|
From the other thread: People who assume Obama didn’t know about Weinstein must have a head injury. He just knew Weinstein wouldn’t dare. Weinstein was having public jokes made about him being a rapist by this point, not to mention the three letter agencies would absolutely have let him know. It’s as dumb as thinking Epstein wasn’t some kind of op. Motherfucker was pimping for Clinton, Ehud Barak and Prince Andrew, you’re dumber than dogshit to think he wasn’t up to his ears in spook poo poo (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2021 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:Unless you have some evidence for these claims, the objection to them is that this kind of mythologizing is disrespectful to his victims and distracts from what is known about how he operated. It’s as if you’re saying the truth is less interesting, meaningful, and real than a set of speculations that you’d prefer to focus on. If your interest is in justice and reducing harm to women, this is not the way to go about it. Epstein wasn’t some fascinating mystery: he was a crude rapist. I am absolutely certain the two most insane intel agencies on earth also had no interest in two of their former heads of state having the same pimp. Why would that interest them? Jesus H dude listen to yourself. Just ground floor, it’s an enormous blackmail risk. It was public knowledge Epstein was an international trafficker and Clinton and Barak palling around with him was no biggie? Seems incredibly weird to assert they’d have no interest in him, and in no way detracts from or seeds doubt in his victims stories. What a weird angle to take.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2021 02:12
|
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:I’m not saying it’s impossible that there is more to the story than is known, but when you ignore what is known about how he found his victims in favor of speculation about how spy agencies must have been involved because there’s no other way he could have gotten away with it, you’re ignoring how abusers get away with it every day. The story isn’t “really” about Clinton and Trump and Bill Gates: they are implicated in a story that is really about how a man got away with abusing women. To say otherwise is to remove the victims from their own stories, which I don’t like because it gives cover to abusers with less sensational stories. That’s not at all what I’m saying. I don’t doubt the public story from records we have access to. What I am saying is that he was obviously known and in some way given a pass (at minimum) by these agencies, and much more likely was in some way involved. That doesn’t mean he didn’t do any of the things he’s accused of in the way the victims describe, just that there’s a large part of the story we don’t know BECAUSE it includes names like Bill Clinton. It’s sickening what he did, and if you can’t see Clinton palling around with him as part of the story, when he was definitely loving girls too, I don’t know what to tell you. The rest of your post feels like hand waving. It’s extremely important to talk about these things because if I can’t say, in a room of loyal democrats, that Bill Clinton is a rapist and not get booed, then the work of finding justice for those women isn’t done.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2021 03:04
|
|
|
Lib and let die posted:Yeah, it shouldn't be surprising to anyone at this point that people victimized by powerful people are often subjected to a faustian bargain of "go public and starve or bury it and survive" and it's a little gross to see this sort of macho bravado of "if i were the victim, i would simply..." nonsense just flippantly thrown out there. I mean, she works for the Clintons. She has likely seen the process up close, if anyone has.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2021 17:23
|
|