Here is a quote from President Trump told to New York Magazine in 2002:
"I've known Jeff for 15 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."
That has really got to make you wonder. Epstein has connections to the Clintons as well.
It just really makes you wonder, regardless of politics, if rich, powerful people just do whatever they want to whomever they want whenever they want.
For a time. Epstein appears to have run out of luck.
Epstein, a billionaire friend of Trump, got away with what was called "the deal of the century" for sex crimes with dozens of minors.
The same fairly unimportant Florida prosecutor who gave Trump's friend a small slap on the wrist then skyrockets into the Trump Cabinet.
It makes one wonder how much money Epstein gave (if any) to the Trump campaign. It also makes one wonder if the prosecutor went easy on Epstein because someone mentioned a Cabinet appointment to him.
But I'm sure it's all just a coincidence.
Could be (coincidence). Or not - Washington is built on favors and back scratching. If not coincidence it certainly won't be the first time political power has negated a fair court sentence!
And there's the party at Mar a Lago which included 28 young women flown in to entertain Trump and Epstein.....the only males in attendance.
Hadn't heard about that one, so you got me curious. Even the conservative Business Insider has an article about it.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-e … men-2019-7
I guess all of that money doesn't buy happiness.
That's the story, but it wouldn't faze Trump supporters even if we had pics of him and a Lolita in the hot tub.
Why would it matter more to them than it did to Clinton supporters?
They are all dirty. If you accept the dirt on some, don't be surprised if some ignore the dirt on others.
Thanks, you proved my point. I didn't realize Bill was photographed with an underaged girl.
We're talking about minors here. Children.
He'll do a lot more than rot in jail depending on where he is sent, if you know what I mean. I have heard that child molesters aren't treated well in prison.
And they shouldn't be. It's funny because the last time this was news, the left wasn't interested. I guess since he's a democratic fund raiser.
Find a way to bring Trump up and all of a sudden people who weren't shocked and outraged before jump on board.
I hope you mean that and aren't being sarcastic. I have as little respect for Bill Clinton's zipper as I do for Donald Trump's zipper.
If you know what I mean.
It wasn't sarcasm. I think you are genuine and hold everyone (not just politicians you don't like) to the same standard.
I also don't admire bill for his sexual exploits, but at least it wasn't with children.
Thanks, LTL. I try, despite my flaws.
Likewise, you have your own leanings, as I do, but I think you also try to hold everyone to the same standard.
Never you mind. It isn't directed at you. Pp works overtime to find fault in anything I say.
Do you think anyone who voted for Trump held him to the same standards as previous presidents? That was the source of my bemused surprise.
Many who voted for Trump were not willing to lower their standards enough to let Hillary take office.
The left conveniently omits the hard truth that they offered a candidate more unacceptable than the alternative.
" The left conveniently omits the hard truth that they offered a candidate more unacceptable than the alternative.
You know, why don't you have the balls to talk directly to me instead of attributing what I say to "the left"? "The left" isn't posting here. I am.
Unlike many on the left, I recognize only 2 genders; which prohibits me from having balls.
But, I've noticed I get banned if I speak directly to you. I'm a little leery of you and a possible penchant for reaching out to hub pages if you think it can get people you don't like banned.
Just as I thought. Using "the left" as a way to insult without taking responsibility. For the record, I have never reported you. I have hit the "Report" button one time and that was on a non-regular poster who was making threats. I have respect for those willing to stand by their views.
Insult? There's your problem. Expressing a view is not 'insulting'. You take things too negatively and personally, possibly?
Lol, you just said you do it to avoid being banned. And, I've been on these forums for over 10 years. I can take an insult. I'm asking you to have the courage to speak directly to me and stop attributing my personal statements to "the left." Obviously , you don't have to do it just because I asked.
Please tell me what standards Bill Clinton was held to.
Seriously. And the fact that Hillary tried to trash rape victims, to deflect criticism of Bill made her worse. Because she is a woman.
Trump has been accused of no worse than what Biden has been accused of, but Trump bad, Biden good, to democrats.
Sorry, I must strongly disagree.
Biden habitually hugs and pats women. He is old school. Granted, that kind of behavior is now considered inappropriate.
Trump has had numerous lawsuits and accusations of rape and sexual assault along with supporting witnesses for the accusers, most recently with Jean Carroll.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … ls/474726/
I went through the list. The only rape allegation is that really bizarre one we just heard of.
As a woman, my opinion is that if you are touched inappropriately, if you don't speak out in the moment, with a forceful statement making a man know he has acted inappropriately, you have little right to cry foul later and you put other women in jeopardyof being touched inappropriately.
Trump is an ass. Biden is an ass. The left deems one unfit to hold office the other is a darling of the left.
The right elected a sexual predator. Even after the Access Hollywood video showed what a creep he was, his voters didn't care. Even now after the porn star and playmate affairs are known, and his appointing Acosta--a criminal in his own right--to be Labor secretary.
"We only pick the best people."
Give us a viable alternative this time around.
It wouldn't make any difference. Trump fans love his dishonesty too much to opt for anyone else.
Ok. Then liberals are too far removed from observable reality to understand how ridiculous that sounds.
LOL. To not vote would have been one less vote against Hillary. I had the choice between a perv protector or a perv.
One is as bad as the other. The only thing that would satisfy that test was to not vote at all.
Well, that's progress. You acknowledge you willingly voted for a perv.
I've never said Trump wasn't, personally, a scuz bucket. As a matter of fact, I can think of many occasions I've spoken negatively against him, personally.
But, he never had the political baggage Hillary drug around and the democrats ignored.
So you did vote for the perv?
And do you consider Melania a perv protector as well?
Your line of questioning is ignorant and serves no purpose.
An ignorant question does not afford the respect of an answer.
Pretending it does is is just an extension of the ignorance started by the question.
No...you just didn't want to answer the query. Again, I don't blame you....
Wasn't it you who stated Hillary was a "perv protector"? The question I asked was If you considered Melania a perv protector as well?
You didn't want to answer either way....that's clear. If you want to refer to it as "an ignorant question" then I assume anyone can do the same re your queries.
Do you mean "liberals" or Randy? "Liberals" didn't say that.
Randy made a negative comment about what he calls 'Trump fans' I responded with a negative comment about liberals.
Did you miss that or are you just looking for something to, again, conplain about?
Randy's comment was not directed at any one person. Yours was in direct response to Randy's comment but, once again, you didn't.have the guts to say it directly to Randy, instead attributing it to "liberals."
"Then liberals are too far removed from observable reality to understand how ridiculous that sounds."
lol, neat trick you got going there.
"You can keep your doctor"
"I never touched that woman"
You forgot to add "The Benghazi was caused by a YouTube video."
I get disgusted reminding some that politicians can tell lies, it's not unique to any one politician. I must also say some lies are just not all that important. Let's say as losing one's doctor, talking a young woman into kinky sex in a closet, and yes lying to the American citizens on how four of our citizens died...
You do know why Obama didn't keep his word, but you still keep pretending it wasn't the right which prevented him from doing so. How many times do we have to confront you on this, Shar?
I'll give you five lies told by Trump for every one you name by Obama, but I seriously doubt you'll take the bet.
I tried to find an answer to your question about why Pres. Obama couldn't keep his word Randy, and I failed. I did come across one Politifacts article that noted the claim was made publicly 37 times by the president or his spokespeople. At least 7 of those declarations came after the law was passed.
How did the "Right" keep him from keeping his promise?
Politifacts didn't offer that explanation and rated his promise Pants on Fire! because he was aware it was wrong after the law was passed and still said it.
Not sure what you are even talking about? How can you defend Obama's out and out lie? Please educate me on how those on the "right" prevented Obama from keeping his "you can keep your doctor" statement? I will look forward to a legitimate resource that can support your theory that the right prevented him from keeping his healthcare promise.
Republicans had 16 to choose from for the nomination and all of us had several other options for the presidency. You chose him. Since you believe you made the right choice, you should proudly own it.
I'm not a Republican. I'm an independent. Your party gave us a crappy candidate. The Republican party gave us a less crappy candidate.
You do understand independents do still get to vote in the general election?
It was such a hard choice. I mean, on one hand, we had a man that we all knew his past. On the other hand, we had a woman we all knew her past, and it involved looking the way and staying married to a well-known preditor, of a young woman in the White House, and that frequently went on trips with a well known sexual predator. Being a woman, just don't care for a woman that puts up with that kind of kinky to pursue power. Something very wrong with that picture.
But you're okay with Melania escorting a known adulterer, a man who many women have accused of being assaulted by, and a man running around with porn stars and playmates he eventually paid to be silent.
What distinction do you draw between what Hillary did and what Melania did about their spouses affairs?
Seems to me, none of our claims in regards to Trump have been proven in any respect? Their word against his... This many women, why have none charged him? The Porn star charged him with slander, not rape. She lost that case and was penalized with trump's court costs. He has paid pros for their silence, and as I said denied each and every story these women have hit him with.
I must have missed something? Did Melania run for president? Got a bit of news for you, would not have voted for her either. Plus, Melania has not been in and out of the spotlight with backroom pay to play deals.
"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters." - - Donald Trump
I find it odd Carroll won't charge him. She could in the state of New York? Once again "A she said he said... I would put more credence in her story if she charged him. She appeared to be a crusader coming forward with her claim, nothing can stop a sex offender better than jail... Myself,I don't appreciate a story without an ending.
My issue is his behavior happened for many years and was ignored by Democrats, his wife, political donors. He couldn't even stop it in the White House. Democrats and the media continued to love him and ignore the facts.
Yes but remember the most important part. His name isn't Trump.
I'm confused. Isn't that how Republicans and other Trump supporters are with Trump? Do you have an issue with them (including yourself)?
BTW, I don't represent all Democrats, and I would never knowingly vote for a sexual predator.
They aren't. Such ilk are considered to be the bottom in prison. Such ilk are oftentimes targeted, even killed in prison.
Why should it did it bother you that Bill Clinton was a regular at Lolita island.
Should it bother you that multiple searches on Google and Bing show nothing about Clinton on "Lolita island"?
Unless someone can prove otherwise, the claim is no different than Hillary Clinton running a sex trafficking ring out of a New York pizza parlor.
A Trump supporter actually wrote a Hub about it.
Otherwise, Bill Clinton's libido deserves the same level of respect as Donald Trump's. But not Epstein.
Once again, your links have nothing to do with your comment.
You implied that Clinton went to "Lolita island" to rape underage girls.
Your links above refer only to Clinton flying on Epstein's jet, like plenty of other people. They have nothing to do with the island, rape and sex trafficking.
You do know the arrest of Epstein occurred in 2008. Think about the timeline. President Donald Trump didn't even announce he was going to run for office until 2015.
"Epstein’s arrest came amid increased #MeToo-era scrutiny of the 2008 non-prosecution agreement, which caused a furor in recent years as the details came to light, many of them exposed in a series of stories by The Miami Herald."
Trump announced long before 2015. He has been publicly running for President and raising money to run for decades.
https://www.tvguide.com/news/donald-tru … -timeline/
One of my points here is that I think that it's likely both the Clintons and Trump knew what was going on or, at least, certainly heard rumors. It's almost impossible to imagine they didn't. Think about that for a second. They didn't do anything. Instead, they actually befriended the guy.
My thoughts exactly. If you've ever seen the movie Hostile, it strikes a chord with this situation in a round-a-bout way. I think the power and riches go to the head and, after they've done about everything they can do...they've had all the coke, hookers, etc...that they can have, they turn to something like underage sex, or..in the case of Hostile, paying to torture random people pulled off the streets. Let's hope we don't truly have the latter going on as the rest is bad enough. I'm positive this type of attitude doesn't fit all the uber wealthy and powerful, though it's enough to make me steer clear from voting for any of the billionaires wanting to lead our country.
I feel like Dan Quayle, but we need to get back to family values. And, simply "getting back to God" isn't going to do it. We see what goes on at the highest levels of our religious institutions, televangelists, etc.,They never left God, according to them anyway,but we see the results, and that's what matters. And, let's not leave out the Iranians who got back to God with their 1979 revolution. We see how that worked out.
I agree with most of what you said.
“And, let's not leave out the Iranians who got back to God with their 1979 revolution. We see how that worked out.”
This is a somewhat simplistic view of a complicated topic. You would have to understand how the Muslim religion works to understand what happened in 1979 with the Shah of Iran and the Ayatollah Khomeini. There are differences between the Sunni and the Shia Muslim religion and their history that needs to also be understood. It is complicated.
Here is an interesting article about the three-tiered justice system in our country.
“We often think about a two-tiered justice system, one for the rich and powerful and another for the rest of us. But we’re seeing something different playing out in America: one justice system for the rich and powerful, one for social justice-protected classes, and another—the one that is supposed to exist for us all based on equal justice and the rule of law—for the rest of us.”
https://www.opslens.com/2018/05/we-woun … n-america/
I do know a bit about Islam, but I'll take your word that it's more complicated. I do know Iran is a religious-based government and it's not too good. We share the disdain for our "justice" system, but I don't agree with the point the article you linked is making. In fact, I think the left vs right thing is only serving to dampen the power of those of us who are already treated differently by the system. Divide and conquer. And, if people should be chanting "lock her up" in regards to Hillary, they should be doing it with Trump also. Not everything is about left vs right, but that's what the media wants cause that's what sells.
Again, I agree with much of what you've said.
I do believe we have a three-tiered justice system. Lets just say, if you or I were served with a subpoena from Congress and we destroyed 30,000 emails that were part of the subpoena and destroyed all the devices listed in the subpoena, we would be in jail. Yet, Hillary Clinton walks free. I don't understand how anyone can't be upset by such a thing. I could go on but I'll stop.
"The IG report gives the impression that the FBI treated Clinton and her coterie like royalty — or at least like personages worthy of endless deference. When Bleachbit software or hammers were used to destroy email evidence under congressional subpoena, the FBI treated it as a harmless error. The IG report “questioned whether the use of a subpoena or search warrant might have encouraged Clinton, her lawyers ... or others to search harder for the missing devices (containing email), or ensured that they were being honest that they could not find them.” Instead, FBI agents worked on “rapport-building” with Clinton aides."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ … 704890002/
I read Comey's "A Higher Loyalty." He goes out of his way how he tried to treat Clinton the same as any other defendant, as he did Martha Stewart. To me, just having to state how hard it was to treat them the same as "regular" defendants says something. No, we aren't entirely disagreeing at all. I just look at the Meuller Report and see the same type of special treatment given to Clinton. However, that may change when Trump is out of office. If so, this notion of liberals vs conservatives in the justice system may warrant that I look at it closer. Till then, I just see a bunch of well-connected rich people getting away with crimes.
This is an interesting article though.
"I just see a bunch of well-connected rich people getting away with crimes."
On this, we completely agree. I've seen a state senator's son out of a DUI charge with a phone call, a wealthy man's son caught dealing drugs given community service and the list goes on. So, yeah, wealth and standing do play a role in how the criminal justice system deals with you. That I do believe.
Prostitution has been around for thousands of years and it certainly not only the rich that support prostitution.
I won't get too outraged by this statement since I can't tell what specifically it's responding too, but it appears that you're saying that these underage girls were prostitutes or that it's okay to have sex with underage girls if you call them prostitutes.
This is an interesting comment because I believe in one of the cases against Epstein, some of the underage girls were actually called "prostitutes" even though that wasn't remotely correct in order to justify a more lenient sentence as though Epstein's abuse wasn't really abuse, just sex with prostitutes who happened to be underage.
I'm going to assume that you are not saying that a 15-year-old girl can be classified as a prostitute when she is forced to have sex with a millionaire against her will or that because a 15-year-old girl is tricked into giving a massage for money that makes her a prostitute or even that if a 15-year-old girl acts stupidly, agrees to give a massage in her underwear to some creepy guy, and then ends up being forced to have sex with him, that she deserves what she gets and might as well be called a prostitute.
Trump was not found on any of the Epstiens flight logs? Bill was found to have made many flights with Epstein, along with Kenvin Spacy. It would seem, Clinton, will or should be implicated along with Epstein?
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/07 … n-to-sweat
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/07/nyre … trump.html
https://moneymaven.io/mishtalk/economic … T8j--LwOw/
Here's a nice pic of Trump hanging out with his fellow pedophile Epstein. Oh wait, that's Clinton.
Are you the guy on Bill's left? Or with your back to the camera?
I'm the one that's not suffering from selective outrage.
Onus, I think perhaps you're confused about the definition of selective as I began this form stating that Epstein was connected to both Clinton and Trump.
And I will say again - I believe both of them knew about Epstein and what he was doing and both should be thrown in prison if that can be proven.
It seems the Democrat party has a history of protecting their perv donors.
“Since the woke-ty woke Democrats are now gung-ho on undoing special treatment of wealthy liberal sex creeps, perhaps they will soon be revisiting the matter of two of their other “faves,” Oregon real estate mogul and deep-pocketed left-wing White House donor Terry Bean and West Hollywood Clinton pal Ed Buck.”
Like Epstein, Bean also had a thing for young minors. In 2014, a grand jury charged him with horrifying sexual abuse allegations involving multiple victims – including a 15-year-old boy. After a sweeping investigation led by the Portland police department’s sex crime units and two county district attorney’s offices, authorities charged Bean with two felony counts of third-degree sodomy and one misdemeanor count of third-degree sex abuse. His 20-something boyfriend, Kiah Lawson, was indicted on third-degree sodomy and third-degree sexual abuse.
Bean wriggled out of prosecution by publicly dangling $220,000 as a cash “compromise” with the alleged victim, who then suddenly refused to testify against him. A judge in the county where the politically influential Bean family reigned promptly dismissed the charges. Case closed? Not so fast.
In January, government investigators filed new charges against Bean and Lawson after the alleged underage victim, now an adult, revealed that he had been ripped off by his attorney, who reportedly never delivered Bean’s payoff. The criminal trial is scheduled to begin in August. In May, a second alleged juvenile victim of Bean’s came forward with a civil lawsuit alleging the Dem donor sexually abused him three times when he was 17. The state Democratic Party and several federal officials who have received donations from Bean have declined to return the money.”
https://www.wnd.com/2019/07/epstein-bea … pl4LI2v.99
Do you think Acosta will return Epstein's money, Mike?
Do you know what a red herring is in a discussion?
Description: Attempting to redirect the argument to another issue to which the person doing the redirecting can better respond. While it is similar to the avoiding the issue fallacy, the red herring is a deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument.
Yes Mike, a red herring is when someone doesn't want to answer the question posed to him/her.
You need to read this.
"deliberate diversion of attention with the intention of trying to abandon the original argument."
Isn't that what you did instead answering the question?
No, this is an explanation of the reason you asked such a question.
And here is the actual affidavit of the underage rape victim that had to pull her suit due to threats by Trump supporters. But it also makes you wonder if there was more to it.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Do … 2Ep2qg3XnY
That is not an affidavit.
That is a lawsuit that was filed in 2016. It's only exhibits are signed affidavits by the plaintiff and a alleged witness. One interesting note, nothing states the case was submitted for criminal action. This is a civil lawsuit asking for a monetary reward. Should this have gone to court the fact the case was not turned over for criminal prosecution would be a major issue.
If this suit was to move forward, Epstien's lawyers and President Donald Trump's attorneys would be able to go through her life with a microscope.
Given that Trump has talked about grabbing women's genitalia without consequence and been known to walk into the dressing rooms of beauty contestants, it doesn't seem to far-fetched to think he could be involved in this. And given Bill Clinton's proclivities with interns, him too.
I believe there is much to this situation we don't know.
Lawsuits are not usually pulled because of harassment. They usually move forward unless there is an underlying reason. A criminal accusation should have been brought first and the authorities should have conducted an investigation. To be successful, that could probably be used as the basis for a civil lawsuit. Even if they were found innocent, a civil lawsuit could be successful.
I will admit, with such powerful people being accused, this type of criminal accusation would be a major undertaking.
I'm sure there is much to this we don't know.
Sure, there's much we don't know, but I'll say it again. I find it very hard to believe that Clinton and Trump didn't know what Epstein was doing or hadn't at least heard "rumors".
Do you need a 'witness' Crankilicious?
I agree with your thought. To think that either didn't know about Epstein's antics is hard to accept.
Actually, the link does provide the affidavit of the rape victim of Donald J. Trump and a second affidavit of a corroborating witness to that rape. And yet, his supporters are able to dismiss the fact that it's quite likely he is a child rapist.
This Epstein story gets more and more sickening by the hour.
I believe it will get even worse before it's over. I understand one of the victims was a 16 year old girl who worked as a spa attendant at Mar-a-Lago for a time.
Epstein should be put in jail & given THE MAXIMUM sentence possible. Also put Epstein within the general prison population. Ilk like him aren't liked by prisoners at all. In fact, in prison, such ilk will be TARGETS! Ilk like him are AT THE BOTTOM of the prison food chain!
It DOES. However, due to connections, it was smooth sailing for Epstein because of his sociopolitical connections. Similar ilk who didn't have sociopolitical connections would have been imprisoned w/o clemency. Epstein had smooth sailing because of his legal team.
“Jane Doe” aka “Katie Johnson” – 1994. Lawsuit filed June 2016, refiled October 2016 as reported by Buzzfeed and others, then dropped in November 2016.
Jane Doe is an unnamed plaintiff, who has also gone by “Katie Johnson” in legal papers. She claims she was repeatedly raped by Trump and Jeffery Epstein at Epstein’s New York City apartment in 1994, when she was 13 years old. A witness, also given a pseudonym — “Tiffany Doe” — said she recruited “Jane Doe” and others. Doe, using the name “Johnson,” gave an interview to the Daily Mail in which she said she did not know who Trump was at the time of the alleged attack but identified him later when she saw him on television. It is not known why she withdrew the lawsuit. She has not spoken publicly or withdrawn her rape allegation since then.
lhttps://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ … p-recapped
No telling how many of the victims were paid to stay quiet by Epstein and others. I wonder if Michael Cohen knows anything about this? It would seem to be right up his alley...
"It is not known why she withdrew the lawsuit. She has not spoken publicly or withdrawn her rape allegation since then."
All this tells me is she doesn't want her claim to be investigated. If something like this happens and a criminal investigation isn't conducted, BUT they go ahead and file a civil suit for a monetary reward, it makes it look very suspicious.
This means she's not been interviewed by detectives or had her claims validated by law enforcement. She just alleged this happened and files a civil suit for monetary award.
Does anyone but me find this behavior a bit suspicious? This plaintiff has never let her claim be investigated by law enforcement and validated. You have to wonder why.
Mike, I feel like you're a couple of steps from figuring this all out. Right now, you're siding with the rapists because the victims can't fully establish their cases. I completely understand why you would do that since that's how the law works. Just because somebody is accused doesn't mean they're guilty and we should not just generally believe accusations. Otherwise, our justice system would disintegrate.
However, I think we find in society, particularly when it comes to sex crimes - and you can go research this - white men side with other white men and it's primarily the reason that these cases don't get judged fairly and don't go through the system fairly.
To make matters worse, in this case, you have evidence of intimidation and witness tampering. Perhaps you think it is an easy thing, when you are raped, to move forward with the legal process despite being threatened and called a whore and exposing a very defining moment of your life to family and friends, but it is not. Victims often prefer to just try to move forward and not dwell.
Some of the girls in Epstein's case, blamed themselves and decided they were at fault. Combine this feeling and society's judgement of you with goons threatening you and it's not hard to understand why cases such as this did not move forward.
I disagree with you.
"Right now, you're siding with the rapists because the victims can't fully establish their cases."
The only side I'm taking is the effort to gather ALL the facts. That's it. There are no sides, there is only a desire to discover the truth based on facts and evidence.
"white men side with other white men and it's primarily the reason that these cases don't get judged fairly and don't go through the system fairly."
Again with the racial element. I don't view the world in terms of race. Yeah, I don't believe it. Please provide any proof of this if valid and substantiate proof exists.
"Victims often prefer to just try to move forward and not dwell."
So, we agree that rape victims don't often skip the criminal investigation and automatically file a civil lawsuit for monetary damages in cases of rape. I believe it you have what it takes to file a civil lawsuit, and submit yourself to the scrutiny of defense attorney, you probably would have no problem with a criminal investigation. A defense attorney would be ruthless in getting evidence to protect their client.
"Some of the girls in Epstein's case, blamed themselves and decided they were at fault. Combine this feeling and society's judgement of you with goons threatening you and it's not hard to understand why cases such as this did not move forward."
I agree. Yet, rape victims do face their attackers and put them in jail. They often also have quite a bit of support.
So, why avoid criminal prosecution and simply file a civil lawsuit for monetary compensation?
That is the sticking point for me.
It's hard to gather evidence when 15-year-old girls are being threatened by goons and feel as though it's their fault.
There's this thing called circumstantial evidence. In this case, there's clearly enough of it to warrant believing that Epstein is guilty.
I'm sure it's very convenient for you not to view the world in terms of race. Sadly, others don't have the same privilege. Perhaps you can just view it in terms of power.
"It's hard to gather evidence when 15-year-old girls are being threatened by goons and feel as though it's their fault."
I agree, it's not easy. I also realize it has been done successfully in the past. There is a support systems in place for rape victims. If it were my daughter, I would have gone to the police minutes after I learned about it.
"There's this thing called circumstantial evidence. In this case, there's clearly enough of it to warrant believing that Epstein is guilty."
I disagree. The only thing available are affidavits signed by the victim and the witness. The alleged victim's affidavit could be dismissed under the hearsay laws. That's it. Nothing to corroborate their claims. An investigation by law enforcement could easily corroborate the victim's allegations.
It's my humble non-legal expert opinion, this girl got some bad legal advice.
Now, if she was to bring the civil lawsuit forward, I could imagine a defense attorney saying some really harsh things like "You were allegedly raped and did not pursue a criminal case. You, pursued a civil action for monetary damages instead. Tell me, are you more interested in making money from your rape than in punishing the individual responsible for it? Does money mean more to you than justice? What type of female do you believe is focused on getting money from their perpetrator after being raped?"
I can imagine this would just be a start and a defense attorney would get even nastier after this.
"I'm sure it's very convenient for you not to view the world in terms of race. Sadly, others don't have the same privilege"
It's not a privilege, it's a choice. White people do the same thing. I've heard it all...If I was a minority, I could get minority owned business benefits, I could get points when I apply to certain colleges, etc. There are even rap concerts where they tried to charge white people double simply because they were white.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/07/us/afrof … index.html
"Perhaps you can just view it in terms of power."
Right out of the Democrat, victim playbook. So sad.
Clearly you learned nothing from the Bill Cosby case and how long he was able to buy his way out of his crimes. Eerily similar situation here.
I did learn that when a case goes to trial, even a civil trial, a defense attorney gets to interview the accuser(s). And an investigation is conducted. That is what is very different in these two cases. Here is something from the case with Bill Cosby. The entire thing started when one of his accusers filed a police report. Law enforcement then conducted an investigation.
"Jan. 13, 2005 After experiencing nightmares and a "flashback" that triggered her memory, Constand first tells her mother that Cosby assaulted her, according to court documents.
Jan. 22, 2005 Constand files a police report with the Durham Regional Police outside Toronto, sparking a criminal investigation by Montgomery County detectives in Cheltenham."
https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/bi … d=47799458
So only those who file police reports are to be believed? I pray you don't have daughters.
I believe filing a police report and starting an investigation give such claims legitimacy.
And yet, only 35% get reported currently due to a variety of factors. I choose to believe many of the other 65%, especially as false reporting is estimated at no higher than 10%.
Applying those stats to Trump, let's say the 16 women who have chosen to report his assaults are the 35%, statistically, there could be another 26 women out there who chose not to come forward.
Epstein caught for paying off--tampering with--witnesses.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/ep … spartanntp
The truth is in the details He is alleged to have paid off "Possible Witnesses Against Him."
If he paid off witnesses that were listed in a criminal complaint, he would have charged with a felony. "Possible Witnesses" is something else.
It's not right, but doesn't rise to a criminal act. If you want to be extremely honest, they weren't witnesses listed in any type of legal actions. So, they didn't really meet the legal definition of witness.
If order to get this guy everything has to be exact.
Are you saying they don't have enough proof to charge Epstein with witness tampering, Mike? Or that he won't be charged in the future?
Yes Randy, unless someone is listed in a criminal complaint as a witness, there is no proof he's done anything illegal by giving them money. You, me, or even anyone who has known him could be considered a "Possible Witness." There is a legal difference between a witness, and an alleged "Possible Witness." Will he be charged in the future? That is up to the prosecutor handling the case. I'm sure there is much we don't know.
Gus, I was relying on my memory of a link posted not long ago by someone on the forums. I'll see if I can find it. If I'm wrong I apologize to Shar for being so.
Here's another link showing Obama was among a number of folks in his admin saying the same thing. And reasons he failed as well.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol … n/3500187/
Please have a look at this link. Should close the conversation on Obama's political lie.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-mete … n-keep-it/
Your link is similar to the Politifact article I mentioned. Both mentioned that other's in the administration and some Democrat politicians made the same statement.
Politifact went a little deeper by including a timeline which shows the statement being made even after the law was passed when all involved knew it was not true.
. . . but still no information about the Right's involvement in breaking his promise.
There will be suits against Epstein's estate. Epstein's death won't stop this suit against his estate by his victims. Both Trump & Clinton has distanced themselves from Epstein. Further investigation into Epstein's records will reveal who was involved which will include very powerful men.
by Grace Marguerite Williams 7 years ago
If Donald Trump is elected as President of the United States, what will be YOUR reaction? Why?
by Susie Lehto 7 years ago
He was sweating bullets after that attack. Trump used humor after the attempt to calm the crowd down. Scary moment! Donald Trump Has Close Call in Dayton, Secret Service Steps in to Protect - they were ready to take a bullet for Trump in Dayton, Ohio. Video: ...
by Scott Belford 4 years ago
Once again, Donald Trump sides with the bad guy. He rarely has a bad word to say about - Murdering Putin- Murdering Un- Murdering Dutertes (president of Philippines)And now Murdering Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.Yet he has no problem debasing our allies like the Macron, May,...
by Allen Donald 4 years ago
Okay, Trump supporters, this report from Buzzfeed, if true, would appear to be the end of the Trump presidency.Buzzfeed is reporting that Donald Trump directed Michael Cohen to lie to Congress about the Moscow Tower Trump project and wanted to go to Moscow to meet with Vladimir Putin personally to...
by Scott Belford 6 years ago
If You Are A Woman, Will You Vote for Donald Trump After the 1st Debate and Follow-up Comments?Hillary Clinton finished off the 1st debate skewering Donald Trump for his alleged misogyny. How did that affect your vote?
by Sondra Rochelle 6 years ago
Copy from Facebook page of Kevin M Carney(opposing Views.) A gentleman named Bill Howell eloquently wrote the below letter.Dear Mr. Trump,It’s taken me a while to realize this and to admit it, but I’m grateful to you.For the past few months I’ve spent a good deal of time lamenting your campaign and...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|