With the ruling of Judge Kenneth A. Marra of Federal District Court in West Palm Beach on the obscene plea deal with Jeffrey E. Epstein, it is time for Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta to resign. Marra found, as many of us have long argued, that the deal cut by Acosta violated federal law and allowed the infamous financier to get a disgracefully low sentence. Many of us objected to his nomination by President Donald Trump and condemned the Senate for confirming him. It is now time for him to resign.

I have previously written about the disgraceful sweetheart deal given to accused serial pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The deal was struck by Acosta not only succeeded in protecting Epstein from serious jail time but protected a host of high-profile friends including Bill Clinton who were regulars at his infamous island resort. Epstein ran the notorious “Lolita Express” where he took friends like Bill Clinton by plane to his private estate on the Caribbean island of Little Saint James with young girls who allegedly were used as prostitutes.  Epstein was known for his preference for young women and powerful figures like Clinton were repeat guests.

Despite a strong case for prosecution, Epstein’s lawyers, including Alan Dershowitz and Ken Starr, were able to secure a ridiculous deal with prosecutors. He was accused of abusing more than forty minor girls (with many between the ages of 13 and 17).  Instead of being held accountable, he was allowed to plead guilty to a Florida state charge of felony solicitation of underage girls in 2008 and served a 13-month jail sentence.  Moreover, to my lasting surprise, the Senate approved the man who cut that disgraceful deal, former Miami U.S. attorney Alexander Acosta, as labor secretary.  The Senate did not seem to care that Acosta betrayed these victims and protected a serial abuser.  In other words, everyone was protected–-The powerful Johns, Epstein, the prosecutors–just not the victims who were never consulted before Epstein got his sweetheart deal.

The secret agreement cut by Acosta violated the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act. Theoretically, that could undo the deal but it is unlikely. Acosta fixed it to guarantee that neither Epstein nor his powerful friends would face true justice.

Or course, after cutting this ridiculous plea deal, Acosta’s career did not suffer. To the contrary, he flourished and even ended up with a cabinet position.

I am usually inclined to treat bad decisions as lapses in judgment that can be overcome. However, this deal is different. From the start, it was highly suspicious and secret. Acosta hid the details from the victims as well as the public. It made a lot of powerful people breathe easier but did great injustice to the victims. It was not just a bad decision. It was a mockery of justice.

It is now time for Acosta to be held accountable for guaranteeing that Acosta and his powerful friends were not held accountable. It is time for him to resign.

Here is the opinion.

If Acosta does not do the right thing, it should be attached to a note from President Trump asking for Acosta’s resignation.


  1. The sweetheart deal for Epstein because too many of the powerful and connected were participating. The ruling elite has different rules and Epstein was hired to protect and serve them.

  2. Started reading this thinking it was about the real Acosta the bogus illiterate journalist wannabe. Nope. Just a diversion for another Goebbelist turned pimp for the new version of Pravda

  3. From the Solicitor General, Noel Francisco’s, brief submitted to SCOTUS on the sealed appeal to Mueller’s subpoena for bank records from “Corporation A”:

    8 Petitioner suggests (Pet. 26) that Congress would not have been troubled by barring federal criminal jurisdiction over foreign state-owned enterprises because the President could use tools such as economic sanctions to address foreign instrumentalities “that commit crimes in the United States.” That overlooks not only the legal and practical limits on sanctions, but also the threshold need to acquire evidence through grand jury subpoenas in order to determine whether a crime has been committed—including by U.S. citizens.

    [end excerpt]

    Yeah, that’s right. Moreover, it’s especially right when the U.S. citizen whose bank records the grand jury subpoenas IS, or might be, The POTUS, Trump or his senior adviser. I mean, really, Corporation A is arguing that, since Trump could sanction the foreign government that owns Corporation A if Corporation A were committing crimes in the United States that might have involved Trump or Jared Kushner committing crimes in the United States, therefore Corporation A supposedly doesn’t have to respond to Mueller’s grand jury subpoena for the bank records needed to determine whether Trump or Kushner committed a crime in the United States.

    If SCOTUS quashes Mueller’s subpoena, then SCOTUS provides backdoor sanctions relief for every last foreign-owned bank doing business with U. S. citizens. The last I heard, the Judicial Branch of the U.S. Government does not conduct the foreign policy of the United States. The SCOTUS decision to uphold Mueller’s subpoena for bank records from Corporation A had damned-well better be a unanimous decision.

    BTW, there’s a ninety-five percent chance that the NSA already has those bank records in the form of classified signal intelligence. (I mention that for prospective benefit of Mister Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.)

    1. Another critical excerpt from Solicitor General Noel Francisco’s brief to SCOTUS on the sealed appeal to Muller’s subpoena for bank records from “Corporation A”:

      Petitioner’s interpretation would, as the court of appeals recognized, lead to a result that Congress could not have intended—i.e., that “purely commercial enterprise[s] operating within the United States,” if majority- owned by a foreign government, could “flagrantly violate criminal laws” and ignore criminal process, no matter how domestic the conduct or egregious the violation. Supp. App. 10a. Banks, airlines, software companies, and similar commercial businesses could wittingly or unwittingly provide a haven for criminal activity and would be shielded against providing evidence even of domestic criminal conduct by U.S. citizens. See id. at 10a-11a. Although petitioner declares that result to be “precisely what Congress intended,” Pet. 25, it cannot plausibly be maintained that Congress and the Executive Branch—which drafted the FSIA—would have adopted such a rule “without so much as a whisper” to that effect in the Act’s extensive legislative history, Samantar, 560 U.S. at 319.8

      [end excerpt]

      This may end up being a momentous Supreme Court decision. Chief Justice Roberts is not about to let anyone else screw this one up.



    On Thursday, federal judge Kenneth Marra ruled that Acosta’s team had violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, which entitles victims to know about big developments in their cases, by concealing the agreement from victims.

    Acosta explained in a 2011 letter that he allowed for Epstein’s short sentence after “a year-long assault on the prosecution and the prosecutors” by the financier’s “army of legal superstars.”

    “The defense strategy was not limited to legal issues,” Acosta wrote. “Defense counsel investigated individual prosecutors and their families, looking for personal peccadilloes that may provide a basis for disqualification.”

    “The office’s decisions were approved by departmental leadership and followed departmental procedures,” the Labor Department said Friday. The agency said the matter remains in litigation and referred further questions to the Justice Department, which declined to comment.

    Legal analysts widely agree Epstein’s punishment was light, but experts expressed mixed views on whether the labor secretary should be forced out of work.

    “I would vehemently oppose an effort to impeach Acosta,” said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor who represented the last federal official ejected from office, a New Orleans judge who was found to have committed perjury in 2010.

    Turley, who opposed Acosta’s nomination, would rather see him resign.

    “This was not misconduct that the nominee concealed,” he said. “Moreover, he was confirmed despite the objections of many over his actions in the case.”

    During Acosta’s 2017 confirmation hearings, Epstein’s name came up 59 times. Lawmakers voted 60 to 38 to approve his nomination.

    “You are aware that Mr. Epstein served that 13 months,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va) said during the confirmation hearing. “He had to sleep at a county jail, but he was basically allowed to move and go around the community and do whatever he wants.”

    “I am on record condemning that, and I think that was awful,” Acosta replied.

    But Susan Low Bloch, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown University, argued that the secret plea deal could be seen as a “high crime” and compel the House to start the impeachment process,

    What Senators knew before they confirmed Acosta shouldn’t matter, Bloch said: “The offense doesn’t get waived or erased.”

    It’s unlikely, however, that most House members and two-thirds of the Republican-controlled Senate will see Acosta’s past as suddenly disqualifying, she added.

    The Justice Department launched a probe into the matter earlier this month.

    Edited from: “Questions Surround Labor Secretary Acosta After Judge’s Ruling”

    This evening’s WASHINGTON POST


      During Acosta’s 2017 confirmation hearings, Epstein’s name came up 59 times. Lawmakers voted 60 to 38 to approve his nomination.

      This passage notes that Republicans voted overwhelmingly to confirm Acosta despite numerous references to Epstein during committee hearings.

    2. The important issue stated by Turley was: ““This was not misconduct that the nominee concealed,” he said. “Moreover, he was confirmed despite the objections of many over his actions in the case.”

      If you wish to fight against Acosta show where he deceived Congress or show that he made some type of illegal deal. I have my own questions and concerns, but too many on the left don’t believe in providing the criminal action or proof.

      1. Alan, I’m not looking to prosecute Acosta. I’m just noting his deal with Epstein was referenced many times during confirmation hearings.

        1. Trump hired Acosta for the same reason Trump hires well nigh everyone else: kompromat makes employees both pliable and disposable with a lit smidgen of plausible deniability on the side. Chance are that Trump won’t hire Turley until Trump gets kompromat on Turley. I’m guessing that the chance for that is very nearly zero. But The Professor is shaking my confidence daily.

          1. Wait a second. On second thought, if Epstein has kompromat on powerful politicians, and if Acosta interviewed Epstein during Epstein’s proffer sessions for the plea agreement with Acosta’s former office, then . . . Acosta might have kompromat on powerful politicians. Hmmm . . .

            1. There needs to be a Special Counsel investigation to see if the Russians gathered kompromat on Bill Clinton as a result of his many documented trips via the Lolita Express, and perhaps during his trip(s) to Moscow.
              I don’t think Bill was very happy about Obama aceing out Hillary for the nomination in 2008, and maybe an investigative will turn up claims that he had hookers pee on a bed Obama slept on.
              Had Hillary won, as was widely expected, Bill Clinton was not likely to be a passive First Spouse.
              While ineligible to serve another term, he would use a return to the White House as a means to wield political power again.
              The Special Counsel investigation could be preceeded by hiring a firm like Fusion GPS to hire a firm like Steele’ Orbis, then use Russian contacts to solicit damaging information on Clinton.
              Then the Russian soirces could tell the Russian contacts who would tell the Steele-like political operative who could then compile a dossier and feed it to the FBI.
              And this could all be done even before a Special Counsel is appointed.
              Wait a second.
              The $500,000 payment that Bill Clinton received from a Kremlin-linked bank to deliver a speech in Moscow was likely a way to cultivate Clinton to act as an advocate for Russia once in the White House.
              So in addition to the Russian kompromat, there’s the foreign “buying” of influence.
              The only requirements for the Special Counsel time is that it should be stacked with known anti-Clinton partisans using the most aggressive tactics possible to squeeze others involved with either Bill or Hillary Clinton, or in any way connected with the 2016 Hillary Campaign.

              1. Eight-Hundred page sentencing memo on Manafort.
                Eight-Hundred Page sentencing memo on Manafort.
                Eight-Hundred page sentencing memo on Manafort.

                Rumor has it that the Eight-Hundred page sentencing memo on Manafort is a highly persuasive argument against Trump even thinking any further–not even in his wildest dreams–of pardoning Manafort.

                When was the last time Rudy Giuliani was allowed to speak in public?

                “After this is all over, we can clean it all up with a few pardons,” Giuliani said [paraphrased].

                Ha-Ha! (P.S. Thanks for ignoring the devastating argument about Corporation A that will likely seal Trump’s fate.)

                Remember: If we all close our eyes, then no one can see us. (Ha-Ha!)

          2. Preposterous obsession you havebwoth this one single Russian word. Learn a new word already.

        2. Peter, you may not be trying to prosecute Acosta but there are calls for his removal. That his name was mentioned many times is inconsequential. Likely many mentioned his name for the same reason as the person before and after without adding anything.

          People are calling for his removal. He failed to inform the victims of the agreement not to prosecute. That is disturbing but by itself not enough to call for his resignation since this apparently was considered at his hearings and he was appointed. I guess I would feel more comfortable if I had an adequate explanation and knew how that specific rule was handled by other judges.

          1. Alan, as Diane Feinstein noted at Acosta’s hearings, this man can’t possibly serve the interests of American labor if he brokered a plea bargain like that for Epstein.

            1. “this man can’t possibly serve the interests of American labor if he brokered a plea bargain like that for Epstein.”

              Peter, you are enamored by words that are meaningless.

              Tell us exactly what the “that” was and the rationale at the time behind Acosta’s decision. That requires knowledge and critical thinking skills along with a bit of time to think. Try it.

              Take a look at what all these people said about Kavanaugh and then Smollett. Blind yourself to the party they might belong to and see how irrational our legislators and our media were.

          2. If the Manafort sentencing memo is indeed 800 pages long, it’s highly probable that L4B had a hand in writing it; it may have originally been 8 pages before her role on composing it.
            It remains to be seen if she will eventually grace these threads with the entire 800 pages, or present the Reader’s Digest condensed version of only 100-200 pages.

            1. You are exaggerating wildly. Besides, you’re the one who’s constantly complaining about Mueller not showing his cards. Maybe Mueller will file a report this coming Friday. But I won’t believe it until AG Barr posts it on my computer screen.



    The Senate voted to confirm Alexander Acosta as labor secretary Thursday, elevating the Florida law school dean and former U.S. attorney for Florida’s southern district to fill one of the last of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet-level vacancies.

    The 60-38 vote largely fell along party lines, though eight Democrats – including Sens. Bill Nelson of Florida, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Jon Tester of Montana and Catherine Cortez-Masto of Nevada – voted in favor of his confirmation. One independent, Sen. Angus King of Maine, also voted for Acosta’s confirmation.

    Acosta, a Miami native, is the only Hispanic to join Trump’s Cabinet.

    “Acosta’s leadership at the Labor Department will serve as a much-needed change from what we saw under the previous administration,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

    That’s what bothers critics about Acosta, currently the dean at Florida International University’s law school. He drew the ire of labor unions during his confirmation process and faced controversy over a deal his office approved while he was Miami’s U.S. attorney.

    Among those opposing his nomination was Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. She criticized the then-U.S. attorney’s role in approving a “non-prosecution agreement” in 2007 with Palm Beach financier Jeffrey Epstein when he was charged with sex trafficking.

    Epstein, who police found had solicited dozens of girls to perform sexual acts in his Florida mansions for several years, pleaded guilty to one state charge of soliciting minors for prostitution, paid damages to scores of victims and had to register as a sex offender.

    In a deal with Acosta’s office, Epstein avoided any federal charges and spent a little over a year in prison.

    In his confirmation hearing, Acosta defended the deal with Epstein as the best option for prosecutors based on the strength of the case.

    “At the end of the day, based on the evidence, professionals within the prosecutor’s office decide that a plea that guarantees that someone goes to jail, that guarantees that someone register generally and that guarantees other outcomes is a good thing,” he said.

    Trump nominated Acosta, 48, in February after the initial Labor Department choice, fast-food executive Andrew Puzder, withdrew following several controversies. Puzder admitted he had hired a maid not authorized to work in this country, causing key Republicans to waver in their support.

    Edited from: “Senate Confirms Alexander Acosta As Labor Secretary

    McClatchy D.C. Bureau, 4/27/17

    1. There had to have been something in for Alex Acosta. Probably simple careerism of the type that Tom Wolfe called “the favor bank.” Nonetheless, the number of people for whom Acosta may have done a favor by keeping Epstein relatively quiet could, in Wolfe’s theory, keep Acosta at his current post for the remainder of Trump’s one and only term of office. Or not. I wonder what Acosta knows about the people for whom Acosta may have done a favor by keeping Epstein relatively quiet.

      1. I agree, Diane. And old Alan Dershowitz just happened to be Epstein’s lawyer. Yet another odd coincidence.

        1. ” Yet another odd coincidence.”

          Peter, what is the coincidence where Alan Dershowitz is concerned. (more meaningless tripe on your part)

          1. Sluggo doesn’t read Turley. And even when Sluggo does read Turley, Sluggo remains utterly clueless as to what, exactly, Turley might be insinuating between the lines. Listen up, Sluggo. Turley “objected” to Trump “nominating” Acosta. But Turley “condemned” the Senate for “confirming” Acosta. Turley’s word choice might suggest that at least a few of the Senators who confirmed Acosta may be at risk of “kompromat” from either or all Epstein, Acosta, Trump and possibly even Putin.

            It’s a freaky Roman circus in a freaky Roman bath befitting the freaky Roman Empire in which we schlubbos all live, Sluggo. And I mean Turley, too. He’s still a schlubbo like the rest of us. They’ll never take that any from him. Never!

            1. Diane, I realize it is a bit early today for you especially after an exceptionally strong drinking binge but I am dealing with what Peter said not what Turley said. I know you would like to tell me the coincidence Peter was discussing but who wants your opinion ever?

              1. Sluggo, you incomparable dolt, you! You may find this impossible to believe, but the phrase “another odd coincidence” could indicate nothing more than just “another odd coincidence.”

                Meanwhile, Dershowitz is well-known for taking high-profile cases to publicize Dershowitz’s well-known views on the rights of defendants, in general, and perhaps, even in particular, the rights of even the most heinous offenders to confront their accusers as well as any other the witnesses against them. Dershowitz is famously committed to the erstwhile commonplace notion that the burden of proof is on The State to make its case beyond a reasonable doubt. In light of which reputation, the simple fact that Dershowitz had a hand in proffering and negotiating a plea agreement favorable to his client Epstein with the Acosta’s office ought otherwise to tell you, Sluggo, a thing or three about the evidence against Epstein. How often does The Alan Dershowitz avoid a trial in favor of his client copping a plea? Rarely? Or frequently?

                How’s that head scratching going for you, Sluggo?

  6. while Epstein gets a slap on the wrist, for serious well proven crimes of procuring minors and flying them around and so forth, that is to say, real human trafficking, there is a lot of jawboning about the crime which is basically all jsut fake news.

    Typically, it involves lawful Chinese owned massage shops are regularly raided and harassed and hit with phony charges which are often if not usually dropped, and they allege 40 and 50 year old middle aged Chinese women are out there “human trafficking” other 40 and 50 year old middle aged Chinese women.

    The police lay it on thick about the socalled “human trafficking” and what they don’t say is how rarely they ever actually bring such charges. Like almost always just misdemeanor prostitution charges, and almost always for that horror of horrors, that nonexistent threat to public health and morals, HANDJOBS, and not even intercourse. Many times there is also the implication that they are illegal immigrants which is rarely so, either.

    Also almost always, and they don’t tell you this, is they are almost all licensed facilities. It’s about like a bar or liquor store that serves minors booze sometimes. Sometimes illegal things happen. But it’s still a business providing lawful services. The notion that like 90% of the customers are getting erotic touching or whatever is preposterous.

    So it’s all pretty much a big fraud but they keep on hammering this notion that there’s this huge problem. Well I dont know maybe there is among Mexicans but they don’t bother with licenses.

    In one Midwestern state a few years back, they raided over 20 businesses in one night, arrested at least three times as many workers, and didnt bring one single criminal prosecution out of it. And that year, out of all the many raids and arrests, there were about 5 actual “human trafficking” cases and not a single one involved a Chinese person. Oh, that part never makes the “fake news”

    So recently like today, this happened again en masse in Florida and they collared the owner of the Patriots. The police press conference is very irresponsible suggesting that every single customer is a solicitor. Very despicable and false innuendo but customary for these kinds of phony vice operations.

    PS Check back in a year and see if they brought even ONE single successful “human trafficking” persecution out of this …. Maybe a handful of guilty pleas to prostitution or solicitation for handjobs is all they will get. Oh actually I forgot. they often also seize a lot of cash and then that goes into an asset forfeiture civil case which nobody will bother to try and defend, the likes of which the SCOTUS just denounced this past month. But it goes on and on.

    PPS how many cops around the country are out there getting regular massages and yes, well maybe even handjobs on the public taxpayer’s dime for these constant investigations? Don’t hold your breath for a budgetary analysis of that!


      Robert Kraft, the owner of the New England Patriots, was arrested today in Florida as part of a massage-parlor prostitution enforcement effort there. The 77-year-old NFL team owner is one of more than 150 men accused of soliciting prostitution. Police say they’ve been investigating the spa he visited, Orchids of Asia Day Spa, since October 2018.

      Authorities are calling this a “human trafficking operation,” with some media outlets invoking “modern-day slavery.” But so far all signs suggest this is just an ordinary anti-prostitution effort.

      Kraft was charged with two counts of soliciting for prostitution, a misdemeanor. Orchids of Asia’s owner, Hua Zhang, was charged with deriving support from the proceeds of prostitution, keeping and frequenting a house of prostitution, and procuring for prostitution. All of these are charges that can apply to prostitution-business bosses even when everyone involved consents.

      Martin County Sheriff William Snyder said at a press conference that some of the workers at these spas lived in them and weren’t allowed to leave during the day. This is something we frequently hear from police chiefs and county sheriffs at the start of big “sex trafficking busts” that turn out to yield nothing but ordinary prostitution charges. (See, for instance, King County, Washington, cops on Korean sex workers there.)

      Police across the country have been ramping up stings at massage parlors, driven by a concentrated effort coming from federal law enforcement (including Homeland Security) and a whole lot of misinformation. In most cases, these investigations don’t lead to trafficking charges but do result in arrests for prostitution or people giving massages without a license. In at least one recent high-profile instance, they led to a Chinese sex worker’s death.

      It’s not just undocumented immigrants who face deportation after an arrest in these stings. Prostitution charges can mean deportation even for immigrants here legally.

      Florida police shut down Orchids of Asia along with nine other Asian spas and massage parlors around Orlando. The operation includes accusations of prostitution solicitation by 165 men, more than 50 of whom have already been arrested. These men have not been accused of being involved in human trafficking.

      Despite some reports referring to the spa workers as “girls,” police have not indicated that any employees were actually underage.

      Massage parlor workers were also arrested as part of the operation to “help” them, but cops want you to know they wish they had found horrific abuse instead of just sex workers. “Even though we may have charges on some of them, we’d rather them be victims,” said Vero Beach Police Chief David Currey.

      Details on this story are still coming out, and police say charges are still forthcoming, which means it’s possible that we’ll find more here than currently meets the eye. But at the moment, it looks an awful lot like so many prostitution enforcement operations billed as “saving girls” from trafficking.

    2. This anecdotal tale is nevertheless accurate, but also at all the other levels of the “cops are doing a thankless job, look how swell they are, yada yada” and not just this particular episode.

      to kurtzie

      1. I dont understand your meaning.

        In the past day I have seen more fear monger of articles on Bloomberg and other papers about the scourge of Chinese women massage therapists making large tips to please customers.

        It’s a national crisis of something. Maybe a dangerous tax evasion racket on par with waitresses not reporting tips.

        Perhaps real crisis is bitter feministic American women who are not very nice to their men, seeing they have stiff competition right down the street.

        Quelle horreur!

        Oh and supposedlt This sting in Florida has cleared over 1 million in cash seized by cops… that they have booked… no telling how much was skimmed…. but …. Now we know why it really happened.

  7. But, Epstein WAS guilty, he admitted it, and DID time–a ridiculously low amount of time considering the number of children who were abused, and this was because Acosta cut a sweetheart deal due to Epstein’s connections. Not only did Acosta not suffer any penalty for allowing this perversion of law, his career has flourished. THAT is the point. So, I ask again: where are all of the “family values” Republicans, including “holier-than-thou” Mikey Pence, who won’t even sit across a lunch table from a female unless “Mother” is present.

    1. anonymous

      Guilt is for the Clintons. Epstein is donald’s friend – and trump’s friends are people with connections – Manafort, Putin, saudi prince killer, cohen

  8. There are different standards for the rich and connected.

    If a school janitor had had sex with 40 girls between 13 and 17 he would be in jail for life and probably killed in prison. Not even felons like child molesters.

  9. “Virginia Giuffre (the accuser) alleged she was pulled into years of abuse by investor Jeffrey Epstein when she was working as a 15-year-old towel girl at President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach in 1999.

    The suit alleged no wrongdoing on Trump’s part but accused Epstein’s girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell of procuring underage girls for Epstein. She denied the allegations.”





      “The suit alleged no wrongdoing on Trump’s part, but accused Epstein’s girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell of procuring underage girls for Epstein. She denied the allegations.”

      – Politico

      “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance,

      baffle them with bull—-!”

      – W.C. Fields

      1. My response was to a comment that Trump never went to Epstein’s lair (although he has been on his plane). Why go out when he hosted Epstein on a regular basis, even praised his prowess with “young” women. They were sued jointly in a civil rape allegation by a then 13-year-old girl (later withdrawn after death threats). Keep believing your boy is innocent. Robert Kraft says he’s innocent too (although the police say everything is on video).

        1. enigma…….Sadly, Dr. King had a penchant for young women and orgies, too, but I would never judge him for that.
          It’s none of my business.

          1. Cindy Bragg,..
            The anonymous woman claiming the forcible rape as a 13 year old in the early-to-mid 1990s was allowed extraordinary leeway in filing, withdrawing, then refiling a civil suit against Trump.
            Even though the statute of limitations had expired.
            Initially, her chief advocate and supposed media liason was a former associate producer of the Jerry Springer Show.
            To top this off, Attorney Lisa Bloom scheduled a press conference right before the 2016 election at which the “victim” was to appear.
            She was a no-show, and there were a lot of MSMedia reporters who were extremely angry at wasting time congregating at the no-show event.
            I’m going to ask for change from a $3 Dollar Bill from anyone who finds this story credible.

            1. Thanks, Tom…..Lisa Bloom and mommy Gloria do more damage to true bona fide female victims.
              I’m so tired of people believing females first, without evidence….but that’s because, IMO, the culture still treats so many girls and women as helpless pieces of property. And that doesn’t help any real victims of crimes.
              I know there was a time when no one believed women. And girls….But holy cow…those days are long gone!
              This is 2019 for Pete’s sake! And young teenage girls are waaaaaay more developed and savvy than even my generation.
              Laws that reflect the mores of a time gone by, need to catch up, in my opinion!

              1. It’s terrible, Cindy. Now they’re even doubting a guy?😏, Smellette, after intially accepting his story.
                When will people ever learn that politically motivated and timed claims of these “victims” should be accepted without question?

              2. Possible victims’, of any kind, accusations should be taken seriously.

                However, possible victims’, of any kind, accusations should not be automatically believed.

                It has taken a long time for many victims to be “taken seriously” in this country of all colors, shapes, and sizes. But as a whole, this should not be taken to the extreme.

                It is time for this country to get off the loony bandwagon ride to nowhere and center ourselves again.

                IMHO, with the current climate and culture of America, I see two main issues:

                (1) Everyone is a victim; and

                (2) Everyone is a judge.

                Both of these are awful traits to endure as a nation, as a whole. It is time to extinguish both of them.

                And really, what is it more than this society is suffering from a huge symptom of Narcissism.

                A trickle down of the psychological warfare that has its tentacles squeezing . . . .

              3. Tangentially, I would not say “waaaayy more developed,” but “savvy,” most likely.

                But again, it all falls back on each individuals parental guidance and how they grew up—were raised.

                I think most children today know the “Stranger Danger” rule. And I think most teenage girls, specifically, but I would not rule out boys either, know not to, for example, get in a car with a stranger, etc., etc.

                Shoot…I was only propositioned to get in a strange man’s car in 2017 (on my very last night living in D.C).

                I had packed up all my stuff into my car and I was getting a late night dinner at a local diner (~ midnight) and then proceeding to my hotel for the night, when a strange guy, in his own vehicle, rolled his window down, asked me to roll my window down.

                I opened my window 1-2 inches and I said “Yes?”

                And he goes, “Hello there. I noticed you are eating take-out in your car alone, and so am I (he holds up his take-out container) and I was wondering if you would like to have dinner with me?”

                Me: “Where?”

                He: “Well, I was thinking that we could go behind the CVS over there, you can follow me in your own car, and then you can get into my car, and we can eat dinner together.”

                Me: “Behind the CVS?”

                He: “Yes.”

                Me: “Over there?”

                He: “Yes.”

                Me: “They’re closed. And it’s dark over there.”

                He: “For privacy, we can eat together, in private.”

                Me: “I am sorry, but I have a boyfriend waiting for me. In fact, he will be meeting me in 10 minutes or less, so I can’t eat with you, here or there, or anywhere.”

                He: “Well, I am going to go over there behind the CVS anyway. If you change your mind, you can meet me there.”

                Me: “Okay. I’ll keep that in mind. By the way, that’s a nice cross you have there hanging off your rear-view mirror.”

                He: “Oh, it’s not mine. It is an Ankh….it’s my brothers…I am not religious. In fact, it is his car too…I am just borrowing it for the night. If you change your mind and would like to share a nice dinner together, I am a gentleman.”

                Me: “Okay. Thank you.”

                And then he drove off, toward the CVS and turned in behind the store.

                And then I booked it out of there towards my hotel and away from him as fast as I could.

                The guy gave me the real, hair-raised on your arms creepy vibe.

                In fact, looking back at the whole thing, I should have not even engaged him at all. I thought he might want directions, which is dumb in today’s society because everyone has cellphones.

                But people become victims of predators all sorts of ways, and that includes adults too.

                With regards to young girls and boys, the parents need to teach them how to be safe and smart. But not all children have parents, or good parents, for that matter.

                1. That was YOU that I tried that with when I was in DC?
                  The smooth “CVS snack” opening line usually works better for me as a way to meet women.
                  Sometimes it’s a variation, like meet me behind Walgreens, or behind the dumpster at McDonalds.😉😀
                  Sorry I creeped you out when I tried it out in DC.

                  1. Ha-ha-ha! Very funny.

                    I was actually dealing with an entity or a force — something much darker in nature. Like 6 months worth of that nonsense — variations of it, until I left.

                    I think I would have been elated to meet you, Tom, behind a CVS, in the middle of the night. Believe me . . . but I do appreciate the jokes. 😉

                  2. Did I forget to mention that his eyes were “almost” glowing? Greenish-glow.

                    Yeah. I was not religious at all, but after that….you can say I have changed my tune on religion.

          2. Witch doctor was that?

            The one with the fake, plagiarized thesis?

            “Generational Welfare” and “Affirmative Action Privilege,”

            Don’t Leave Home Without Them!

          3. Witch doctor was that, the one with the fake, plagiarized thesis?

            “Generational Welfare” and “Affirmative Action Privilege,”

            Don’t Leave Home Without Them!

            1. YNOT’s reply, above, is to Cindy Bragg’s outrageous smear against Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. quite a ways upstream.

        2. Enigma,…
          We’ve discussed the allegation of the nameless alleged 13 year-old rape victim, and the cast of characters and other assorted oddities associated with this accusation.
          Maybe Lisa Bloom or her Mom, Gloria Allred, will hold another press conference hyping the “victim’s” appearance in, say, early November 2020, if Trump runs again.

          1. We’ve discussed it, my point is that Turley can’t help but suggest Bill Clinton was involved in predatory behavior while ignoring Trump, who was named in a legal document.
            In case you missed it:
            “I traveled by bus to New York City in June 1994 in the hope of starting a modeling career. I went to several modeling agencies but was told that I needed to put together a modeling portfolio before I would be considered. I then went to the Port Authority in New York City to start to make my way back home. There I met a woman who introduced herself to me as Tiffany. She told me about the parties and said that, if I would join her at the parties, I would be introduced to people who could get me into the modeling profession. Tiffany also told me I would be paid for attending.

            The parties were held at a New York City residence that was being used by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein. Each of the parties had other minor females and a number of guests of Mr. Epstein, including Defendant Donald Trump at four of the parties I attended. I understood that both Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein knew I was 13 years old.

            Defendant Trump had sexual contact with me at four different parties in the summer of 1994. On the fourth and final sexual encounter with Defendant Trump, Defendant Trump tied me to a bed, exposed himself to me, and then proceeded to forcibly rape me. During the course of this savage sexual attack, I loudly pleaded with Defendant Trump to stop but he did not. Defendant Trump responded to my pleas by violently striking me in the face with his open hand and screaming that he would do whatever he wanted,

            Immediately following this rape, Defendant Trump threatened me that, were I ever to reveal any of the details of Defendant Trump’s sexual and physical abuse of me, my family and I would be physically harmed if not killed.”

              1. was that before or after Bill and Hillary Clinton attended their good friend, Donald Trump and Melania Trump wedding? They seemed very warm and gushed with laughter as the 4 yucked it up


                Hillary looked so happy. Must have been all that young puzzy that Bill was getting at Epstein’s place knowing she would kill for her husband to rape and plunder women

                1. enigma……..Trump is only bound by the Constitution, not the Bible. He is not our pastor. He is our president, and as long as he does his constitutional duty, he’s doing what we’re paying him to do.
                  And your view re: Dr. Kng’s immorality as a real pastor?

                  1. Do you imagine Trump is faithful to the Constitution? Anything besides his own needs?

                    Dr. King was a man and a sinner as are we all. He risked (and gave) his life for the betterment of others. Trump’s only risk ever was the chance of catching venerial disease.

                    In his own words in an interview with Howard Stern…

                    “Hey, so wait a second, get back to my question,” Stern said. “Let’s say you’re with a hot chick, right? But you’re so germ paranoid, and I’m germ paranoid, do you say to them, ‘look you’ve got to go take a medical test before I do you.'”

                    “Well, you’d like to say that, and sometimes you do,” added Trump. “The problem is that sometimes your own chemicals take over and you can’t wait.”

                    “So you’ll just have straight intercourse with a rubber with them right?” Stern asked.

                    “Well, I don’t know, you know there’s lots of different ways of doing it. It’s a very complicated subject. They say that more people were killed by women in this act than killed in Vietnam, OK,” Trump said.

                    “Yes, that is true,” replied Stern.

                    “You know, you get criticized for that statement, but that statement is very easily true,” added Trump.

                    Stern responded, “I even went as far to say that you’re braver than any Vietnam vet because you’re out there screwing a lot of women.”

                    “Getting the Congressional Medal of Honor, in actuality,” said Trump.

                    “I’m having a good time, but Howard, you know the one negative: It’s very, very dangerous out there,” said Trump.

                    “Yes it is, it’s your Vietnam,” added Stern.

                    “It’s Vietnam,” added Trump. “It is very dangerous. So I’m very, very careful.”

                    1. Bill Clinton–“I did not have sexual relations with that woman” – YouTube

                    2. Bill Clinton TRUTH FINALLY REVEALED:
                      Bill thought they were talking about Hillary and he answered honestly


                    3. Enigma
                      1) Yes, Trump adheres to Article 2…I’m married to a Constitutional scholar
                      2) A Howard Stern interview 20 yrs old when Trump was a playboy and not politician?
                      That was about the time Obama was cruising the clubs in Boystown.
                      3) I have a personal letter from Coretta hanging on my wall, so I really don’t need a Dr. King lecture.

                    4. “I’m waiting for him to be faithful to Article 2, Section 4.”

                      Enigma, provide the crime and the proof of treason, bribery, high crimes or misdemeanors.

                      You have made claims for so long, over and over again but never have proof. What does that say about you?

                    5. “Do you imagine Trump is faithful to the Constitution?”

                      From what we have all seen Trump has been more faithful to the Constitution than Obama.

                    6. I find the allegations about Obama being gay to be dubious. First of all he is married and secondly he has children. To be sure many gay men have gone that route too but it is worth giving some deference to on its face.

                      Secondly. The guy who says he had sex and snorted coke with Obama is a flake. he is not a credible witness, to be generous. Larry Sinclair I think is the name. A strange and obviously crazy homosexual.

                      Thirdly, I read a story in WND that Obama was gay and all the queers in Chicago knew this. Well I know Chicago but very little about the queer side of it because I am not queer. But of course there are neighborhoods where they are said to congregate. That is little evidence of anything. I will tell you what i found very flakey about that article.

                      1- it calls the East Bank Club a gay workout club. Really? I knew some straight family people who belonged and I was under the impression it was fairly prestigious club. Expensive yes, gay, no. Surely it has gays in it like other clubs and probably more if it’s an expensive one. But not a bathhouse at all. Seriously.

                      2– Wayne Madsen “confirmed” the story. Well. I have heard more wrong stuff out of Wayne Madsen for years. He has blamed nearly everything on Mossad imaginable. He is a crank and let me tell you, I find a lot of “conspiracy theorists” reasonably believable, but not Wayne Madsen.

                      Overall, I don’t find this story credible, and it hardly matters at this juncture.

                2. I guess you believe that when a person is incarcerated he should remain incarcerated for the rest of his life.

                While he’s at it, maybe Enigma would like to recount the details of Smollett’s version of the attack on him… need to bother with those little retroactive disclaimers added on later in the first few paragraphs.
                Just what was originally described by Smollett will do fine.
                After that, maybe he’ll quote from the statement of Julie Swetnick about the numerous drug/ rape parties she claims she saw Justice Kavanaugh attend.
                Which, of course, she would have had to attended as well, to give those graphic first–hand eyewitness accounts.

            1. No, Enigma, your point was to bring up and rehash a suspicious and widely discredited claim that Trump and Epstein forcibly raped a 13 year old girl 25 years ago.
              Keep it in storage for when resurfacing that accusation might be best used again, maybe around Nov. 2020.

              1. If Turley keeps bringing up (multiple times) that Bill Clinton was an Epstein friend, who rode on Epstein’s plane. I won’t let him leave out that Trump is also an Epstein friend, who also was accused of raping a 13-year-old on four ocassions. Might as well throw in Prince Andrew too. Discredited is not the same thing as unproven. Unless you mean Trump totally denied it as he has so many things like Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal.

                1. If you have documentation that other friends and associates of Epstein flew on the Lolita Express more than two dozen times, it would make some sense to put them all in the same category.
                  You’re obviously free to want to believe a very suspicious accusation from an anonymous no-show allied with a former Jerry Springer Show that she was raped by Trump and Epstein 25 years ago.
                  That belief, once again, shows how strong your Faith is when you really need to believe something.

                    The flight logs on Epstein’s Lolita Express 727 show Bill Clinton to be the most “frequent flyer” of the known Epstein friends.
                    As mentioned earlier, a billionaire like Epstein who hosted parties for many of the rich and/or famous has, or had, a large circle of friends and associates, some of whom remain Epstein’s friends and supporters.

                    1. I think repeated referencing a very suspicious allegation as if it were fact should count every bit as much as trying to “sell” the attack on Smollett, or peddle Julie Swetnick’s lurid, fantastic accusations.
                      They apparently count for those who want and need them to count.
                      As I’ve mentioned, it just takes a great deal of Faith.

                2. From Wikipedia: “On February 16, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated Acosta to be United States Secretary of Labor.”

                  From Turley, “Many of us objected to his nomination by President Donald Trump and condemned the Senate for confirming him.”

                  Also from Turley, “If Acosta does not do the right thing, it should be attached to a note from President Trump asking for Acosta’s resignation.”

                  Asking? In a note? Has Turley never watched so little as a single episode of The Apprentice?

                  Blind spot? In the passive voice, Turley “objected to the nomination by President Donald Trump.” But, in the active voice, Turley “condemned the Senate for confirming” Trump’s nominee, Alex Acosta. Yeah. Trump drives in Turley’s blind spot. Unless Trump has a saddle strapped to Turley’s back so that Trump can ride Turley into town.

        3. There is no parallel between abuse of minors, which is a horrible and despicable crime, malum in se, and asking a middle aged female masseuse to voluntarily rub the unguinal area, especially in places where reputedly that is often possibly on the menu– which is a not horrible, and usually just a minor crime at best– malum prohibitum.

          I observe that it is plenty legal to ask a woman to rub your groin for free and guys do that all the time. If a guy dares to offer a tip, suddenly, it’s a crime!

          Lets not overlap or confuse the serious matter of juvenile exploitation with adult sex work. I hope people will agree these are not really equivalent matters.

          1. In a bizarre twist of first amendment law, if one were to make a “porno” out of paying for a handjob, by filming it, for intended publication, it would be legal.


            How much sense does this make? our laws on voluntary adult sex work need serious reform. And the middle of a hysteria is exactly the right time to start talking about it.

        4. If Robert kraft a 77 year old widower got a nice 40 or 50 year old Asian massage therapist to massage his groin for a handsome tip, that is actually a good thing for him and does not harm society nor the massage therapist. Drop the hate enigma !

          1. Kurtz, I agree. If Karft pays generous gratuities the women might be fine with that. Assuming they are willing professionals.

            Prostitution gets a bad name ‘because’ it’s illegal! That status alone makes it a problematic industry. Abuses occur because criminals cater to demand.

            Yet the NFL has to disapprove. They can’t have NFL players offering women cash. That would be the worst P R.

          2. Mr Kurtz – Out of curiousity, where does the assumption come fom that he was being massaged by a 40 or 50-year-old? A couple of the alleged owners that were arrested met that description. Most of the girls were assumed to be victims as well. I’ve read enough of your reactions to see you don’t exactly believe that human trafficing is a real thing. If it turns out that the girls were say 16 or 17, and were kept captive, would it make any difference?
            In full disclosure, one of my daughters is a LMT (Licensed Massage Therapist) who works at a luxury hotel & spa and hates the seedier side of the industry. For those that do it right, there’s a whole lot more science and medicine than you find associated with a happy ending.

            1. fair questions

              first of all, there is a charge called human trafficking in nearly all states if not all, and the federal level. it is rarely charged and rarely prosecuted successfully to conclusion. there are many “whys” but i would say, it is a real charge, and NO DOUBT it is a real problem some places in the world. very little here in the USA is my impression contrary to the much ballyhooed “polaris report.”

              pimping is a crime, much more easily proven, but also likewise rarely charged. again, a real thing, but rarely charged. you need a worker to beef on the boss for this to happen. the thing is, workers need bosses, and so they don’t want to beef. people are putting bread on the table. that goes for any ethnic group.

              Putting that aside, on to the growing phenomenon of Chinese immigrant owned, lawfully zoned and licensed massage facilities, ie, massage parlors. First of all., the workers are almost all middle aged. Just go into one and see. Or you can read up on arrests. There are hundreds of arrest stories around the country every year. Almost always 40 and up. Show me one single arrest of a Chinese minor working in a massage parlor. I have looked and not found. Almost always 40 and 50s and sometimes 60 some year old workers.

              But back to the legal aspects of the businesses. First of all, these are almost always licensed on some level, state county or city, and maybe all three. And that means, owners and workers have work cards, either green cards or temporary work cards. And they have gone thru background checks just like American licensed massage therapists.

              But we all know that Chinese massage facilities get a bad rep. They cater to a mostly male clientele, generally. that is for sure. that is not bad per se is it? I dont think so i am a man. so do barbershops. Now we know some get into trouble for bad things. That is not surprising given the numbers, like 15 K of them in California, and probably 100K around the country all told. So some small number will be criminals. But they should not be tarred and painted all with the same brush. If one percent of 100K gets into trouble every year that’s 1000 stories. a lot to sell newspapers and make sexy stories on tv news. but a small percentage.

              Also true sometimes there are manual massages that go into the naughty zone such as alleged against Robert Kraft. Who knows the percentages. By their very nature this is a private thing. Why do we care so much about that? but it is known to happens some places sometimes.

              We also know that whatever the proportion that may give a handjob only, there is a much smaller number which may actually veer into oral or genital copulation. that is going to get them arrested even in a place that will tolerate manual release like a big city. Recently such a story from the “hotbed” of the trade, Queens New York, which saw two shops closed– out of probably 200 or more nearby. So this is a question of degree in the minds of many people but lost in the debate. based on articles I read Kraft is accused of getting a handjob. Well that is sexual but not intercourse. my point is simply that these are generally not whorehouses to be frank,. not even close to brothels, not even the places where a naughty thing may happen from time to time.

              the usual chinese massage facility in exurbia in the shopping center is a great place to get a good therapeutic massage. it has people walking in and out every day who are not getting handjobs. it probably has a mostly male clientele but women go too. it probably has a license and probably has some licensed workers. maybe not all. probably some workers are better at the skill than others.

              Lets talk about American massage therapists now. Has an american massage therapist ever touched a naughty place? You can be sure that has happened too. a small number to be sure and maybe an arrest almost never happens…… of a women masseuse at least. more on that below.

              Has an american ever asked an American for an improper massage? Of course that happens too. Travolta was sued for this once if not more times.

              Also many American male massage therapists are arrested every year for improperly touching female customers. Massage Envy franchise has a class action suit or two against it there are so many “victims.” but massage envy is not treated as a social scourge. Nor is every male masseuse treated as a potential sex offender.

              I have read many disciplinary license actions and I see a lot of American names. I have read them over a long time. I rarely see a Chinese name in licensing revocation actions. And there are a lot of licensed Chinese massage therapists.

              I feel that .Chinese shops get a very bad rap and it’s partly due to irresponsible prosecutors making grand speeches that have little connection to the charges they are actually in the business of proving in court. The newspapers just repeat whatever the cops say uncritically. they demonize any allegations to sell print.

              Of course to some degree it is also due to websites where creepy supposed customers will claim that they got this and that service at this or that place. Well those should be taken with a grain of salt. A bunch of anonymous creeps on the internet some of whom are perverts and liars who get their jollies from making up sex stories fit only for a locker room. And a very small percentage of the clientele if they be clientele at all. There are no statistics taken either way and nobody is trying to make the case from the Chinese worker’s point of view out there. They have no lobbying groups to defend them in the USA for the most part. I would not call this racism but i observe that some ethnic groups in the USA have vocal lobbies and the Chinese do not. So they generally suffer what they do without complaint.

              Anyhow, American women who like to get massage usually got to a frou frou spa. Those are fine. but expensive. Usually chinese shops charge $60 an hour 90 for 90 or 40 for 30 minutes. American massage is sold only in 60 minute increments generally and it is sometimes less on groupon but in spas usually more. It can be twice as expensive depending on the digs. But anybody can also feel free to go to a Chinese owned massage shop. they are welcome and should not let the hype discourage them. They are not staffed with slaves. They will get a good massage usually and perhaps a better than what they might get at the mall. Massage envy therapists are notoriously inexperienced by comparison. Experience matters.

              All licensed shops are supposed to be following the same cleanliness guidelines as any other shop, no matter who owns it. But some are nicer than others. If cheap digs are a turnoff, of course, if you want a better experience always go to a better looking location in a nicer place. That goes for bars and hotels as much as it does massage facilities. And be sure and leave a decent tip. Yes in Chinese shops they expect more in tips than Americans. And one can be sure in general they get more tips when they serve men than women. So they aim for serving men in general. But women can hire massage too. anyhow there is an enduring and normal healthy human dynamic there which is not just a matter of naughty touching.

              The bottom line for a lot of these prosecutions are three things that have zero to do with any “human trafficking.”

              a) a cranky neighbor or somebody’s wife got mad, or maybe a competitor is trying to run them off, and somebody called cops and made a stink.
              b) they think they are notorious tax evaders which makes people unsympathetic. but like a lot of small businesses that deal in cash, they keep books that are very light on paperwork. like maybe no paper books at all. probably true of a lot of little Chinese restaurants too. Not illegal per se but prosecutors dont like.
              c) the cops are motivated by asset forfeiture opportunities which is at the departmental level but also guess what? may also including skimming the evidence before it’s booked. yes I mean there is a lot of pocketing a little bit of the seized cash. when nobody is keeping clear books that opens the door to it unfortunately and it also explains why a lot of prosecutions collapse if they are challenged by competent defense counsel.

              Well, anyhow, I say throw the book at Epstein, fire Acosta, but cut the local people trying to put bread on the table some slack.

              1. If one is concerned about human trafficking build a wall and secure our borders. That will end virtually all human trafficking in this country.

                If one is concerned with people having consensual sex behind closed doors they should close their own and stop messing with other people’s lives.

                Generally this type of complaint comes from the competition or zoning concerns because some don’t like the element that exists. That is why cities have zoning laws. Nothing is perfect but if you make normal things illegal you end up with a lot of criminals.

                1. i agree with that! Thanks Allan

                  But for precision’s sake, there is a distinction between human smuggling which is one crime and human trafficking which is another. Border enforcement can reduce and mitigate smuggling.

                  Human trafficking does not have as a necessary element border crossing. Generally it is defined as “commercial sex acts or labor or services that are induced through force, fraud, or coercion, regardless of whether or not transportation occurs.” If the victim is a minor there are certain presumptions of fraud which make the crime easier to prove.

                  So HT as a crime can occur with American natives on both the perp and victim end of it, so to speak. It is essentially what used to be called “white slavery” and then “involuntary servitude.” The federal statute for that has been superseded by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000.

                  There are real crimes of HT occurring in the US, though perhaps there is a lot of overlap with crimes being charged different ways. A lot of the crimes of force are simpler to prove than a HT charge.

                  One often hears for example that “the workers slept there and were not allowed to leave.” Now sleeping in a shop violates zoning code not criminal code. And it allows workers to save money. So they like it rather to sleep there than rent an apartment for a travel gig. Its about like a band sleeping on a tour bus instead of renting rooms.

                  And if workers are not “Free to leave” then they must have been detained, yes? Well, it’s ILLEGAL to detain workers in every state and location. And easily proven crime against any boss. If there is a worker willing to credibly testify! So why is this never charged if what the advocates say is true, that the workers cant leave? Well, maybe, it’s because the advocates are lying! The workers can leave, they just dont want to. If they wanted to leave they would have or it would have been easy arrests against the bosses. But nobody in the “press” ever makes that simple deduction.

                  Now fraud is a lot harder to prove. And indeed fraud is the element of that crime that explains why it probably is so rarely charged. Tough case to prove any kind of fraud based purely on verbal stories.

                  So I reject the notion asserted in the “polaris report” that, for example, there are 3,300 massage parlors in California alone that are “Fronts for human trafficking.” that is hogwash. Their methodology for that number comes from their own unaudited and unverified “analysis” of their own “hotline” tips and reports.

                  There is a lot of info on the aspects of licensing at this link for people interested in this arcane licensing topic.


                  One one level it is like a liquor license. It may be a purely salutary good or service but it is associated with certain perceived social woes so it is licensed. some licensees follow the law better than others. some liquor stores sell beer to teenagers. some sell ripple to drunks.
                  some just sell wine to rich folks. but they are all licensees and it’s unwise to try and prohibit the sale of alcohol altogether based on abolitionists who paint with too broad a brush.

                  1. “it is defined as “commercial sex acts or labor or services that are induced through force, fraud, or coercion, ”

                    Kurtz, when arrested and convicted or deported who makes up the bulk of illegal trafficking? I think it would be those that are here illegally or out of jail illegally. How many American citizens are chained up and then work in a sex parlor. The thing I believe that keeps those women working is that they have no passports and are not American citizens.

                    If I am wrong show me the numbers. My opinion is a guess.

                2. Alan, you’re ridiculous. How is a wall going to stop foreign nationals from overstaying tourist visas? Melania Trump more than likely entered that way. She then became a ‘model’.

                  1. ah come on peter. just because there are a lot who come with valid visas, fly in or come in cars and whatever, and then overstay, does not mean there are not a lot sneaking in across the southern border. surely you can admit that is so?

                    a wall helps with the border sneakers not the visa overstays! we got it!

                    they say they’re at about 60/40 for last year. well 38% of the illegals is still a lot.

                    I mean almost by definition, the ones sneaking in do not have valid visas, and the ones who don’t sneak in, do! this is obvious to people who understand the nomenclature as you obviously do


                    1. Kurtz, I don’t know where you’re coming from here, but that article completely undermines Trump’s case for a wall. In fact, I appreciate your posting it. I just saved it as a reference tool.

                      NOTABLE PASSAGE:

                      The report released Wednesday by the Center for Migration Studies of New York finds that from 2016-2017, people who overstayed their visas accounted for 62 percent of the newly undocumented, while 38 percent had crossed a border illegally.

                      “It is clear from our research that persons who overstay their visas add to the US undocumented population at a higher rate than border crossers. This is not a blip, but a trend which has become the norm,” said Donald Kerwin, CMS’ executive director, in a statement. “As these numbers indicate, construction of hundreds of more miles of border wall would not address the challenge of irregular migration into our country, far from it.”

                      The study also finds that the undocumented population from Mexico fell by almost 400,000 people in 2017 and that since 2010, the number of undocumented from that country fell by 1.3 million.

                    2. Well Peter I guess i don’t explain very well. My points are two.

                      1- Yes you are right that visa overstays will not be prevented by a wall. And they are the majority now. Ok! I got it.

                      2– Secondly, NONETHELESS, a wall will help prevent the border sneak across in the night sort of illegals, who don’t have visas. just because the relative proportion is less, does not mean the absolute numbers are not still a problem. they certainly are a problem and any time could get worse.

                  2. btw in case anybody was wondering?

                    “Although most Chinese immigrants in the United States are legally present, approximately 268,000 of them were unauthorized in 2014, according to Migration Policy Institute (MPI) estimates, comprising around 2 percent of the 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States.”

                    by contast, Mexicans make up half the “unauthorized migrants” acc to Pew.

                    I find it remarkable that the Democrats have been as successful in every ethnic group as they have. The differential, for example, between Mexicans affected by Trump’s policies, versus Chinese or Vietnamese, is enormous. Chinese and Vietnamese migrants in America have very little to be concerned about with respect to Trump policies at the southern border, for example.

                    What accounts for this?

                    I have a hypothesis. Chinese PRC government fears and loathes Trump who is shaving their trade advantages down. They influence Mandarin language publications circulated among US resident Chinese via Wechat and so forth. ….. Probably far more sophisticated than the alleged Russians buying facebook ads. This is a problem that will only get worse. Look for far more diverse “foreign collusion” stories to come in the future.

                  3. Peter, I know that your ability to think is greatly impaired. A border wall is just one part of border security. If incomplete it funnels illegals into specific areas that the border control are aware of and helps to reduce the manpower needed. When you talk about drug seizures you talk about what is seized coming through our entry areas. That is right because where there is no wall and the border is open the drug seizures don’t exit. The drugs come right in.

                    Do you know what else is happening. The cartels are bringing in people in one area so the border patrol sends all its local men to concentrate in that area and arrest the people that don’t run fast enough while the drugs can be smuggled in elsewhere since the border control is occupied arresting people. You have to be one of the biggest fools I have ever encountered.

                    As far as overstaying visa’s, every third world country I have been to tracks my location until I leave and they verify it. Do you really think we can’t do the same?

Comments are closed.