No. For that is not the FR way.
Once again McCarthy demonstrates why he calls National Review home.
The main reason the MSM followed this case was the link of Acosta to Trump. Just another club to bash Trump for a few news cycles. Epstein was not prosecuted because his association and activities with powerful men such as the vile Clinton and unnamed others was his ultimate protection. Soon this story will fade, Epstein will probably get off again lest he releases some information on the protected class, there will be no justice for the rapes of young girls and the fake news, propaganda MSM will look for new clubs to bash Trump.
Is any rational person surprised that prosecutors like Acosta are used as tools? See any prosecutions of Antifa or the Obama plotters who rigged an election? Equal justice under the law is turning out to be a myth.
McCarthy, somewhat disingenuously if not ignorantly, leaves out that Acosta has claimed he was instructed to do the deal. Why is no one in the media looking into the higher-ups who forced the plea deal?
Yes, this is a mess. It appears that the prosecution deliberately let Epstein off the hook in perpetuity. I suspect this was an effort to protect people who would have been implicated had they not created this agreement.
When the new prosecution asked for people to come forward they were looking for a new crime to prosecute, that occurred after 2007. What we need to investigate and prosecute is why Epstein was given a get-out-of-jail card in the first case. That is an entirely separate crime that occurred after Epstein’s crimes. Acosta claims that he was told to back off by “intelligence.” Mueller was the head of the FBI and he handled other cases in a similar way; see Whitey Bolger. This is a complex knot to untangle and there are a lot of people whose careers, and, possibly freedom, are at stake. This might include people in the White House, past and present, the Secret Service, who certainly knew Clinton was committing crimes, and the DOJ who covered for everybody involved.
I’m wondering why they aren’t going after offenses committed after the Florida case? Surely this leopard hasn’t changed his spots.
If an offender offends again, and the crimes for which he is arrested and charged occured separately from, and subsequent to, those for which he had been convicted and sentenced, it is NOT “double jeopardy” for that offender to be prosecuted again. Happens all the time.
Otherwise, it would be like issuing every ex-con sex offender a “Get-Out-of-Jail-Free” card.
If there isn’t anything ‘new’ revealed and it’s the same old accusers and players from the previous conviction, then double jeopardy will apply. Sad to say so... But you can’t go around convicting people of the same crime over and over again.
Epstein is a scumbag who deserves a lengthy prison term, but right or wrong, the Federal Justice department already convicted him of serious crimes and gave him the sweetest plea deal ever. A deal worked out under the Obama era justice department and likely arranged and dictated by Clinton sycophants with the help of the Republican Acosta.
I really do think this was brought in NY to embarrass a Trump official. It looks like these are old charges, so why not go after newer ones unless you want this case to die an inglorious death in order to protect the powerful, set a bad precedent (and don’t underestimate this one), and give the impression of injustice run amok during the Trump administration.
It looks like (according to CNN) that while the “why now?” question for these over a decade-old charges against Epstein originated from a Miami Herald investigative report done in Nov. 2018 by a reporter named Julie K. Brown.
Yeah, right.
This thing is designed to fail but make enough noise to embarrass Acosta.
Please drain the swamp!
There wasn’t any ‘deal’ that dealt with blackmail....
FYI - blackmail and money laundering?
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1148303671857491968.html - epstein
from link:
So, apologies in advance, but I want to do a quick little THREAD to explain my theory of what the Epstein story really is. I promise this isn’t some crazy Pizzagate conspiracy about space lizards, just a neat little explanation that IMO perfectly fits the known facts (0/13):
(1/13) Let’s take as our starting points two givens.
(A.) You are a committed, unrepentant pedophile
(B.) Because of your old job in private banking, you are very connected to lots of very, very wealthy people
We’ll also assume a goal:
(Z.) You want to become very rich
(2/13) The obvious route is, well, obvious: you could just be a pimp, offering underage prostitute services to very rich people. This has two problems: you’re very disposable (see: DC madam), and it’s also not super lucrative. You can’t charge millions of dollars up front.
(3/13) The second level though follows instantly: You don’t need to charge up front, just get them to have underage sex, and then blackmail them afterwards for hush money. Better ROI, but you’re still a liability, and producing and receiving big bribe money raises big questions.
(4/13) So, what to do? Well, the second idea has some merits. First, you need to recruit people in. Have lots of massive parties at your spacious home (check), invite top academics, artists, politicians to encourage people to come (check), and supply lots of young women (check)
(5/13) You don’t even have to do anything, and most people invited might even be totally unaware of the real purpose of the parties! But, sooner or later, some billionaire will get handsy, she’ll escort him to a room with a hidden camera, things happen. Morning after, you strike.
(6/13) You inform him she was really 15, but you offer him a nice, neat way to buy your silence: a large allocation to your hedge fund, which charges 2/20 (check). To ensure nobody else asks questions, you also take the extraordinary step of demanding power of attorney (check)
(7/13) The fund is offshore in a tax haven (check) and nobody will see the client list (check). Of course, you don’t really know anything about investing, instead making up some nonsense about currency trading (check), and nobody on Wall Street has ever traded with you (check)
(8/13) The fund itself doesn’t need investment personnel (check), only some back office people to process the wires (check). You don’t want to money from non-pedophiles, or they’ll notice you’ve just put it in a S&P 500 fund, so you reject all incoming inquiries (check)
(9/13) A $20 million wire from Billionaire X to you with no obvious reason will raise many questions, and the IRS will certainly want to know what you did to warrant it. A $5 million quarterly fee for managing $1 billion in assets? Nobody bats an eye.
(10/13) Because of this structure, you’re extraordinarily secretive about client lists (check) because they aren’t clients, they’re pedophiles paying you bribes, and they also are very secretive, which is why no letters or return streams ever leak (check)
(11/13) Occasionally you may also try this trick on other people: important political figures, mayors, prosecutors, etc. They don’t invest in the fund, but it’s nice to have them in your pocket. Others (academics, artists, etc.) can just be bought with money as a PR smokescreen.
(12/13) And, of course, the scam can be kept going as long as people are willing to pay, which is forever. If you’re ever caught, just lean on some of your other friends in government to lean on the prosecutor to get you a sweetheart deal. There’s almost zero risk.
(13/13) And the last piece of the puzzle is the evidence. You’d want it somewhere remote, but accessible: a place the US can’t touch but you have an excuse to visit all the time to update. Remember that offshore fund?
(9/13) A $20 million wire from Billionaire X to you with no obvious reason will raise many questions, and the IRS will certainly want to know what you did to warrant it. A $5 million quarterly fee for managing $1 billion in assets? Nobody bats an eye.
(10/13) Because of this structure, you’re extraordinarily secretive about client lists (check) because they aren’t clients, they’re pedophiles paying you bribes, and they also are very secretive, which is why no letters or return streams ever leak (check)
(11/13) Occasionally you may also try this trick on other people: important political figures, mayors, prosecutors, etc. They don’t invest in the fund, but it’s nice to have them in your pocket. Others (academics, artists, etc.) can just be bought with money as a PR smokescreen.
I bet there’s a *very* interesting safe deposit box there.
The fact that Epstein’s fund is offshore in a tax haven — it is based in the U.S. Virgin Islands — and has a secret client list both add credence to the blackmail theory.
ping. 8>)
 |
  |
Don't underestimate President Trump. He knows things...
↓ YouTube is hiding this video and pushing everything it has that accuses Trump to the top! ↓
Click on image above to see the video ↑
President Trump knows something bad about Bill Clinton.
Why does McCarthy choose to build expectations for Epstein escaping justice, instead of applying him considerable knowledge to figure out how SDNY CAN prosecute a mass child-raping politically corrupt blackmailing fraudulent scumbag?
SDNY has multiple options: prove post-2007 offenses (there is no way that Epstein stopped offending; child porn in Epstein’s abode in 2019 ought to cover that); show that Epstein violated the 2007 agreement, which could not legally bestow immunity for future crimes; charge Epstein with offenses not addressed in the “global” deal (how about ... BLACKMAIL); arrange for State AG’s to prosecute the scum on State charges (Florida now has a governor who presumably is not in Epstein’s thrall); show in court that the 2007 agreement was the product of corruption and therefore invalid.
The SDNY may have grabbed Epstein not for prosecution, but to limit access to him.
Man, this is discouraging. McCarthy is making valid my vague doubts, though his reasoning is far clearer than mine.
I guess we can “hope” there is child porn in a safe at his apartment.
. A different charge, different crime.
Epstein was indicted on charges, but never appeared in court to be tried in front of a jury, due to his cutting a deal with the Feds. Double jeopardy is supposed to prevent people who have been either convicted, or acquitted in a court of law, from being retried for same or similar crimes. I think the fact that he cut that deal, and never had a trial, along with the new charges of human trafficking, and evidence presented, that whatever attempt to prove double jeopardy on his part, will be dismissed.