Jeffrey Epstein Arrest

[Arturo Bandini]

Two guys falling asleep at the same time ?

That remembers me that song of the Ramones.

[jj22]

Still awaiting an explanation as to why Americans and the media is all in on the Clintons murdered him when Trump was equally close to the guy.

But that is American politics for you. Americans focus on Clinton conspiracy to all but determine he was murdered by them and believe the fake news that Trump didn't know the guy (ignoring the equal number of pics and even a video of them discussing girls).

I'll say it again, it was Trumps DOJ, Barr's failure and no one should believe they helped Clinton murder this guy. Which is the snake oil they are trying to sell us. If they want to point to a coverup, then the arrow points to Trump given it fell under his watch, his relationship with the guy was equal to Clintons, and there's no reason to think that his Administration (DOJ, Barr) would do all that to help a Clinton murder this guy.

Sometimes all it takes is common sense, but common sense is missing in todays Politics.

But carry on trying to sell me that the Trump Administration failed to secure this high profile prisoner all to assist the Clintons in murder.

[GMDino]

(08-14-2019, 07:53 AM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: Two guys falling asleep at the same time ?

That remembers me that song of the Ramones.

I think this incident will highlight other problems within the penal system.

Inability to keep workers might be a pay or management problem.  Low unemployment means more competition for good workers.  And if you can make $11.00 an hour watching prisoners or stocking shelves at walmart which would you do just to have a job?

People falling asleep on their watch probably happens more than we want to know but two get caught in a high profile case and NOW it will be a huge problem.

Lot's of blame to go around here.

[Au165]

Inmates who would benefit by offering up information for better conditions, time off, etc. didn't hear anything coming from his cell. Never underestimate the incompetence (guards off sleeping) of people when looking at likely reasons for things to happen. Also, the camera system in the hallway was working well enough to prove they didn't make their rounds as they were supposed to. Which probably means it worked well enough to prove no one else entered the cell.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-13-2019, 05:51 PM)Dill Wrote: You may be right about that.

I am right. But, it's nice to see you acknowledge it. 

(08-13-2019, 05:51 PM)Dill Wrote: Some people still don't believe the Clintons killed Vince Foster or Obama was born in Kenya because Dems say you can't without proof.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah, the old whataboutism defense. Good to see you're not above using it. 

Seriously, though, I do acknowledge that both sides are capable of believing things without evidence to people they dislike. It's just the Dems are guilty more recently.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-13-2019, 08:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: Absolutely agree it's both parties and I'm firmly on the record that EVERYONE who is dirty should go down.  Just pointing out that the first one wasn't real.  There are plenty of doctored ones of DJT too. So finding one quickly didn't make it real.

Who cares if its real? Dude said he couldn't find any after hours of searching. I found 2 in 5 seconds. One was fake, so what. The other one isn't. And I still found both in literally 5 seconds. There were more to choose from. I just grabbed 2 because I'm at work and I don't want to see Epstein's face longer than I have to.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-14-2019, 09:26 AM)jj22 Wrote: Still awaiting an explanation as to why Americans and the media is all in on the Clintons murdered him when Trump was equally close to the guy.

Seriously? You need this explained to you? The Clintons have previously been accused of murdering other people (some who were suicides, or should I say "suicided") that could cause them problems politically, financially, legally, etc.  Epstein's just another name on the list.

Not saying I believe it, but it's understandable why the Clintons would be the focus over Trump.

[GMDino]

(08-14-2019, 12:27 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Who cares if its real? Dude said he couldn't find any after hours of searching. I found 2 in 5 seconds. One was fake, so what. The other one isn't. And I still found both in literally 5 seconds. There were more to choose from. I just grabbed 2 because I'm at work and I don't want to see Epstein's face longer than I have to.

The reason the fake one is important is twofold.

1) We have a POTUS that rails about "fake news" all the time.  To provide "fake news" against Clinton should be railed against also.

2) No one has denied that Clinton was a frequent flyer with Epstein.  There is no NEED for fake photos.  They only dilute the actual, real pictures of them together by sliding into the conspiracy side of things.

I get you were just trying to prove JJ wrong.  No problem.  But I was just pointing out that one of them (first one I found too) is fake. 

To a deeper point I don't need a picture (or in Trump's case a video) of them together.  I need some proof they did something disgusting, dirty, illegal.  Without that it is all accusations.  And it should not matter which political side the accused are on.  If they are guilty then get them off the streets.

[jj22]

(08-14-2019, 12:32 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Seriously? You need this explained to you? The Clintons have previously been accused of murdering other people (some who were suicides, or should I say "suicided") that could cause them problems politically, financially, legally, etc.  Epstein's just another name on the list.

Not saying I believe it, but it's understandable why the Clintons would be the focus over Trump.

Yes conservative media has been painting the Clintons as the biggest mass murdering couple in American history for decades now. It's been their favorite thing to promote against them since the 1960's. Bonnie and Clyde has nothing on them if you let them tell it.

That doesn't make it all the less outrageous to clear minded people who just don't get into all the Clinton conspiracies that tend to excite the Republican base.

I think it's lame and old but it works as many Americans are gullible to the Clinton conspiracies for whatever reasons.

I don't think they are serial mass murderers as accused (you almost have to chuckle at everyone thinking that), but as we can see majority of Americans do so the constant fake news attacks painting them as such over the course of decades has worked.

So now that it's been established that he was victim number 68 (cause we know how Old Bill operates, and there won't be no 69). Now we need to focus on why the Trump Administration, Barr, and the DOJ assisted them? And what they had to gain by covering it up and setting it up so that they can get to him. That's what the investigation hopefully gets to the bottom of.

Either way Trump and his Administration are accomplices and in the court of law, that makes them equally responsible.

[Dill]

(08-14-2019, 12:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah, the old whataboutism defense. Good to see you're not above using it. 

Seriously, though, I do acknowledge that both sides are capable of believing things without evidence to people they dislike. It's just the Dems are guilty more recently.

That's not whataboutism unless this is whataboutism:

"True, when it's a Democrat that's accused of something. When Republicans are accused, then who cares what the evidence is"

The issue is not really about whether "both sides" believe things without evidence.

Rather, the issue Trump supporters raise is NOT believing WITH evidence, not rumors, but very public evidence provided by Trump himself.

Both sides aren't doing that. Any more than both sides are manufacturing murder conspiracies about the other side's candidates.

While I am on the subject, manufactured murder conspiracies don't become "evidence" no matter how long or how often they are repeated.

When Dems (and reasonable Republicans) dismiss murder rumors for LACK of evidence, that does not illustrate a double standard.

Believing Clinton murder rumors without evidence is the flipside of disbelieving Trump behavior WITH evidence.

[BakertheBeast]

(08-14-2019, 12:27 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Who cares if its real? Dude said he couldn't find any after hours of searching. I found 2 in 5 seconds. One was fake, so what. The other one isn't. And I still found both in literally 5 seconds. There were more to choose from. I just grabbed 2 because I'm at work and I don't want to see Epstein's face longer than I have to.

Calm done Hose. My bad.. I should of specified non-photoshope pics. Anyway, can you find me a video like this one with Clinton partying and giggling with Epstein?

I looked all over and couldn't find any. Please, only real video's. I can complete my meme if this video exist. Thanks for the help!

[*PhilHos*]

(08-14-2019, 03:42 PM)Dill Wrote: That's not whataboutism unless this is whataboutism:

"True, when it's a Democrat that's accused of something. When Republicans are accused, then who cares what the evidence is"

The issue is not really about whether "both sides" believe things without evidence.

Rather, the issue Trump supporters raise is NOT believing WITH evidence, not rumors, but very public evidence provided by Trump himself.

Both sides aren't doing that. Any more than both sides are manufacturing murder conspiracies about the other side's candidates.

While I am on the subject, manufactured murder conspiracies don't become "evidence" no matter how long or how often they are repeated.

When Dems (and reasonable Republicans) dismiss murder rumors for LACK of evidence, that does not illustrate a double standard.

Believing Clinton murder rumors without evidence is the flipside of disbelieving Trump behavior WITH evidence.

Please, spare me. I see the same thing from both Democrats and Republicans. Why you refuse to acknowledge this, I don't know.

[*PhilHos*]

(08-15-2019, 06:04 AM)BakertheBeast Wrote: Calm done Hose. My bad.. I should of specified non-photoshope pics. Anyway, can you find me a video like this one with Clinton partying and giggling with Epstein?

I looked all over and couldn't find any. Please, only real video's. I can complete my meme if this video exist. Thanks for the help!

One was not photoshopped. There was another that wasn't.

As to your video search, get off your lazy ass and do it yourself. Maybe if you spend more than 4 seconds looking, you might actually find something. Here's an idea: try Hillary's private server ... oh wait, nevermind. She erased everything off it. So nothing to find there.

[jj22]

(08-15-2019, 06:04 AM)BakertheBeast Wrote: Calm done Hose. My bad.. I should of specified non-photoshope pics. Anyway, can you find me a video like this one with Clinton partying and giggling with Epstein?

I looked all over and couldn't find any. Please, only real video's. I can complete my meme if this video exist. Thanks for the help!

Exactly. You won't find videos of Clinton discussing girls with him. His relationship with Trump was much more personal. He was basically a wingman. Therefore, using common sense. Barr, DOJ, and Trump Administration failure doesn't point to a Clinton coverup, it points to a Trump  cover up if they want to play the conspiracy theory game.

[Dill]

(08-15-2019, 12:54 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Please, spare me. I see the same thing from both Democrats and Republicans. Why you refuse to acknowledge this, I don't know.

You know very well why I don't acknowledge "both sides do it." 

You KNOW that no currently living Democratic leader spouts the extreme misogynistic, racist, and xenophonic rhetoric that Trump does--daily and publicly. You would have to go back to Wilson, Andrew Johnson, or Andrew Jackson for a minimal comparison. 

And you KNOW that Trump supporters/defenders deny that his behavior is the reason people "hate" him. They make the effect the cause by claiming Trump hate drives criticism of his bad behavior, not his bad behavior the criticism.  And Dem voters will not continue to support a candidate, even if he shoots someone in broad daylight on 5th Ave.

So asserting "both sides do it" is a false equivalence based on no evidence, and asserting that Trump's behavior is not the real cause of Trump hate just denies the public evidence of his behavior--in part minimizing or normalizing it.  (Not all THAT bad to call women "dogs" or mock disabilities.)

As I've said before, all efforts to normalize Trump's behavior, to pretend others are just as bad and otherwise deny what the evidence shows, must undermine norms of evidence-based rationality just as his daily nasty tweets undermine norms of public decency.  Such efforts must go around rational argument to rely on false equivalence, on rejection of logical consistency, and on ad hominem. They must gaslight and deflect, flip the script by claiming the other side is really doing all that.

The claim both sides do it--fair enough 25 years ago-- is now just part of this fog, to be always claimed but never demonstrated.

I am not going to "spare you" or anyone from this conclusion.

PS I am not saying no one can make a case for Trump; one certainly can argue that he cut taxes for his donors and appointed the judges conservatives wanted.  I'm just saying no Democratic leader exhibits the same level of degraded behavior; and if one did, Democrat voters would not accept that level of degraded behavior.  Counter examples would disprove this.  But there are none. 

[*PhilHos*]

(08-15-2019, 05:56 PM)Dill Wrote: You know very well why I don't acknowledge "both sides do it." 

Yes I do: you cannot make any negative comments towards Democrats or liberals. You ignore anytime a Democrat or liberal does anything remotely negative/racist/sexist/etc with the exception of those times when you defend said Democrat or liberal.
Make all the rationalizations you want, you're only deluding yourself and those poor fools who believe anything negative towards Trump and Republicans.

[Dill]

(08-15-2019, 06:47 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Yes I do: you cannot make any negative comments towards Democrats or liberals. You ignore anytime a Democrat or liberal does anything remotely negative/racist/sexist/etc with the exception of those times when you defend said Democrat or liberal.
Make all the rationalizations you want, you're only deluding yourself and those poor fools who believe anything negative towards Trump and Republicans.

This, at least, makes clear your standard. You are not looking at what Trump does, but at what people "believe."  And at that level you find an unequal distribution.

As if negative comments about Dems and Trump, to be "fair," should be balanced equally between them, regardless the difference in quality, quantity and consequence.

But the central problem in the US today is not whether "fools believe ANYTHING negative towards Trump," but that the great bulk of that negative IS TRUE and people support him anyway. That can't be fixed by occasionally criticizing Hillary too.

I "ignore" when Biden confusedly distinguishes white kids from "poor kids" because that kind of gaff is qualitatively different from deliberately calling Mexicans "rapists," or urging Israel to ban US Congresswomen from visiting, or warning Americans repeatedly of an "invasion" of brown people heading for our borders, or claiming 3-5 million voted illegally in the last election. That's not just stuff people "believe" Trump did. He did it.

If Elizabeth Warren mocks a disabled person, you can be sure I will "make a negative comment," not clap and cheer and give her my vote.  If Harris urges a crowd to chant "Send them back" I will certainly criticize that, not join it. 

Until then, to equate occasional "remotely negative/racist/sexist" comments of occasional Democrats with Trump's daily fare of despicable inciting tweets just signals broken judgment. 

[BakertheBeast]

(08-15-2019, 12:59 PM)PhilHos Wrote: One was not photoshopped. There was another that wasn't.

As to your video search, get off your lazy ass and do it yourself. Maybe if you spend more than 4 seconds looking, you might actually find something. Here's an idea: try Hillary's private server ... oh wait, nevermind. She erased everything off it. So nothing to find there.

Phyllis, its clear you are in an agitated state which is understandable for a Trumplican thses days. No need for name calling. No video huh? You can't find one either huh. Just say so. I assuming cause none exist. When you were called out on it you went with the old right wing comeback, Hillary, Ohhhhh good one. From what I read, Epstein was a big donor of Clintons and they met a number of times. Clinton had a reason to associate with Epstein (money). Trumps reason (from the video's) was young girls. Who had a better motive to want Epstein dead?

[*bfine32*]

[GMDino]

TRUMP: "I don't know Prince Andrew, but it's a tough story. It's a very tough story. I don't know him, no."

FOX NEWS: Immediately cuts to a photo of Prince Andrew, Melania, and Trump hanging out together at Mar-a-Lago during a party that Jeffrey Epstein also attended. pic.twitter.com/zBIfDBSFXN

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 3, 2019