Big D vs Twitter
- Thread starter Mors
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Look at Michael Tracey's twitter/Substack, or one of a dozen or so long-form interviews he's done on Youtube. You'll find what I'm telling you is there, if you can be bothered to look.
I can't really find many holes in what the guy has to say (he's not the only one, but he's the best and most prolific). If you can, be my guest. I'm happy to discuss with people who aren't obnoxious c*nts.
Is that aimed at me?
So, you think Epstein didn't do anything wrong beyond what he pleaded guilty to in the 2008 case? Or have I taken that up wrong.
I think there were almost certainly other pervy "indiscretions" that would probably amount to criminal activity, or if not, most people would consider very wrong: sex with 16-17 year olds, maybe massages from 14-15 year olds.
Most of the rest of it is just innuendo and speculation about a mysterious and enigmatic figure. It's salacious and titillating so people choose to believe it. From what I can discern a very large amount of the worst accusations come from Virginia Giuffre, who was clearly extremely unreliable. Doesn't mean they can't be true but the presumption must be that they're not. And then a lot of the rest come from women who were highly incentivised to lie by the availability of truly huge amounts of compensation funds. Literally millions per "victim", and the more lurid the mistreatment the more you got.
Doesn't take a genius to see how the whole thing could just have been maintained by unscrupulous lawyers. It's certainly more credible than it being some nefarious paedophile-entrapment ring run by International Jewry.
I think there's likely being wild stretches in how far this goes, and it's definitely being used as a political stick. But, I also believe Epstein was a very bad man, to put I mildly, who deserved to be stopped and sent to prison for a long long time. I think that part should be pretty clear. Even if it was only massages from 14-15 year olds, which I think it fairly clearly isn't, that's enough for me to want to lock him away.
It's important that "the files" are released. Unfortunately, a lot of people want to see them for salacious reasons or for political gain, but the debate needs a separation of speculation from reality. If what is speculated is there then there need to be huge repercussions for those implicated, and if it isn't there then there need to be repercussions for those who said it was.
I don't think for one minute that Trump's handling of this reflects a man who has nothing to hide, but I reckon he could get away with pretty much anything right now, such is the cult of Maga and the weakness of the opposition.
And it's worth remembering that there are a lot of young women who have claimed to be victims who haven't gone public and want to keep their identities private. I don't see what they have to gain.
I don't think for one minute that Trump's handling of this reflects a man who has nothing to hide, but I reckon he could get away with pretty much anything right now, such is the cult of Maga and the weakness of the opposition.
And it's worth remembering that there are a lot of young women who have claimed to be victims who haven't gone public and want to keep their identities private. I don't see what they have to gain.
Have they made money? From what I've read they don't have to go public to get a payout.
‘From what I’ve read” is the crux of the issue here Peter. We’ve all read stuff, and it’s hard to know what to believe. I have no idea if they’ve received payouts. I also have no idea if there’s a photo of Trump blowing Clinton, but I’ve read that there is.
I read Hilary was pegging him while he was blowing on the Arkansan skin flute.
He might not get away with that.
Is "you can learn anything by reading!" the new "but you can prove anything with facts, logic, and reason!"?
