I goggled that sentence re Alan. I could not find it. If you can, please show.
You say settling of the lawsuit shows nothing conclusive. Ok, fair enough. That is an opinion. However, in the court of law it does go to the facts.
Is Alan guilty of defending a scumbag? Hell yes. But if you critisize him for that . . . you are missing his whole point why he is defending the President.
pS . . . I was the one who went through the pilots logbook. Was able to conclusively show that the logbooks do NOT show Alan ever going to the island several threads back. Thats why many here see the "facts" differently.
I never saw any info that he was on the island. I only read Virginia’s testing only about the many times he had sex with her when she was 16. I was once in her position and I find all of her testimony very believable. She does not sensationalize or try to be salacious. Her stories are detailed about the men she was with or saw, and sometimes she saw nothing particularly amiss, like with Clinton on the island. I believe her.
Of COURSE Mister Constitution won’t be telling us the truth here. You’d have him admitting to rape of an underaged girl in 3 states and in the air? Not likely. I have the particular “advantage” of having seen powerful men with a young teen girl up close and I know that dignified pillars of society aren’t always so dignified or moral when alone with a hot young girl.
It’s easy to find Alan Dershowitz admitting going to Epstein island, you actually have to do research. Check the UK press for instance. Not google headlines.
Wrong. It’s he said, she said in the lawsuit. There was a settlement, that’s fact, not opinion. And her lawyers filed a statement: “...that As expressly understood by the parties upon the execution of the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release, Ms. Giuffre [Virginia Roberts] reaffirms her allegations, and the withdrawal of the referenced filings is not intended to be, and should not be construed as being, an acknowledgement by Edwards and Cassell that the allegations made by Ms. Giuffre were mistaken.”
The headline is just that, nonsense. The lawyers admit a tactical mistake in the proceeding.
You can’t show anything conclusive in those hand written log books. The type is unclear, codes can be given or info omitted.
Dershowitz and Epstein are all over each other like white on rice. Maybe Dershowitz found Jesus and spilling the beans. Who knows. His past can be easily ripped apart before his very eyes, he needn’t say a word, Occam’s razor as I showed in last post.