Ouch...appears money was taken to spike Epstein stories
- Thread starter windriverrange
- Start date
Why has this woman not been prosecuted? Are there not many people complicit in many Epstein crimes?
This whole Epstein situation stinks to high heaven.
The media spikes stories unfavorable to their political interests? Say it isn't so.
Alright... hang on.
On one hand corporate media killing important stories for their own financial betterment is a valid issue. I've screamed about it.
On the other hand, wind and brad are the first two that say guys accused of impropriety are drawn and quartered on the basis of a mere accusation.
So Vanity Fair is supposed to publish a criminal accusation based on one person's tale? And ABC is supposed to determine that complaining party is also credible? We're judging whether they should've published it without knowing whether the journalists could corroborate their narratives?
Seems to me it's hard to both demand that journalists stop crucifying people based on one accusation, while wanting them to drag someone through the mud based on one woman's story.
On one hand corporate media killing important stories for their own financial betterment is a valid issue. I've screamed about it.
On the other hand, wind and brad are the first two that say guys accused of impropriety are drawn and quartered on the basis of a mere accusation.
So Vanity Fair is supposed to publish a criminal accusation based on one person's tale? And ABC is supposed to determine that complaining party is also credible? We're judging whether they should've published it without knowing whether the journalists could corroborate their narratives?
Seems to me it's hard to both demand that journalists stop crucifying people based on one accusation, while wanting them to drag someone through the mud based on one woman's story.
I almost agree with you, except for the ironic part that the juris prudence you suggest only seems to be applied when the potential damage is to the MSM's favored party.
The single accuser stories on Kavanaugh, Roy Moore, and Steve Wynn were gladly published without any concern for juris prudence you described.
Kavanaugh was clearly a drunk and acted like a little a conservative, entitled, drunk brobitch. I believed her. Moore? There qas more than one there too i think. Wynn maybe, i dont know.
All were single accuser stories that the media was glad to publish whether they were accurate or not. I mean you think based on whats been published that Kav was a drunk in high school and thus that justifies it, yet the media should practice juris prudence with Epstein even though the locals all called his island retreat: "Pedo Island". If you can't see a double standard there, then no amount of reason will permeate your partisanship.
I can't stand Dershowitz. You read his affidavit and tell me if a media outlet should run with the girls' narrative.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8u567bvdshn9mj3/Alan Dershowitz affidavit.pdf?dl=0
It aint easy knowing what to publish and what to sit on. Some latitude is appropriate if youre gonna have any journalistic responsibility.
And no, Kav didn't only have one accuser. And I'm fine with them not running with one of his accusers, too, if she wasn't credible. He was also a SCOTUS nominee vs a private citizen.
That’s Justice Kavanaugh, bro.
Was that while he worked for the White House or as an ABC news anchor?
2010 +/- so he was an anchor. I'm guessing the slickster limoed down from Chappaqua.
