Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ike

Epstein autopsy points to homicide

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Cookester15 said:

What is my agenda genius? 

You only care about "conspiracy theories" when its frame around "the left" supposedly conspiring to keep things secret.

 

I just proof of RIGHT-WING POLITICIANS and an ENTIRE DEPARTMENT of the federal goverment literally attempting to uphold a illegally-made plea bargain that was keeping Epstein and out of jail.

 

You don't seem awfully concern about those people who did THOSE specific things.

 

But rather, an ABC news anchor talking about how Buckingham Palace was going to kick them out of interviews of Kate Middleton and Prince WIlliam.

 

That's why ABC news was pressured, they were pressured with losing news coverage for something else entirely.

 

Do you even know that it was JOURNALISTS WHO KEPT INVESTIGATING this story for 10 years to keep it alive in order to bring to light that Jeffrey Epstein's plea bargain was highly, HIGHLY suspicious???????

 

It was the LOCAL FLORIDA NEWSPAPER who did most the leg work, the Miami Herald. They're the ones who found the victims to try and piece together what exactly happened with the Jeffrey Epstein criminal probe and plea bargain in 2008.  They're the ones who had the breakthrough revelation that Alexander Acosta DIDN'T INFORM THE VICTIMS of the settlement to get their approval, which is illegal.

 

 

 

Oh, by the way...............your tweet claims that ABC News buried the story 3 years ago.

 

Then how come there's this article from ABC News about Jeffrey Epstein.................from 3 years ago

 

https://abcnews.go.com/US/victims-feds-hid-sweetheart-deal-sex-offender-deep/story?id=36843144

 

 

Quote

 

Victims: Feds Hid 'Sweetheart' Deal for Sex Offender With Deep Political Ties

By james hill and matthew mosk

Feb 11, 2016, 4:10 PM ET

 

New court filings are bringing fresh attention to a Florida sex scandal that could become grist for political trouble in the 2016 Presidential campaign.

 

The new legal filings allege that federal prosecutors in Florida “repeatedly” and “intentionally” violated the rights of dozens of teenage sex abuse victims by secretly negotiating an “extraordinarily lenient” deal with a wealthy Palm Beach financier known in the past to have socialized with powerful business and political figures -- including former President Bill Clinton and current GOP front-runner Donald Trump.

 

Prosecutors went to great lengths to keep secret the non-prosecution agreement reached in 2007 with Jeffrey Epstein, attorneys for the victims allege, “because of the strong objection they would have faced from victims of Epstein’s abuse, and because of the public criticism that would have resulted from allowing a politically-connected billionaire who had sexually abused more than 30 minor girls to escape ... with only a county court jail sentence.”

 

That's what you get for following a Project Veritas claim, sweetheart.

Edited by jehurey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jehurey said:

You only care about "conspiracy theories" when its frame around "the left" supposedly conspiring to keep things secret.

 

I just proof of RIGHT-WING POLITICIANS and an ENTIRE DEPARTMENT of the federal goverment literally attempting to uphold a illegally-made plea bargain that was keeping Epstein and out of jail.

 

You don't seem awfully concern about those people who did THOSE specific things.

 

But rather, an ABC news anchor talking about how Buckingham Palace was going to kick them out of interviews of Kate Middleton and Prince WIlliam.

 

That's why ABC news was pressured, they were pressured with losing news coverage for something else entirely.

 

Do you even know that it was JOURNALISTS WHO KEPT INVESTIGATING this story for 10 years to keep it alive in order to bring to light that Jeffrey Epstein's plea bargain was highly, HIGHLY suspicious???????

 

It was the LOCAL FLORIDA NEWSPAPER who did most the leg work, the Miami Herald. They're the ones who found the victims to try and piece together what exactly happened with the Jeffrey Epstein criminal probe and plea bargain in 2008.  They're the ones who had the breakthrough revelation that Alexander Acosta DIDN'T INFORM THE VICTIMS of the settlement to get their approval, which is illegal.

 

 

 

Oh, by the way...............your tweet claims that ABC News buried the story 3 years ago.

 

Then how come there's this article from ABC News about Jeffrey Epstein.................from 3 years ago

 

https://abcnews.go.com/US/victims-feds-hid-sweetheart-deal-sex-offender-deep/story?id=36843144

 

 

That's what you get for following a Project Veritas claim, sweetheart.

The left?  So are you saying the news media is on the left? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cookester15 said:

The left?  So are you saying the news media is on the left? 

Nope, you are.

 

Notice how you still don't address all those things I said regarding Epstein, regarding Republicans who let Epstein off the hook.

 

............and how Project Veritas claiming that ABC News intentionally avoided reporting on Epstein in 2016 was FLAT OUT FALSE, which I proved by posting their news article?????

 

And you try.................you TRY............to ask a question in the hope that you'll direct the conversation off to a tanget?

 

Yeah, sweetie...........that ain't working, honey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Nope, you are.

 

Notice how you still don't address all those things I said regarding Epstein, regarding Republicans who let Epstein off the hook.

 

............and how Project Veritas claiming that ABC News intentionally avoided reporting on Epstein in 2016 was FLAT OUT FALSE, which I proved by posting their news article?????

 

And you try.................you TRY............to ask a question in the hope that you'll direct the conversation off to a tanget?

 

Yeah, sweetie...........that ain't working, honey.

So this news anchor was lying while off air? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cookester15 said:

So this news anchor was lying while off air? 

The News Anchor didn't get to report the news at that time..........but ABC News ultimately did report what was going on with Jeffrey Epstein in 2016.

 

It had been a story they had been working on, but they found a NEW reason to report it once the plea bargain documents finally surfaced.

 

Its kind of like saying that ABC News wants to report a story on two parties . Party#1 doesn't co-operate and tries to pressure them to stop the story. So they back off.

 

But Party#2 ends up corroborating the story, which gives them the ground to go ahead and report it.  Something like that happened here.

 

But you stupidly took Project Veritas at their word. Those people have been caught lying or mis-leading MULTIPLE times within the past 10 years.

 

The only people who would be stupid enough to follow them in 2019...............are right-wingers.

Edited by jehurey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh would you look at that, ABC News responded to the accusation to point out some obvious facts:

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/05/776482189/abc-news-defends-its-epstein-coverage-after-leaked-video-of-anchor

 

 

Quote

 

ABC News Defends Its Epstein Coverage After Leaked Video Of Anchor

November 5, 2019, 7:14 PM ET

A newly surfaced video of an ABC News anchor's unguarded remarks about the network's coverage of the late Jeffrey Epstein has thrown ABC on the defensive.

 

In a leaked video posted Tuesday by the right-wing activist group Project Veritas, news anchor Amy Robach expresses her frustration to a colleague over ABC's failure to broadcast her interview with a key accuser of Epstein.

 

Robach complains that the network "quashed" her interview, suggesting that ABC had yielded to threats from powerful forces, including Buckingham Palace. Prince Andrew is among those men whom the accuser alleges Epstein trafficked her to for sex. The prince's representatives have denied that claim.

 

ABC News executives say their journalists were simply not able to corroborate the details of the reporting sufficiently for broadcast.

 

"We would never run away from that," Chris Vlasto, head of investigations for ABC News, tells NPR. The network has filed approximately two dozen digital and broadcast stories on Epstein since early 2015, when ABC started talking to the accuser, Virginia Roberts Giuffre.

 

Robach's comments in late August 2019 came just two days after an NPR story disclosed the existence of Giuffre's interview and ABC's failure to broadcast it. In the video, Robach is sitting on a chair at a studio set for ABC's Good Morning America, at times swinging back and forth while speaking remotely through her microphone with an unseen colleague. It appears to be the early morning hours before broadcast or during advertising breaks.

 

"I've had the story for three years," Robach says in the video. "We would not put it on the air. Um, first of all, I was told, 'Who was Jeffrey Epstein? No one knows who that is. This is a stupid story.' Then the palace found out that we had her whole allegations about Prince Andrew and threatened us a million different ways."

 

Dershowitz, who served as one of Epstein's legal advisers, told NPR in August that he had called ABC News in 2015 just before the interview was supposed to have been broadcast to dissuade the network from airing Giuffre's allegations.

 

ABC said it never intended to broadcast her allegations against Dershowitz. Yet legal scholar Dershowitz said he had called primarily on his own behalf, not Epstein's, to warn ABC against giving Giuffre a platform. "I did not want to see her credibility enhanced by ABC," Dershowitz told NPR. He said he spoke to two producers and an attorney in a series of calls in a 24-hour period.

 

The first 64 seconds of Project Veritas' video appear to be unedited, just a straight span of Robach speaking. ABC News and Robach confirmed that the video and her remarks are real. Yet in separate statements released by a spokeswoman for ABC News, they argue that Robach's frustrations do not reflect any breakdown in journalistic acumen.

 

Instead, Robach and ABC say they were unable to corroborate elements of some of the key charges from Giuffre.

 

"As the Epstein story continued to unfold last summer, I was caught in a private moment of frustration. I was upset that an important interview I had conducted with Virginia Roberts [Giuffre] didn't air because we could not obtain sufficient corroborating evidence to meet ABC's editorial standards about her allegations," Robach said in her statement. "The interview itself, while I was disappointed it didn't air, didn't meet our standards. In the years since no one ever told me or the team to stop reporting on Jeffrey Epstein, and we have continued to aggressively pursue this important story."

 

"At the time, not all of our reporting met our standards to air, but we have never stopped investigating the story," the ABC News statement says. "Ever since we've had a team on this investigation and substantial resources dedicated to it." The network said it intended to run a two-hour documentary and launch a six-part podcast on Epstein in January 2020.

 

 

 

Gee, it happened exactly like I had guessed. They couldn't get all of the details of the story corroborated, and if one detail is proven wrong in the story, then all details would have come under scrutiny.

 

Therefore, that particular interview didn't meet their standard for showing because they couldn't corroborate everything.

 

GEE........that makes it seem like a news outlet thats doing its fucking job properly.

 

Edited by jehurey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019-11-06 at 1:12 AM, jehurey said:

Oh would you look at that, ABC News responded to the accusation to point out some obvious facts:

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/05/776482189/abc-news-defends-its-epstein-coverage-after-leaked-video-of-anchor

 

 

 

 

Gee, it happened exactly like I had guessed. They couldn't get all of the details of the story corroborated, and if one detail is proven wrong in the story, then all details would have come under scrutiny.

 

Therefore, that particular interview didn't meet their standard for showing because they couldn't corroborate everything.

 

GEE........that makes it seem like a news outlet thats doing its fucking job properly.

 

Weird.. They reported the fuck out of Russia conspiracies with no facts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Cookester15 said:

Weird.. They reported the fuck out of Russia conspiracies with no facts. 

Really? Show me an example of something they reported without having based it with a source?  I'll wait.

 

Lazy shit like that isn't going to work with me, you should already know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jehurey said:

Really? Show me an example of something they reported without having based it with a source?  I'll wait.

 

Lazy shit like that isn't going to work with me, you should already know that.

So you want me to post Russia conspiracies from unnamed sources that led to absolutely nothing? It's like youve been sleeping the past two years while drinking Rachel Maddow cumjuice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cookester15 said:

So you want me to post Russia conspiracies from unnamed sources that led to absolutely nothing? It's like youve been sleeping the past two years while drinking Rachel Maddow cumjuice

Sorry, you're trying to move your own goalposts already.

 

Nobody said anything as to whether they 'led to nothing"...........we're talking about whether or not the stories or facts presented in those articles were true or false.

 

By your logic, since Epstein still hasn't been convicted of his crimes..............that means it has "led to nothing" and therefore there's no point in posting about Prince Andrew. YOU HAVE JUST established that logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×