Epstein is in Trouble

[Harambe]

Yeah, there's no possible way bail should be granted no matter how much he offers in collateral.

Federal prosecutors said they would oppose Epstein’s release on bail, saying he posed an “extraordinary risk of flight” because of his wealth, private planes and significant international ties.

I want to say the crime denotes no bail. Having someone that's as big a flight risk as this guy should put it over the bar.

 

[fishonjazz]

I think there's a difference between suppressing something and not covering something. You've seen three years now of throwing anything at Trump imaginable. Real, not real, fabricated, whatever. This stuff had legs back then. Why no coverage? IIRC, there was an active court case against Trump and Epstein around the election. Instead we're talking about how Trump may have started WWIII by accepting a phone call from the Prime Minister, or whatever, of Hong Kong.

I have never heard of this phone call

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[fishonjazz]

I'm not saying it's not worth reporting at all. What I'm saying is that this was worth reporting way back when, especially for a media that's looking for any reasons to knock off Trump. And yet they didn't...

Wouldn't have mattered.
Trump could rape a bunch of babies and then kill them in the middle of times square and the trumpers would still vote for him.

****ing partisanship sucks

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[infection]

I have never heard of this phone call

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

It was hot news for 12 hours. Trump accepted a phone call from the Prime Minister of Taiwan. Sorry, I said Hong Kong originally. People came out of the wood work to say that this is terrible because it recognizes Taiwan as a sovereign nation when China does not consider it such. I saw many on facebook sharing these links and people in a panic. All of the sudden people acted like they had any idea what this meant prior to people introducing a context to them.

Anyway, basically go at any controversy you've heard of Trump. This probably has more legs than it, or it's more important.

 

[infection]

Wouldn't have mattered.
Trump could rape a bunch of babies and then kill them in the middle of times square and the trumpers would still vote for him.

****ing partisanship sucks

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

I'm suggesting it wasn't reported precisely because of partisanship. Main reason being that Bill Clinton is significantly more tied to Epstein than Trump is, and if anyone wanted to pick up the very legitimate Trump/Epstein story, it happened to be laced with a stronger Clinton connection, and I had always believed that it was a non-starter for the media and hence the silence.

 

[One Brow]

I'm suggesting it wasn't reported precisely because of partisanship. Main reason being that Bill Clinton is significantly more tied to Epstein than Trump is, and if anyone wanted to pick up the very legitimate Trump/Epstein story, it happened to be laced with a stronger Clinton connection, and I had always believed that it was a non-starter for the media and hence the silence.

Yeah, because the media never reports on Clinton scandals. Not ever. Not even a little.[\sarcasm]

 

[Zombie]

I'm suggesting it wasn't reported precisely because of partisanship. Main reason being that Bill Clinton is significantly more tied to Epstein than Trump is, and if anyone wanted to pick up the very legitimate Trump/Epstein story, it happened to be laced with a stronger Clinton connection, and I had always believed that it was a non-starter for the media and hence the silence.

Because we all know the media hates talking about Clinton scandals. Nevermind the near nonstop coverage of Bengazi, private email servers, Uranium One and the Clinton foundation. Not to mention Lewinsky.

 

[infection]

Yeah, because the media never reports on Clinton scandals. Not ever. Not even a little.[\sarcasm]

Do you have any other postulation on why nobody knew about this story? All I have is Occam's razor.

 

[infection]

Because we all know the media hates talking about Clinton scandals. Nevermind the near nonstop coverage of Bengazi, private email servers, Uranium One and the Clinton foundation. Not to mention Lewinsky.

See above.

 

[Zombie]

See above.

That's hardly what I'd call an example of Occams Razor. Seems more likely to me that the reason this story has legs now is that new charges are being brought thus more information has come to light.

FWIW I do remember Trump's (and Clinton's and others) connection to Epstein being talked about around the election. There wasn't anything "new" in that reporting from what I recall, but there were plenty of other revelations about Trump's sexual impropiety that ended up getting more attention. In fact I also remember there being more coverage of Clinton's alleged rape of Juanita Broderick and renewed attention on Bills other sex scandals around the election, again they didn't get a ton of traction because there was nothing new in the reporting. That's usually how news works in my experience.

 

[One Brow]

Do you have any other postulation on why nobody knew about this story? All I have is Occam's razor.

Because even as little as three years ago, people were less worried about men having sex with teen girls. You've forgotten?

 

[infection]

Because even as little as three years ago, people were less worried about men having sex with teen girls. You've forgotten?

I remember “grab them by the *****” being pretty big. But I suppose my memory fails. I guess raping 13 year olds was kosher then and I’ve just taken for granted that it’s only recently that it’s become taboo.