefties make it personal about the president like they make it personal about me.
For what it's worth, in fact, I am a close reader, a very close reader, with jobs in editing, references, and letters after my name to verify that claim, since that's what seems to count these days as proof. But I doubt that will persuade anyone here. It will continue to be, "He agrees with Trump about subject X and therefore he is evil and therefore we can treat him however we want while still claiming to be decent, tolerant, compassionate, open-minded people".
Trump, Putin and Murdoch (the Aussie who owns FOX News) are three billionaires hell bent on destroying our Founder's America for their own selfish reasons ($$$$$ and empire building).
The really clever people can insult without breaking the rules. It's all part of being a tolerant, compassionate Democrat.
>24 barney67: Hey Barnery, that was clever. I feel insulted and you didn't break the rules.
Well, looks like things are about to get even more interesting.
Likely within days, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will release almost 2,000 pages of documents that could reveal sexual abuse by “numerous prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known prime minister, and other world leaders,” according to the three-judge panel's ruling. The documents were filed during a civil defamation lawsuit brought by Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre, a former Mar-a-Lago locker-room attendant, against Epstein’s former girlfriend and alleged madam, Ghislaine Maxwell. “Nobody who was around Epstein a lot is going to have an easy time now. It’s all going to come out,” said Giuffre’s lawyer David Boies. Another person involved with litigation against Epstein told me: “It’s going to be staggering, the amount of names. It’s going to be contagion numbers.”
Come to think of it: plenty of people who wouldn't mind a war breaking out right about now.
eta Also worth a read, an interview with Nick Bryant of The Franklin Scandal
Nice to see him getting the time of day.
#27--hopefully everything comes out and whoever gets torched by this most likely will deserve it.
I've looked through the names in his Black Book--some are familiar--most are not. And I don't automatically jump to the conclusion that just because a name is in it that that person is a predator. I'm no fan of Michael Bloomberg's for instance but I can understand why his name might be among those as Epstein was a NYC resident at the time of this book of his and Bloomberg was the Mayor of NYC. Of course Bloomberg could still be but there is a plausible reason why he wouldn't.
People who have flown or partied with him--those are the ones who should be of the most interest. And IMO there shouldn't be any mercy to the guilty--these crimes are the kind that quite often destroy lives.
d. trump and b. clinton both have probably had sexual relations with underage girls, if not elsewhere then at some of Epstein's sex parties.
I wonder if all that will come out? It would be mind-blowing and pants-shitting revelations indeed if Epstein had hidden cameras and we could all have video and audio conformation of the criminal behavior.
#29--I would think so--Clinton has frequently flown with Epstein--he's on all kinds of plane manifests--been seen on Little St. James Island by at least one of the women who to be fair also said she didn't see him having sex with anyone....though I don't think there was ever any other purpose for this Island once Epstein took ownership than we already know. It's damning to have been there. WJC also has over 20 contact numbers in Epstein's black book not to mention that his former adviser Doug Band--who formerly worked as a liaison (or set up guy) for him has a bunch as well. That said Bill is already out front denying that he's ever been to the Island or taken any trip without secret service or others with him.
Numerous contacts for Donald as well--and FWIW Clinton's name isn't circled--Trump's is and the Epstein staffer who stole and tried to sell the book supposedly circled the names of those he thought the legal authorities should focus their attention the most on. Alan Dershowitz is another circled name. We also have video of Trump and Epstein partying together--they both have homes in close proximity in Palm Beach Florida. And then there has been plenty of smoke and fire out of Donald's past as well as Clinton.
If you ever fly to St. Thomas and sit in a window seat on the left side you'll have a perfect view of the island on the approach to the runway.
Just to state my bonafides I am as far from being a conspiracy nut as a person can be. E.g., I am one of the minority of people who is on board with LHO being the "lone nut" assassin of JFK, lol.
But the cover up of b. clinton and d. trump regarding their "personal" sex lives is real and on-going. On my most perverted day I never even dreamed of doing what those two satyromaniac sociopaths have repeatedly done. The rape of underage girls as a preferred lifestyle? - evil, not to mention low class.
As an aside, HRC has been totally aware of bill's filthy proclivities all along. Should she be given a round of applause for staying with him and avoiding breaking the bonds of marriage, as preferred by catholic christianity forever? I say no. She obviously stayed with him for the hope of ultimate political power and the money it brings. (This is the reason so many people refused to vote for her and voted for the obviously crass but mainly unknown trump, or for a third party, and just didn't vote, i.e., her slimy amoral greediness is what ultimately gave us trump.)
> 32, 33
As Rachel Maddow is forever intoning "Watch this space."
One day trump will not be POTUS. IF - and I say IF - a democrat is elected in 2020 then there is a very good chance trump will be gone after hammer and tongs and could very well die in jail. This is far from impossible - we can debate the probability or plausibility. In any event I have every hope that my dreams will finally, one day, come true.
Arrest the prostitute, not the john (1985).
Reasonable people can disagree about whether the age of consent should be as low as 14 (1997).
Fifteen was a reasonable age of consent, no matter how old the partner was (1997).
Two fifteen year olds is one thing, but WOW!
Dershowitz Responds After 1997 ‘Statutory Rape Is an Outdated Concept’ Op-Ed Resurfaces
Matt Naham | July 29th, 2019
...Dershowitz has not shied away from provocative ideas about sex and the law. In a 1997 op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, he argued against statutory-rape laws, writing, “There must be criminal sanctions against sex with very young children, but it is doubtful whether such sanctions should apply to teenagers above the age of puberty, since voluntary sex is so common in their age group.” He suggested that fifteen was a reasonable age of consent, no matter how old the partner was. He has also argued against punishing men who hire prostitutes. In a 1985 article, in the Gainesville Sun, Dershowitz proposed that a john “who occasionally seeks to taste the forbidden fruit of sex for hire” should not be arrested. The nonprofit executive recalled his discussing the idea in class: “He said, ‘Prostitutes know what they’re doing—they should be prosecuted. But you shouldn’t ruin the john’s life over that.’ If I had raised my hand to challenge that, I would have been singling myself out as—God forbid—a feminist.”...
...allegations made by Virginia (Roberts) Giuffre that Dershowitz knew about and participated in Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s alleged child sex-trafficking operation. Dershowitz was on the team of all-star lawyers who were able to secure an extraordinary non-prosecution agreement for Esptein in Florida more than a decade ago. Giuffre also claimed that Dershowitz had sex with her while she was a minor and working for Epstein. Dershowitz has repeatedly and emphatically denied this, saying he’s never met Giuffre.
...Dershowitz, it has been noted, once admitted to getting a massage at an Epstein residence, but said the woman was an “old, old Russian” and that he kept his underwear on. He also said he did not see young women/young girls there.
> 36 "...Dershowitz .....once admitted to getting a massage at an Epstein residence, but said the woman was an 'old, old Russian'..."
He's attempting to present a visual of an Ayn Rand doppelgänger but I for one am not buying such a claim of masochism's reductio ad absurdum.
Epstein dead today of an apparent suicide.
FWIW I've wondered for a while whether he was a CIA asset. His back story about how he became wealthy is a real murky one. With his connections to and/or leverage over many powerful and major political figures and that he was already supposedly on suicide watch this kind of smells to me of a murder made to look like a suicide. At least some of those under scrutiny are thinking maybe they're going to crawl out from under their rock. So there was reason and real motivation for a lot of these people in the spotlight to want him dead. His death would be necessary to contain the damage he might cause to them.
So his continuing to breathe air was inconvenient....and he was probably going to die soon anyway. If and when convicted he would have had to be isolated. He would not have been a candidate for a country club prison and he could not have survived in the general population of any max security.
We do have a few more names including former Dem. Gov. Bill Richardson and former Dem. Sen. George Mitchell implicated in his sex trafficking as well as others such as Alan Dershowitz.
a murder made to look like a suicide.
Totally my bet as well. No unspeakable slimeball who thinks his genes so fucking precious he actually plans his very own stud farm with HUNDREDS of women--so as to IMPROVE the human race!!!--is ever going to volunteer to die.
#40--it's important that they continue to pursue this and my fear is it will die now. It does not make me happy by the way that George Mitchell is now implicated in this--he helped broker the Northern Ireland peace agreement but it is what it is and if it proves to be true and his name and reputation is ruined or if he were to go to prison he brought it on himself then. Richardson surprises me less--he and the previous New Mexico governor had already mentioned and Epstein having a ranch in New Mexico--obviously they were running some kind of cover for him.
.....and this does not have a good smell to it. That a guy supposedly on suicide watch who is in the news and who has literally damaging information on a who's who of some of the most important people on the planet and is the biggest potential witness to what might be the crime so far of this century is not being watched closely enough?--and that he has the means to hang himself in his prison cell after an already failed attempt? I don't think so. There should have been eyes on him all the time. Murder and cover up is more likely to me. Hopefully SDNY doesn't back off.
Absolutely. You don't put a prisoner of that calibre on suicide watch and then blink.
You can't make this this up either. I had to laugh out loud.
Scarborough Thinks Something ‘Russian’ Is Going On With Epstein’s Death
Bernhard's take (including some useful links):
Only thing that surprises me is that it took so long. Of course, these things have to be arranged, I suppose.
I think the truth will come out in the wash. Just to be different I will predict his death will be established as suicide beyond a reasonable doubt.
Those determined to kill themselves can rarely if even be stopped. One of the talking heads analyzing this case on a news show this morning mentioned the case of a some other notorious felon who was in an Arizona maximum security prison under suicide watch. He committed suicide by stuffing his sock down his windpipe. Death results in only three or four minutes - under suicide watch a prisoner is only checked, at best, every 15 minutes.
If I were a conspiracy nut I would just assume that trump or B. Clinton - or the Star Chamber they head up - had J.E. whacked. But I tend toward the sane end of the spectrum so I will let suicide be the default until I actually
hear of facts indicating the contrary.
Just one of the quotes--Bob Hood--former warden at the Florence Colorado Supermax prison--'Under the circumstances, I would have had a staff member there or have a camera on him 24/7 while he was in my custody, purely to cover my butt. I know that sounds tacky, but this is not your average inmate'.
He was taken off suicide watch according to this. The decision for that would 'normally' have had to come from the prison's suicide prevention program coordinator and then been approved by the warden. If those two actually did decide and approve the least they can expect out of this is termination--they're done. Read the Hood quote again.
As for the swallowing socks thing--inmates under suicide watch get a one piece tear resistant smock. You don't have to give them socks. You have an important prisoner like that you have a guard on him all the time--or a camera in a cell and a guard nearby. It's not fucking difficult.
And you don't get be a warden in a federal prison if you're not a professional. This isn't some private for profit prison where you put your dipshit second cousin in charge just to give him a job.
From the Wikipedia entry for the Metropolitan Correctional Center--'Inmates in the 10-South wing are locked inside single man cells 23 hours a day with lights and CCTV's on at all times'. It goes on to say that inmates in that prison block can only be fed by white shirts-->Sergeants or Lieutenants.
So this facility is set up to handle a guy like Epstein. To keep a close watch on him at all times.
#48--he was a dead man the moment he was arrested. Even if a lot of the the previous adjudicated and sealed court case comes out and more names are named. His death is to contain more from coming out and he won't be making any deals and let's wait and see if this Ghislaine Maxwell is the next suicide or meets with an untimely accident.
If my parents had named me Ghislaine I would consider that reason enough to commit suicide.
>50 JGL53: Woops. I made the wrong assumption about that G between the J and L.
Still breathing because my middle name is "Garon".
According to ancestrydotcom "Garon" means "ready", or "rock" or "stone" - all this being a gloss on the (more so biological) general theme of my astrology signs - Taurus (the bull) in western astrology and "ox" in Chinese.
Just a reminder as some people forget - a full grown water buffalo is more than a match for a full grown lion (i.e., teeth and claws can only get you so far, then superior muscle power will crush you - metaphorically-speaking, of course.)
So - to be forewarned is to be forearmed.
Indeed. The buffalo is considered one of the most dangerous animals in Africa.
I found this:
Anycase I believe Epstein was a US Intelligence asset and Goodman makes the case here and there was no way he was going to be allowed to live and have his brain picked by prosecutors if he was. Meanwhile Ms. Maxwell his partner in crime has pulled a disappearing act. Don't be surprised if she never reappears.....or shows up dead. Funny shit happened to her Dad too.
.......and keep in mind that the CIA has a very dark and tangled history that includes murder and assassination--overthrowing governments, running drugs and guns and any of number of banking frauds and money laundering schemes to hide their ill gotten gains, they've experimented in mind control on unsuspecting people. A bit of prostituting of underage children and teens and having the goods on powerful and influential people is not something I think would be below them. No one knows where this high school math teacher got the wherewithal to buy the most expensive residence in NYC or a couple Caribbean Islands. Hedge fund guy?--no real evidence of that either. So.......
>55 lriley: Last link is broken. Here: https://thegrayzone.com/2019/08/11/jeffrey-epsteins-death-deepens-multiple-linge...
#56--thanks david--I tried to link the youtube of that earlier but I messed it up somehow. Saves me the trouble of messing it up again.
What I think we're looking at in the earlier trial of Espstein is Acosta being told by someone way up the food chain to dial his prosecution back which he dutifully did. I remember reading this bit from a DEA guy that almost every time he had a drug kingpin lined up for arrest it would turn out that his guy was already an asset of the US Govt. and he'd be left with going after the lower hanging fruit while his main target walked away.
The autopsy of Epstein has found several broken bones in his neck which is consistent both with his hanging himself or being strangled by someone else. It's interesting as well that I've heard stories about the guards--that the one who was actually a guard had been overworked and overworked some more and the other wasn't a guard at all. The other thing is they both may have fallen asleep (?) during their shift. From overwork? Being drugged? It seems someone should check the coffee machine--both should have blood tests. In any case the scapegoats shouldn't be just from the Metropolitan Correctional Center---there needs to be some movement up the foodchain. Ultimately the Attorney General of the United States is the one responsible for the Bureau or Prisons and the one who should take responsibility when shit happens. And the investigations into the other actors like Ms. Maxwell and Mr. Wexner and people in Epstein's black book of names should continue on. Donald Trump is in that book and so is Bill Clinton. If someone doesn't have a very good explanation for why they're in that book they should be investigated and if need be prosecuted. If you've been to visit Epstein's Caribbean Island or his ranch in New Mexico you're probably a pedophile. I don't know what other explanation there is for being at either. It seems pretty clear what those places were about.
This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.