July 10, 2019

"There’s little question that Acosta was out-lawyered, but perhaps he was also disarmed by the attentions of these celebrity attorneys."

"[Alan] Dershowitz, then a Harvard law professor, had famously defended O.J. Simpson. [Ken] Starr, of course, was the independent counsel who investigated the Clinton Whitewater case, leading into the Monica Lewinsky cliffhanger. In a 2011 letter trying to defend himself after the cushy plea deal, Acosta wrote that he faced 'year-long assault on the prosecution and the prosecutors' by 'an army of legal superstars.' He also asserted that defense lawyers 'investigated individual prosecutors and their families, looking for personal peccadilloes that may provide a basis for disqualification.'... Pending further revelations, one thing is clear: Acosta should step down from his Cabinet position for dereliction of duty in his prior role — and because he has the spine of a mollusk. In deciding not to fully prosecute Epstein in 2007 — and then agreeing to bury the proceedings without advising the victims — he violated the law, betrayed the victims’ trust and displayed rare cowardice before justice. Finally, nobody likes a whiner."

From "One thing is clear from the Jeffrey Epstein revelations: Acosta must step down" by Kathleen Parker (WaPo).

I don't like the ugliness of "dereliction of duty" and "spine of a mollusk" and "whiner," but I do think Acosta should resign. When it mattered most, the cries of a wealthy man overwhelmed those of ordinary people. That's not what belongs in the Labor Department.

225 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 225 of 225
Birkel said...

Royal ass Inga objects to calling Epstein a pimp.
Noted!

Michael K said...

What is wrong with you creeps?

Inga thinks history began when she woke up this morning. That's OK. You stay there in your quiet white-only town and the rest of the world will get on with reality.

History would be good for you if you had reading comprehension.

daskol said...

This is strange. A photographer captured people visiting Epstein's residence during a brief stop in Manhattan a couple of years ago. The photos feature a parade of young socialite/model women and...Ehud Barak, wearing an extremely goofy hat (and described in the caption as a man with his own security detail, but not named). Bibi's son subsequently tweeted about the article and that photo in particular, and Barak is a major political opponent of his father's.

Anne in Rockwall, TX said...

Curiouser and curiouser. This is from the Intercept quoted at Hot Air.


"A week later, on July 15, Epstein received a shipment at his Palm Beach home from the port in the U.S. Virgin Islands closest to his home there, according to maritime shipping records compiled by ImportGenius and provided to The Intercept. The shipment was a 53-pound shredder.

For the next decade, Epstein’s legal troubles appeared to be behind him. Then, in November 2018, the Miami Herald published a new investigation into Epstein’s alleged child sex trafficking ring, which prompted federal investigators to take a new look at the case. However, the agreement not to prosecute first had to be invalidated. That came on February 21, when a Florida federal judge ruled that Acosta’s office had violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act by keeping the women in the dark.

On March 11, 2019, Epstein got a new shipment from the port in the U.S. Virgin Islands. This time, it was sent to his New York townhouse, and it’s listed in maritime records as a tile and carpet extractor that weighed 191 pounds."

Original Mike said...

"Be careful, some of the guys and gals might be some of your own."

Personally, I don't own anyone.

DarkHelmet said...

Minimize it? I'm all for maximizing it. Since I don't have any 'faves' in the political class or the East Coast glitterati I don't care where the chips fall. And even if I had 'faves' I'd be happy to see them go down if they deserve it.

Turn on all the lights and pull up all the rugs.

Bruce Hayden said...

Epstein was having sex with 14 year old girls. Can we at least agree that is bad?

It's illegal and not up to the modern age standards. Historically it's not unusual.


Interesting that Freder, one of our longest surviving leftists here, is the absolutist here, concerning sex with 14 year old girls. Moral relativism is mostly an invention of the left. And,yes, I expect that everyone here (including me), most of us living here in the Judeo-Christian United States in 2019, agree that in our culture today that it is bad. Not maybe as bad as sex by adults with prepubescent girls or boys, but still really bad. But Rharden is also correct in his implications- it was not considered nearly as bad a century or more ago in this country, nor is it considered bad in some parts of the world today, including parts of the Muslim world (after all, their Prophet apparently married one of his wives at the age of 7 if I remember correctly).

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
“It’s the left that wants Trump to fire him so they can stop looking into the Epstein plea deal as “old news”.”

What a ridiculous notion. The left wants to know what the fuck happened and how did Acosta allow a known sex trafficker to practically walk free. The left wants to know who of the rich and powerful, be they on the left or the right, were involved and complicit. The left wants justice for the girls that were raped and abused and used in sex trafficking.


This person voted for Bill Clinton.

These people don't care about justice or sex trafficking or any of this.

They just want to attack Trump because he is in their way to more power.

narayanan said...

iowan2 said...
Prosecutors make plea deals everyday. Acosta was a federal prosecutor, and the plea deal was Epstien pleading to state crimes.


Lawyer in the house?

?please elucidate how "federal prosecutor" negotiates "pleading to state crimes".?

Bruce Hayden said...

For the next decade, Epstein’s legal troubles appeared to be behind him. Then, in November 2018, the Miami Herald published a new investigation into Epstein’s alleged child sex trafficking ring, which prompted federal investigators to take a new look at the case. However, the agreement not to prosecute first had to be invalidated. That came on February 21, when a Florida federal judge ruled that Acosta’s office had violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act by keeping the women in the dark.

This is interesting. The original plea agreement probably couldn’t have prevented prosecution for cries committed after it was accepted by the court, and the original agreement could be read to only apply to the Florida district where he had been charged, and not the SDNY, which is the district now charging him. And, sure enough, evidence of a significant number of new crimes (e.g. kiddie porn in the possession of a registered sex offender) was discovered during the searches made incident to his arrest.

What may have been going on was the dotting of all of the i’s and crossing of the t’s so that the search warrants that found the evidence that should keep Epstein in prison for the rest of his life were not rejected on technicalities, making all that new evidence inadmissible.

Kevin said...

Royal ass Inga objects to calling Epstein a pimp.

Everyone knows Bill Clinton can get his own underage girls.

It's quite a slap to Bill to imply he needed any help in this area.

If anything, Clinton was a draw to get the girls to Epstein's island.

doctrev said...

Blogger Bruce Hayden said...

What may have been going on was the dotting of all of the i’s and crossing of the t’s so that the search warrants that found the evidence that should keep Epstein in prison for the rest of his life were not rejected on technicalities, making all that new evidence inadmissible.

7/10/19, 11:33 AM

What definitely happened is that the prior week, a judge agreed with Mike Cernovich and Alan Dershowitz that the records behind Jeffrey Epstein's plea deal were to be unsealed. That's quite a coincidence!

Birkel said...

Bruce Hayden,

As doctrev suggests, don't be so quickly to give the Miami Herald all the credit.
Mike Cernovich drove the bus.
The Herald is part of the Leftist obfuscation.

Seeing Red said...

try to minimize what happened to these girls is a tell.


Open borders. Back at you.

hombre said...

What does a decade-old lousy plea deal undoubtedly approved by DOJ higher ups in the face of a pending state prosecution have to do with remaining Secretary of Labor?

Seeing Red said...

He’s a small fish. I want the names of the CIA and FBI heads.

We’re they involved in the agt3mpted coup?

narciso said...


Just like with madoff:

https://twitter.com/realsaavedra/status/1148995208803045378?s=21

Lincolntf said...

https://nypost.com/2019/07/09/trump-barred-jeffrey-epstein-from-mar-a-lago-over-sex-assault-court-docs/?sr_share=facebook&utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=NYPFacebook&utm_medium=SocialFlow&fbclid=IwAR1sQeIxsuEOcVOz0tToqMcrrvIlQNid_smtp_oX5PhfX75nTd6BIxHRQ8s


Yes, Trump did bar Epstein from Mar a Lago.

Fen said...

Interesting that Freder, one of our longest surviving leftists here, is the absolutist here, concerning sex with 14 year old girls.

Well you know what they say - everyone is a conservative about what they know best.

And I see Inga is still using the raped bodies of teenage girls as political props, tools to be used in service to her self-esteem, just like Epstein.

Fen said...

Epstein was having sex with 14 year old girls. Can we at least agree that is bad?

Everyone already has agreed that having sex with 14 year old girls is bad.

You know what's also bad? Using the raped bodies of 14 year old girls to score cheap shots on a blog.

Fen said...

Inga: The left wants justice for the girls that were raped and abused and used in sex trafficking.

If that's true, then why are you more concerned about using these girls as political props to smear Trump?

If that's true, why have you said nothing for the past 6 months about 35% of the girls in the illegal immigrant caravans being raped? Sometimes even kidnapped from their families and brought along to be used as human shields?

And why do you refuse to admit that using raped girls as props to score political cheap shots is wrong?

Darrell said...

From Ace of Spades--

He'd cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein's attorneys because he had "been told" to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. "I was told Epstein 'belonged to intelligence' and to leave it alone"” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta.

Acosta said something like, when I came onto the case, there was already a deal in place to let Epstein off with no jail time whatsoever and no admission of having committed any sexual offenses; I and my prosecutors pushed to at least get some jail and a plea to soliciting an underage girl.

He now says that most of the witnesses against him didn't want to testify against him, because they didn't want to be identified. He's saying that this sort of plea arrangement is common, as prosecutors have to weigh seeking real justice against a sex offender, versus protecting his victims from further humiliation and pain.

He's stressing that at least his team got Epstein to admit to a crime that would force him to register as a sex criminal.

He now stresses that it's highly unusual that a federal prosecutor would intervene in a state case -- and remember, he's saying the state had already given Epstein a complete pass -- and pointing out that it's big deal that he even got involved at all to get something harsher. Without naming Harvey Weinstein, he points out that some sex offenders are let off with no charges at all.

Michael K said...

My objections to Acosta are more about his courting the Democrats for his own career reasons.

Powerline has run a whole series of posts about it.

Anonymous said...

Epstein was having sex with 14 year old girls. Can we at least agree that is bad?

That’s not exactly straightforward, 14 is the age of consent over large swathes of the world, including close to half of Europe. Moreover, all of us are descended from a very long line of young mothers who, over the centuries and millennia, were a lot closer to 14 than to 24 when they started having babies.

Malum prohibitorum rather than malum in se, in other words.

JamesB.BKK said...

Meanwhile, Preet Bharara is a Dem prosecutor in supposed good standing after having ruined the lives and businesses of many innocent people with flounced-up and completely reversed imagineered "insider-trading" counts and ignoring the activities of Epstein and his co-participants up there in NY City.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 225 of 225   Newer› Newest»