Printable View
https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/924825
New Yorker is publishing a spicy meatball about Dershdawg fucking under aged girls, or as he describes it.... “a hit piece against me for the explicit purpose of silencing my defense of President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the State of Israel.”
New Yorker article is of course based on Epstein related intelligence.
Who was that intelligence agency Epstein was running honeypots for again?
Tip of my tongue... devidee thoughts?
I just read his defense piece. Haven't read the New Yorker article yet with the accusations.
If what he says is true -- that the two women who accused him both have a history of making up false claims about sexual improprieties with politicians and other celebrities -- then Dershowitz is probably innocent.
But we'll see.
Remember, we've been down the "underage rape" road before -- remember that woman who claimed Trump raped her at age 13? That went around the internet as a fact which just hadn't quite made the mainstream media, but a deeper look showed that the man behind it was part of a ton of media hoaxes dating back to the 1980s. In fact, I actually knew the guy as an acquaintance. Yet I still had leftists on my Facebook -- even reasonable, non-conspiracy types -- frequently citing "Trump raped a 13-year-old girl" as one of the attack points against him.
I haven't read enough about this yet to make a decision as to whether this is legit or BS, but I'll say that Dershowitz's defense piece is pretty convincing, even if the beginning of "omg omg they're trying to silence me because I love Trump" reads like bullshit.
What tips the scales for me is Dersh's name was among the first mentioned as being conspicuously in Epstein's orbit.
Trotting out Israel as some sort of moral shield is also something of an awkward play..
But your point is well taken, we shall see.
http://facebook.com/l.php?u=https://...ws-11563447601
(click Follow Link when you get to the page)
noooooot looking great for dersh.
It only takes one person spreading fake stories in public in order to discredit 10 reliable persons with same/similar allegations.
The funny part is I believe almost anyone who socialized with that guy likely rolls on the young chick train. Regardless of party affiliation. I wouldn’t if it was straight pedophilia, but fifteen and sixteen year olds, yep I bet they’re all involved. Half the models that sell magazines are 16. When you can buy anything. When the only thing you can’t buy is time and youth, young girls are the ultimate prize for the twisted affluent. I can believe that. That dude is one greasy fucker. He seemed to be all about that life, and I don’t see being a rich heterosexual male who decided to frequently attend his parties that you somehow didn’t know that about him.
No, the women that are accusing Dershowitz are actually very credible. They are not asking for any money from him. Do you think teenage prostitutes are going to remember the exact time and date that they fucked him? Dershowitz is a fucking liar. He thinks, he can go to any judge, lie his fucking ass off and they will do whatever he wishes. Not this time. Time to put this creepy, pervert, OJ Simpson defending attorney in jail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Just look at the way Alan Dershowitz looks at child rapist Jeffrey Epstein. It must be love.
https://media4.s-nbcnews.com/j/newsc...6.fit-760w.jpg
^ :this.
the guy repping the woman accusing dersh used to be friends with dersh btw. he's taking the case pro bono and has stated flatly that he 100% believes his client.
on the other hand, dersh has been caught in numerous lies regarding his sworn statements on the matter.
additionally, instead of offering any credible explanations for any of these... discrepancies..., he has sued her attorney for defamation/fraud/etc in several states on numerous occasions with zero (0) of those suits not being dismissed, and zero (0) sanctions being taken against her attorney.
basically every single judge this situation comes up with finds the accuser credible and dersh emphatically not credible.
lastly, her attorney is incredibly high profile. he's written 40(!!!) books on law and his credits just get better from there. there is absolutely no fucking way his team wouldnt have gone over her story with an electron microscope before staking his reputation and practice on her..... for fucking free.
i totally acknowledge that she might be nothing but a great liar and her attorney just took the biggest L of his life by making this the hill he chose to die on, but we are seriously in the neighborhood of one-out-on-the-river odds at this point.
Do you really expect the defense of a veteran lawyer to be anything but a one sided plea of innocence?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Save the critical thinking for then
I basically think the same thing. I also believe it was sort of a "don't ask, don't tell" situation regarding the girls.Quote:
Originally Posted by BCR
If you were a middle-aged or older pervert who loved young women, you'd show up to Epstein's parties, and there would be tons of them, all apparently willing and interested. You were just happy to be there, and didn't bother to ask questions. You would put it out of your mind that some may not be 18, or perhaps you'd rationalize it that obviously these girls were getting something out of it, so everyone wins.
Las Vegas PD did a interesting experiment/sting.
They placed a phony ad on Craigslist (back when such ads were allowed), strongly implying an 18-year-old prostitution situation.
An undercover female officer answered the phone (one who sounded young), and after the guys made it clear that they were looking for sex in exchange for money, the "girl" would reveal she was only 16. Some of the men were totally okay with this, and wanted to go forward with the appointment. One would be set up, and they would be arrested when they'd arrive. Some of the men were either disgusted or scared by this, and hung up. When describing the sting, a spokesman for the department condemned all the men who were willingly going to engage in child prostitution, but praised the men who hung up, stating that it was nice to see how many men weren't on board with this.
Anyway, the ones who went through with the appointment weren't necessarily looking for underage girls. They originally thought they were hiring an 18-year-old, but had no problem if the girl was a few years younger. There's a big difference between men who specifically seek sex with minors (especially ones under 14, which is an extra level of sick), and ones who will take sex with an underage girl if presented with the opportunity.
I think Epstein himself is a sicko who specifically seeked out underage girls (though it seems like he only liked teenagers, and didn't want little girls). I think that most of his powerful friends who also engaged in the sex were simply along for the ride, and thought they were just banging hot young chicks without asking any questions.
That's not to defend Epstein's friends who took part, which almost surely included Bill Clinton, and possibly included Donald Trump. These are questions you need to seriously ask when the girls look possibly underage, and if you don't get clear answers, you need to leave. But a lot of horny older dudes who are used to getting what they want don't really desire to ask such questions, and here we are.
You know what sharpens the interest in finding out the girls’ age? The threat of spending forever in jail.
Harsh punishment for that “oversight” has a good net effect on society.
Not interested in “intent”. Don’t care to make the distinction.
I understand what you're saying, but the distinction really should be made.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
I'm fine with punishment in both cases, but when there's provable intent, it should be much harsher.
If I'm out somewhere and some much younger girl comes onto me, I have sex with her, and then find out later that she's 16, then I've committed a crime (well, in California -- actually in Nevada the age of consent is 16), but I didn't intend to seek out minors for sex. I would have just been stupid not to question her age prior to doing it.
If I'm online and slowly grooming a 16-year-old to trust me and meet me, and then finally get her to do so and convince her to have sex with me, then I would be a predator who was seeking out underage girls to abuse.
Huge difference, and the law should treat these differently.
Similarly, people like to lump "pedos" all into one category, but the ones who molest little children are far, far worse than the ones who have sex with teens, and it's not even close. Both are bad, but one is much worse.
Epstein only liked teens, but he's still a monster because he had a long pattern of seeking out underage girls for his and others' sexual pleasure.
There are plenty of 13-15 year olds out there with a tremendous rack and the rebellious hope to get out of the house. Baby’s are fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
They are going through a phase and have no idea what the consequences of their actions entail. They are children. Dangerous children, perhaps.
It is your responsibility as an adult member of society to not “be stupid”. Stupid doesn’t get you leniency. Your stupidity fucks up lives
If your hookups are that casual that’s the risk you are going to take. You might spend a long time in jail.
Generally, I agree with your hierarchy but everyone is spending a good part of their life in prison. In the end, it’s a distinction without a difference.
Stupid people live’s really aren’t that important.
What do these two guys have in common?
They are both what?
It’s on the tip of sonatine’s tongue.
I am a believer that pedophiles are literally pedophiles by age 21. It's hard to believe Alan Dershowitz at the age of 65 just became attracted to under agers. It kind of defies logic for the previous 40+ years of his life there is/was nobody coming out against him. I mean the guy is 81 years old now and suddenly a random accuser just come out. Dershowitz has been in the public eye since the 70s, hard to believe he just became a predator at age 65. But here again he defended OJ so who knows.
Daily DoubleQuote:
Originally Posted by devidee
“What is the name of Les Wexner’s (oops don’t want to give away the first answer) yacht?
Actually, this is a good parlor game idea
So Druff & I are arguing how many pedophiles can dance on the head of a pin. I find it odd.
Then I recall the Real Grinders problem.
I google “Real Grinders poker pedophilia” for an update. The 5th search suggestion is the PFA Radio Show on 5/19/2016
https://pokerfraudalert.com/radio/ra...9-22-47-19.mp3
Queue up 06:39:00
2 minutes in there is Dershowitz, Epstein, Clinton & the Lolita Express. This show coulda been dated yesterday.
I’m just havin fun Druff. Was Drexel mossad? It’s incredible.
Is the pedophilia just a vehicle for the bigger endgame Sonatine & Davidee? Walk me through a couple of scenarios.
Wexner looms large? Oh yeah, I see your head nodding.
It’s like the adults are talking at the big table and I can’t quite hear them.
it doesn’t take an extraordinarily perceptive individual to figure out that dershowitz is a slimy fuck
been a long time since I've seen Reversal of Fortune. Given the cast, I assume it holds up, but will re-watch soon.