Acosta Resigns Amid Mounting Questions Over Role In Epstein Scandal

There is a curious pattern in the Trump Administration that you need to beware of presidential praise which often proves the swan song for cabinet members. The latest is Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta who tried to keep his job with a press conference that was widely panned as trying to shift the blame for the sweetheart deal that he gave Jeffrey Epstein, the serial sex abuser. Since I previously called for Acosta’s resignation (and opposed his confirmation) based on his role in the Epstein scandal, I will not feign sympathy.

Acosta phoned President Trump this morning, though it is likely that the White House indicated that it would welcome such a call.

Previously, President Trump declared that he continued to support Acosta and that “he did an unbelievable job as secretary of Labor” and is a “very good man.” Various pundits joked at the time that Acosta’s day must be numbered.

It is important to note that, despite the objections of many of us who have followed the Epstein scandal, Acosta was confirmed by 60 Senators from both parties.

I am usually more sympathetic when people fall from a great height but Acosta’s press conference only reaffirmed the negative view that many of us have developed of Acosta. He blamed state prosecutors and even seemed to portray 2007 as the virtual dark ages when victim rights and transparency were unknown values. His plea bargain was a disgrace and violated federal law. The result worked to the harm of dozens of victims and undermined the integrity of the justice system as a whole. The real question is not why he resigned but why 60 Democratic and Republican senators voted to confirm this man.

It is also another example of poor decision making by this White House to bring on such a controversial figure and then allow this scandal to fester and explode back on the Administration. This is the thirteenth cabinet member to leave this Administration. In the same period, I believe that Obama and George W. Bush had none or one, respectively. While Trump has lashed out at the media, this turnover shows something serious wrong in the vetting and judgment of the White House. The turnover and vacancies have added to a sense of chaos in the Administration.

58 thoughts on “Acosta Resigns Amid Mounting Questions Over Role In Epstein Scandal”

  1. DSS and others that are interested in justice rather than political scheming.

    The key sentence from Bown’s article:

    “the deal included wording that granted immunity to “any potential co-conspirators’’ who were also involved in Epstein’s crimes. These accomplices or participants were not identified in the agreement,”

    Immunity to any co-conspirators left unidentified.

    Can anyone think of people that accompanied Epstein on his plane to Lolita Island multiple times and likely had sex with underage women?

    Bill Clinton.

    No low level prosecutor makes such a deal.

    The full paragraph:

    “The pact required Epstein to plead guilty to two prostitution charges in state court. Epstein and four of his accomplices named in the agreement received immunity from all federal criminal charges. But even more unusual, the deal included wording that granted immunity to “any potential co-conspirators’’ who were also involved in Epstein’s crimes. These accomplices or participants were not identified in the agreement, leaving it open to interpretation whether it possibly referred to other influential people who were having sex with underage girls at Epstein’s various homes or on his plane.”

  2. Acosta Says Epstein Deal Was in a “Different World” — But His Labor Department Still Makes Trafficking Victims Suffer

    Natasha Lennard
    July 11 2019, 1:03 p.m.

    https://theintercept.com/2019/07/11/jeffrey-epstein-alex-acosta-labor-department-trafficking/

    Excerpt:

    “Don’t we want criminal prosecutors to be consulted whenever someone says that they are a victim of trafficking?” Acosta replied on Wednesday, when pressed on his department’s new, harsher visa policy. His words betrayed, once again, a profound disregard for the lives of victims. When someone says they are a victim of trafficking, the most important first step should be to provide that person the means and the security to escape their situation. Exposure to higher risks of deportation and criminalization, as the new Department of Labor policy ensures, are not the responses trafficking victims need.

    If Acosta has proven himself consistent between today and his “very different world” of 11 years ago, it is in his disregard for trafficking and abuse victims.

  3. There is increasing likelihood that Epstein had a previous secret deal with the US Govt. This could explain where the pressure for the NPA came from — a desire to keep Epstein’s role under the lid of secrecy.

  4. “…why 60 Democratic and Republican senators voted to confirm this man.”

    – Professor Turley
    ______________

    The good professor touched on something profoundly edifying. The power of the dark, secret, clandestine, phantom “deep deep state” to shape and control events.

    The “deep deep state” “voted to confirm” the cover-up of the involvement with Jeffrey Epstein of the likes of Bill “Lewinsky” Clinton, Prince Andrew, Chuck Schumer, Elton John AIDS Foundation, and assorted charities, celebrities and luminaries.

    The “deep deep state” has been “voting to confirm” the voidance and nullification of almost every constitutional right, freedom, privilege and immunity of Americans as it has moved America to adopt the principles of communism as central planning, control of the means of production (i.e. unconstitutional “regulation”), redistribution of wealth and social engineering. Affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, rent control, social services, forced busing, minimum wage, utility subsidies, WIC, TANF, HAMP, HARP, Education, Labor, Obamacare, Obamaphones, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing,” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc., etc., etc., are all unconstitutional violations of the right to private property and Article 1, Section 8, which limits the power of Congress to tax for “…general Welfare…” omitting and, thereby, deliberately excluding any power to tax for “…individual Welfare…,” and totality restricts and limits regulation to merely that of “…commerce among the several States…” allowing no other regulation of any and all aspects of private property.

    The “deep deep state” has “voted to confirm” the very lucrative, profitable and counterindicated wars of aggression, not “common defence” as prescribed in the Preamble, such as “Crazy Abe’s” contrived, forced and involuntary Civil War (no other society in history ended slavery by war) and those of the Spanish-American, Mexican-American, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan to the immense advantage of global money changers, bankers and financiers.

    The “deep deep state” has “voted to confirm” the termination with extreme prejudice of key elected officials and agitators, such as the “martyred” Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, in the furtherance of its objectives

    The “deep deep state” has “voted to confirm” the complete and total communization, subsumption and globalization of the United States of America and its associated aggression.

  5. for those who support Trump, let me know when he gets to you……previous admins were no prize, but his whole ‘PROGRAM” as it exists is base on revenge on Obama for insulting him at a dinner…paying Trump back for all his birther attacks..Trump , bully boy that he is, can dish it out but doesn’t like to take it….the only news he trusts is Fox news……….

  6. Another player everyone is forgetting is the judge in the case. A plea “bargain” is negotiated between the prosecutor and the defendant’s attorney, but then it has to be reviewed, approved and signed-off on by the judge. Plea deals that are “contrary to the interests of justice” are typically rejected by the judge. So who was the judge and why did he/she agree to the plea deal? Lots of slimy characters in this sordid case!

    1. well i guess that was one of our unelected, lifetime tenure federal judges

      i’m not picking on them, you go first TIN! those blackrobes scare the bejeezus out of me

  7. Good riddance. This was another self inflicted wound by the President I support. His biggest mistake as President is his extremely poor judgement in hiring people. Way too often he surrounds himself with the very same swamp creatures he claims to be against. I hope my fellow supporters agree.

    That said, I’m not fully condemning Acosta yet because we don’t know all the facts…but he sure smells like a swamp creature and that’s enough for me to say he should have never been hired.

    1. Way too often he surrounds himself with the very same swamp creatures he claims to be against.

      Ivan,
      I don’t disagree with that statement. I read an interesting article the other day that may reflect the candidates for top posts keep coming from the same cesspool. I haven’t confirmed the accuracy of what this author describes, but if even partially true, this is how the political class (both parties) inoculate themselves from the rule of law.

      Everyone should take the time to read this. Slowly, and patiently, because it’s very important.

      From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation. A Grand Jury had been impaneled. Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”. Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared. Now you would think that an honest investigator would be able to figure this out.

      Look who took over this investigation in 2005, none other than James Comey. Coincidence? Guess who was transferred into the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS? None other than, Lois Lerner. Isn’t that interesting?

      But this is all just a series of strange coincidences, right? Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Justice from 2001 to 2005? None other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States, Rod Rosenstein.

      Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this time frame? Another coincidence (just an anomaly in statistics and chances), but it was Robert Mueller.

      What do all four casting characters have in common? They all were briefed and/or were front-line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation. Another coincidence, right?

      Fast forward to 2009. James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin. Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, official government business, on her own personal email server. The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of Hillary. Like all good public servants do, supposedly looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to… the Russians. Now, you would think that this is a fairly straight up deal, except it wasn’t. America got absolutely nothing out of it.

      However, prior to the sales approval, BILL CLINTON goes to Moscow, gets paid $500,000 for a one hour speech; then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours. Ok, no big deal right? Well, not so fast, the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme.

      Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during this time frame. He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009. Who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland? None other than, Rod Rosenstein.

      And what happened to the informant? The Department of Justice placed a gag order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it.

      How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise?

      Very soon after; the sale was approved. $145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal. Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division? None other than, Lois Lerner.

      Ok, that’s all just another series of coincidences, nothing to see here, right? Let’s fast forward to 2015. Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw personal email server. He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law. He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email.

      Sparing you the State Departments cover up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this, they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary.

      Now this is amazing, guess who became FBI Director in 2013? James Comey, who secured 17 no bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a $6 million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer? Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at the State Department. Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and he exonerates her. Nope, couldn’t find any crimes there.

      In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy. They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury! Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta” Comey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July 5th of 2016, and exonerates Hillary from any wrongdoing.

      Do you see the pattern?

      It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Assistant Attorney General, Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues.

      FISA abuse, political espionage pick a crime, any crime, chances are this group and a few others did it:
      All the same players.
      All compromised and conflicted.
      All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves.
      All connected in one way or another to the Clinton’s.
      They are like battery acid; they corrode and corrupt everything they touch. How many lives have these two destroyed?

      As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service. Let us not forget that Comey’s brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation’s taxes.

      The person that is the common denominator to all the crimes above and still doing her evil escape legal maneuvers at the top of the 3 Letter USA Agencies? Yes, that would be Hillary Rodham Clinton.

      Let’s learn a little about Mrs. Lisa H. Barsoomian’s background. Lisa H. Barsoomian, an Attorney that graduated from Georgetown Law, is a protégé of James Comey and Robert Mueller. Barsoomian, with her boss R. Craig Lawrence, represented Bill Clinton in 1998. Lawrence also represented:
      Robert Mueller 3 times,
      James Comey 5 times,
      Barack Obama 45 times,
      Kathleen Sebelius 56 times,
      Bill Clinton 40 times,
      and Hillary Clinton 17 times.
      Between 1998 and 2017, Barsoomian herself represented the FBI at least five times.

      You may be saying to yourself, who cares about the work history of this Barsoomian woman? Apparently, someone does, because someone out there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets. Someone out there cares so much that even the internet has been “purged” of all information pertaining to Barsoomian.

      Historically, this indicates that the individual is a protected CIA operative. Additionally, Lisa Barsoomian has specialized in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the intelligence community. Although, Barsoomian has been involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC Office of the US Attorney, her email address is LisaBarsoomian@NIH.gov. The NIH stands for National Institutes of Health. This is a tactic routinely used by the CIA to protect an operative by using another government organization to shield their activities. It’s a cover, so big deal right? What does one more attorney with ties to the US intelligence community really matter?

      It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall, DACA, everything coming out of California, the Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump, the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14 month nap with occasional forays into the marijuana legalization mix and last but not least Mueller’s never-ending investigation into collusion between the Trump team and the Russians.

      Why does Barsoomian, CIA operative, merit any mention? Because she is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s wife.

      – Tom Tancredo/Team America

  8. Let me add one more thing. To all those that believe they are getting justice by blaming Acosta without knowning all the facts they should recognize that they are complicit with covering up and protecting those that should be blamed and were potentially paid off.

    Acosta, I think, was too low on the totem pole for this to happen unless money changed hands above or the girls refused to testify where money and influence could have played a part as well.

    Therefore it is possible that Acosta in a way was a hero.

    1. A “heroic” act involves putting yourself in grave danger to help other people. I see nothing so far that says Acosta risked his career to get justice for these abused children. In fact, I see the opposite.

      1. Ivan, I understand your feelings but are you accounting for the political and financial power Epstein had? The President of the US was likely breaking the law with Epstein multiple times. Do you think the power started way down with the prosecutor or do you believe the power started much higher up working its way down.

        If the Grand Jury only got one indictment as I have heard wouldn’t that tell us that something devious has happened?

        Havey Weinstein looked like he was heading for jai in short order. now we can’t be sure. He has clout, not as much as Epstein, but it is showing how he might be able to avoid some or all of the charges.

        That could have happened with this case especially since the number of people willing to testify fell and I would guess many people were paid off. Maybe Acosta saw the fix was in and the best he could do was fight for 18 months and a permanent label of sex offender.

        Everyone wishes to make their lives better so how would an underage girl respond to a check of an immense amount of money to her while her father and mother are both provided more lucrative job experiences or maybe a good deal on a piece of property.

        1. The corruption is everywhere you look. I’m sure it goes much higher than Acosta, but I definitely don’t see the actions of a hero.

          1. Yes, Ivan, corruption is everywhere and the corruption that occurred in this case likely started very high up potentially as high as the Clintons. For all we know the powers that be might have wanted a misdemeanor as well and the money may have flowed everywhere along with the political influence. For all you know Acosta might have refused to grant a misdemeanor and forced the other powers to settle or he would quit.

            Remember even after given the jail term Epstein had, I believe, private quaters in the jail and was out of jail most of the time. There are even reports of him walking in Palm Beach which was not allowed but he was let go.

            Hero or villain? I don’t have the slightest idea but I won’t crucify a man when I don’t have a reasonable understanding of the facts and motivations. Furthermore crucifying him doesn’t help discover who played a part in this raunchy illegal affair.

            1. Hero or villain? I don’t have the slightest idea but I won’t crucify a man when I don’t have a reasonable understanding of the facts and motivations.

              It has become increasingly apparent the justice system is not meant to be understood when a certain class of people are involved. Take a selfie on a US nuclear-powered submarine and you end up in Leavenworth. Send and receive Top Secret government material from an insecure illegal server in your home and you can run for president. Have an illicit affair with one of your high school students and you become a registered sex offender off to prison. Run a child prostitution ring for the rich and famous and your lifestyle is nearly unchanged.

              My guess is in the business of law and politics everyone operating in that upper tier has a dossier that can be used against them. If they don’t, they will soon enough.

  9. “pattern in the Trump Administration that you need to beware of presidential praise which often proves the swan song for cabinet members.”

    I think this statemement is both disingenuous and biased.

    The President is running the nation. To him Acosta could have done the best or worst job with Epstein, but the President has to calculate whether the fair or unfair criticism of Epstein is causing difficulty in running the nation. That is the sum total of what is generally considered when one is an executive. Professors don’t shoulder such responsibilities so are not used to making such decisions.

    1. No, Allan, Trump can’t even run the White House, much less the nation. There has been an unprecedented number of departures of unfit and unqualified cabinet members, and a huge number of agencies that have no permanent leader. Acosta’s issues were known when he was nominated. Of course, why would someone who brags about assaulting women have a problem with a former prosecutor who cut a sweetheart deal with a former friend that Trump called “a terrific guy”? At the time in question, Trump was observed to be coming and going frequently from Epstein’s Manhattan mansion, according to the doorman of the building next door. To this day, Trump’s only expression of empathy is with Acosta, not the children who were raped and sexually abused.

      Here’s another little tidbit to chew on: regardless of the strength or weakness of the cases alleging molestation and rape, and/or the alleged difficulty or unwillingness of child witnesses to testify, it is undisputed that Epstein had a massive amount of child pornography in his homes. That is a federal offense and a no-brainer to prosecute. All you need prove is ownership and control of the premises and the presence of this material. Instead of going after Epstein on these charges, Acosta entered into secret negotiations with Barr’s former law firm that excluded the Florida state prosecutor’s office. Acosta went out of his way to ensure that the victims would not know about the sweetheart deal, which included confidentiality and agreement not to prosecute co-conspirators, whomever they may be. He violated federal law by denying victims the right to make victim impact statements. Now, Acosta tries to make himself out to be a hero, saving the case from the allegedly inept Florida prosecutors. The prosecutor in question has pushed back, hard. Acosta is therefore also a liar in addition to his incompetence or malfeasance, as the case may be.

      1. I guess Natacha you believe Bill Clinton to be a responsible man and should be permitted to rape women and go to an island to sleep with underage girls.

        There is something wrong in your head. You go from one subject to the next because you can’t deal in depth on any one issue.

        1. Allan, Natacha is just upset because President Trump is fat. If he would lose weight, she’d be fine.

      2. that may indeed be a possible explanation of acosta’s actions, and he would not be the first prosecutor to make such dubious choices.

        but, as usual it has nothing to do with trump even though you fashion it that way at the start.

        this post shows that you actually have a brain and can think, you just don’t like it much

        1. Yes, this case does have a lot to do with Trump, who was friends with the “terrific guy” when the child porn, assault and rape prosecutions were going on, and who nominated Acosta anyway. Trump may well have been involved in the molestations and rapes of these children, or at least viewing the child porn, since he was seen frequenting Lolita Mansion. Time will tell. Most current and former federal prosecutors who have commented on the matter state that at best Acosta is extremely incompetent and indifferent to the suffering of these children. At worst, there was something way more sinister going on, which might explain why the public corruption division of Justice is now prosecuting Epstein. The tendency is to think Acosta’s conduct exceeds mere incompetence, based on his exclusion of the Florida state prosecutor from negotiations with Barr’s former law firm, his violation of federal law requiring victim notification and the fact that he refused to prosecute Epstein for the child porn crimes which would not have required any testimony from the child victims.

      3. Acosta entered into secret negotiations with Barr’s former law firm

        “Barr’s former law firm” employs 2,500 attorneys.

        1. This is still an imputed disqualification, which Barr himself acknowledged when he initially recused. Another relevant reason to recuse is the fact that Barr’s father, who was headmaster of the prestigious Dalton School in Manhattan, hired Epstein to teach, even though Epstein doesn’t even have any college degree. However, Barr has now un-recused. This really, really stinks.

          1. Yes it is, you are correct, but it is still an imputed disqualification, especially in this era of electronically-stored files and information.

  10. I don’t know if Acosta is a good man or a bad man. I don’t know all the facts of the case but the facts I have heard don’t leave him responsible for Epstein’s sentence. He was a small player who worked under an attroney general who was a partisan Democrat. I don’t know that I wish to blame this Democrat either because the liklihood of both of them being dealt bad hands is strong.

    A lot of powerful people were involved along with a lot of money and that could very easily change the dynamics of the case from a win to a loss so maybe what Acosta did was salvage a politically created loss.
    Professor Turley doesn’t delve deep enough into what happened including the Grand Jury. He doesn’t think that the witnesses could be bought off financially and politically.

    All I can say is if Turely holds Acosta to such standards without knowing the full story then shouldn’t we hold him to similar standards and say that he shouldn’t have permitted the criminal Avenatti to graduate. He did. Should he lose his professorship? Sometimes people have to make decisions where they are unaware of the future and ignorant of all the facts. If I blame Acosta based on the lack of knowledge we have today then I have to blame Turley for Avenatti.

    1. He was a small player who worked under an attroney general who was a partisan Democrat.

      No, the plea deal was concluded in 2007, some days after Alberto Gonzales had left office but before Michael Mukasey was confirmed and sworn in.

      Acosta held federal positions for nearly seven years (2002-09). He departed federal employment in June 2009 to take an academic position. Little doubt Eric Holder would have replaced him. Again, all the positions he had were discretionary appointments made by George W. Bush and his attorneys-general.

      1. Are you saying that Barry Krischer was not the attorney general for Palm Beach at the time?

        I don’t cast blame on either as I have said that they were small fish and that whatever happened happened due to money or politics that was higher than Acosta. I think it is higher than Barry Krischer but until we got to the top we couldn’t figure out who was a problem down the chain.

        I’m not sure what you are trying to say.

        1. Again, Acosta was the U.S. Attorney. He worked for the federal Attorney-General, not the state prosecutor in Palm Beach County.

          1. DSS, the lines here are not clear. We are talking about a billionaire closely connected to Bill Clinton and many Democratic politicians. Bill Clinton might be guilty in the same crimes as Epstein.

            With this much influence one can guess that the feds, state government and businesses may all have been involved at one point or another. The policework was done in Palm Beach where Epstein had one of many homes and a lot of influence. The Palm Beach police treated this case very seriously and to my understanding did a superb job.

            The case I believe was brought to Barry Krischer, Palm Beach County State Attorney, This should have been a multiple count indictment that went directly to the court. Instead he called a Grand Jury and presented only one girl to the Grand Jury. In that setting the evidence is provided by the prosecutor. The Grand Jurors don’t have complete knowledge which seems to explain their charge of misdemeanor solicitation of prostitution.

            The police Chief Reter requested Krischer to disqualify himself. Reiter requested the FBI to take over the case which it did and Acosta stepped in.

            Right there we should be supicious of everthing going on outside of the police department. We also should be aware of the shenanigans played by the FBI to protect Hillary at a later date..

            Moving far ahead, Epstein went to jail but that was controlled by a Democratic police chief that permitted Epstein to have very special privileges. Part of the jail became his “private residence” and some described it as a hotel. Epstein set up an close to the jail and was given special permission to be out of the jail for up to 16 hours a day 6 days a week including weekly trips to NY and his private island via his own jet.

            After seeing the beginning of the story and the end of the story until he was just arrested again I recognize there is a lot we don’t know so I hesitate placing blame on Acosta until we know what that blame really is.

            If you want to get to the big guys one shouldn’t be stopping at the schnook that inherited the problem. Once you do that you propagate the problem because those truly responsible are never touched.

  11. Question the testimony of a 16 year old teeny-bopper or groupie

    The individual, or group of individuals, involved in obsessive adoration of entertainers such as musicians, actors, athletes, and even political figures. Behaviors are juvenile and influenced oftentimes by money, drugs and crush-like emotions or lustful sentiments, and often infringe the rights of the figure experiencing the attentions of a frenzied fanatic.

    1. Music man is talking about what they call “star f _ _ _ ers”

      yeah those poor movie stars billionaires celebrities and pro athletes. they are so oppressed!

      https://slippedisc.com/2018/04/james-levine-victim-i-was-silenced-by-the-new-yorker/

      I say let them have a fair trial and due process before they’re locked up for a long long time

      jeff esptein’s lawyers better get to work on landing him in a minsec club fed or he’s in for some hard time

      https://www.gorillaconvict.com/2016/09/pedophiles-get-killed-prison/

      you know what’s really bad about protective custody? the chomo is in there with other chomos and snitches. out of the frying pan, into the fire. better have a lot of money on your commissary jeff you’re going to need it

      1. jeff will want to get witness protection program i bet. but i doubt it will be available for him

        hey jeff if you’re snitching on a POTUS then nobody will protect you. but if he got into the program it would just mean when they come to punch his ticket, nobody will know the cadaver was his

        i mean can a guy like jeff epstein really be happy working at HR block in Kansas? nah, i can’t see it, can you? he’ll be volunteering at a woman’s shelter looking for new marks within a month

        and if you think they can’t find you in witness protection, ha, ha, ha,

        jeff wants to try out life as a snitch and a chomo. i predict within 3 years he gets “released” from Earthly custody altogether

  12. Your bias shows when you wrote “60 Democratic and Republican senators” voted to confirm. Among the 60 there were 8 Democrats, but this phrasing suggests that the Democrats were primarily responsible for his confirmation.

    1. but this phrasing suggests that the Democrats were primarily responsible for his confirmation.

      Well if you understand how these things work, nominations expect to have the votes from the party of the president. If that party lacks the necessary votes to confirm, then they will require bipartisan support. And because of the political nature of this process, if they only needed 8 to confirm, then they would work to get the 8 and the remaining would be off the hook from supporting the president to their constituents.

      So it was bipartisan support and it was always going to require the Democrats to complete the confirmation process.

  13. The real question is not why he resigned but why 60 Democratic and Republican senators voted to confirm this man. It is also another example of poor decision making by this White House to bring on such a controversial figure…

    If that is the real question, then the answer may be something other than a poor decision by this White House. Based on the 2,5 year Mueller investigation, you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a controversial figure within the political class. And what do most of these figures have in common? The Law. Most importantly, the controversial use of the law to aid and abet their heinous nature. Professor Turley won’t address the elephant in the room; his legal class that have created the environment where skilled legal practitioners exploit the loopholes they’ve created and which the average citizen ultimately suffers.

    1. “…you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a controversial figure within the political class.” And that includes Mueller the Fixer himself.

  14. Why not blame state prosecutors? Whose job is it to bring common-and-garden criminal cases to court? If I’m not mistaken, the police officer who led the investigation of Epstein in Miami blamed the state prosecutors. Epstein has a residence in New York. He wasn’t prosecuted there at all and by some accounts the DA in Manhattan had him removed from the state sex offender registry.

    The federal role in this (were the U.S. Code properly composed and applied) should be to address violations occurring in the Virgin Islands as well as the transportation of the parties to these meretricious transactions from one jurisdiction to another.

    (Recall, federal prosecutors obtained hideous sentences for that Subway pitchman and his bud, even though their principal crime was possession of filthy pictures said bud took through a peephole in his own home. There were some auxilliary charges against said pitchman for some interstate phone calls and travel in pursuit of what would amount to minor crimes in most jurisdictions. There’s a certain amount of business U.S. Attorneys’s offices lay claim to that a properly belong with state prosecutors).

    1. I agree with that but for the sex trafficking statute, conduct anywhere can fall within its jurisdiction, and I really mean anywhere.

      It’s a rich irony that the federal sex trafficking statute was viewed and used as a diplomatic tool by hillary clinton during her tenure, to badger various nations outside the US sphere of influence

  15. Such a fortuitous situation that it was suddenly discovered that Alex Acosta was involved in the original Epstein event. If only we had known about this earlier.

  16. Yes, Acosta was feeble, maybe venal in his prosecution of Epstein.

    But. From everything that I am reading, the rot goes far deeper.

    The local DA in Florida at the time and the Democratic power structure (though there are Republicans who appear to be complicit) also tried to protect Epstein.

    Then you have the office of Cyrus Vance in NY (“Oh that was a low level DA who is long gone”), tried to mitigate the minimal charges against Epstein.

    And why did the NY police not enforce the 90 day reporting requirements for a Level 3 sex offender (AKA pervert)?

    I understand Prof. Turley’s desire to keep justice blind, but in this case it appears that justice was subverted at many levels, over a long period of time.

    Maybe we do need a legal lynch mob in this case.

    1. maybe what was said about epstein being an “intel asset” is at the foot of a lot of this mischief

Leave a Reply