Here's a totally irrelevant, but interesting side note: Their cousin Grace played Alice Marshall (the daughter) in the Harrison Ford movie Air Force One.
Anderson Cooper is gone from 60 Minutes. As long as we still get Anderson and Andy getting drunk on New Year's Eve, that's what counts. When ABC goes to commercial at 12:03, CNN is still there. It took me years to realize there was another song after Auld Lang Syne.
I get that class consciousness is diminished by class dividing campaigns by the billionaire class. Will their effectiveness not be diminished by redistributing their wealth by a magnitude or two? It's on my TOTL policy wishlist.
So guys - call me old fashioned here, but what new evidence did we get of criminal offending? Genuinely asking, because I've not seen much beyond what we already knew The key cases against other parties seem to be based on multiple complainants, some of whom we know, and some of which have been litigated in civil context and apparently settled. So that creates quite a huge delta between allegations in civil context, and what DOJ showed us. As Julie K Brown notes, we don't even really know what investigations the FBI carried out. It could be the real scandal here, is that DOJ, over multiple administrations, didn't bother the further resourcing of this beyond the initial targets. Who were the other men in the Epstein files? This is the FBI’s own list https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article314609810.html
Something that still sits oddly with me in terms of the full coverup conspiracy If Trump or DOJ or 'elites' were wanted to coverup Epstein, then why did SDNY prosecute Epstein and Maxwell during Trump 1?
Right that's my conclusion as well. It's the only one that makes sense. In the before times, even under Trump 1, SDNY functioned as expected. They had a lot of evidence, built a case, and prosecuted the two central defendants. No one from Main Justice tried to stop them or was able to stop them. It's also the obvious place to start. You need to convict these two defendants. So why didn't they then continue on under the Biden admin? It could well be they simply never did much in the way of a further investigation. So this is more the typical institutional fail than wild ideas about protecting the clintons, donors etc Like it's hard to believe they wouldn't have built a case against Trump if they could have
Garland slow played an insurrection and stealing highly classified compartmentalized national defense information. You think he had the courage to open this can of worms?
In all seriousness…Garland did nothing for the same reason he never charged Trump with obstruction. To open a corruptly closed investigation absent a new set of facts would require him to question the decision making of his predecessor and would damage the DoJ’s reputation. And restoring the DoJ’s reputation was his only priority until prosecuting Trump became unavoidable. So it’s not just me finding an excuse to take a shot at garland. It’s just one more bit of the near incalculable damage he did to the country.
Without a more detailed local or federal investigation, I'm not sure this is the best question. I think it would be better to ask how many names did we learn that are suspected of criminal offending? Because, as you note, the FBI hasn't really done a lot of investigating on this, and it seems that most the accusations (stated this way because of lack of trials/pleas) have been done by a few reporters. A couple things here: 1 - I think there are three different, some overlapping, questions: Sex trafficking Money laundering Lack of investigations by multiple admins/AGs And related, Acosta needs to be heavily investigated. 2 - It seems clear that this should not be limited to just men. We know that Maxwell was involved, but I have seen at least one other female pop up as trafficking girls, and possibly her own sister. I've had this thought on and off since the release of the files, and related to others issues in the Administration, I think it is Trump's fear and his lack of guardrails that are more to the reason this administration is handling this differently. Trump's cognitive decline, along with Project 2025, have allowed him to put sycophants in key leadership positions (see Noem, Bondi, Hegseth, Patel, et al) that do his bidding. Thus, we saw Bondi's shitshow last week, a display that would never have happened from Sessions or Barr. Regarding Trump's behavior, in his first term, he still was cognitively good enough to be able to handle push back and could do his far more rational self-PR (that he had done all his life). Now, with his very notable cognitive decline, he's regressing and is really unable to as effectively self-promote - it's all about fear and insecurity. This. It seems his self-imposed remit was to right the ship and not cause too many waves. Hell, he could have just looked at the money laundering aspect of the Epstein charges, but he didn't even do that. A man with a lack of courage.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/17/epstein-zorro-ranch-abuse-new-mexico New Mexico has approved a “truth commission” to investigate abuse on Jeffrey Epstein’s ranch outside Santa Fe, amid ongoing calls for transparency about the late sex-offender’s crimes. The move by legislators on Monday follows the justice department’s release of millions of investigative documents into Epstein last month, which has renewed interest into the financier’s Zorro ranch. Multiple women and girls have said they were sexually abused on the roughly 10,000-acre (4,000-hectare) property. But there is nothing to see there...
So we should just have a two tier policing system where certain ethnics can commit crimes and get away with them then? and you don't think that's going to cause any resentment? it's people like that who have created the so called "far right". If I were a copper turning up to a house with a 12 year girl surrounded by adult men the last thing on my mind would be fear of being accused of racism when it's my job to protect them, there are cases where police took the side of the perpetrators and threatened concerned parents with being arrested. It's widely reported that some of the police and social services just dismissed the girls as "slags" etc. It doesn't matter, if they're 11-15 year old it's rape. I don't know how any of them could sleep at night just ignoring and walking away from such crimes. At least they haven't been accused of racism though!?! There are many such reports about incidents being brushed under the carpet and virtually nobody who was in authority has suffered any consequences. Parents were literally driven to joining the EDL because the authorities put in place to protect their children and enforce laws failed them. So here we are years later and the authorities whose job it is to protect children are probably still filled with people who believe that being called a racist is worse than allowing young girls to be trafficked and raped. My point is the Democrats have only started caring about the files as a political strategy, they couldn't have cared less about "seeking justice for the victims" when they were recently in government for 4 years and were able to do something about it. They know as well as the current government does that the files will never be fully released in such a way that anyone high up in society is held accountable.
If it is now a valid political strategy, why wasn't it that four years ago? It would have been trivial for the president to release the files at any time.
It's because Epstein isn't dead. Odd how Jean-Luc Brunel was also found hanged in a prison cell before the trial. Or if what happened, happened it means that someone in the system couldn't be bought, but occam's razor would suggest that powerful people created a spectacle for the masses to consume, while protecting their friends. That would be borne out by anyone studying how the elites craft false narratives to be consumed by the masses in history. Bill Barr being the attorney general of NYC during would point to conspiracy though. It wouldn't be the first conspiracy he used his expertise to help powerful men wiggle out of (Iran Contra). I think the thing everyone has to realize about this Epstein case is that they had no idea how powerful the Internet would be as a medium in making it harder to control the population. Any Joe Schmoe that works at the Kum and Go *(RIP) that is smart enough can put enough dots together to construct a concrete picture. Are conspiracy theorists right about everything? Hell no. And they push obvious false ones (Flat Earth) so that they get placed in with loonies and crazies. However they oftentimes get the majority of the picture right. It's because there are always little details that give things away. For instance like the Flag being lowered and secret service ushering in a photographer during Trump's "Assassination Attempt". That has to logically be explained somehow because that's not how people would react, unless they knew the shot was coming and wanted to get the Photo. The same powerful people crafting these narratives usually hold the keys to the public's general, socially acceptable forms of media dissemination. There's a subreddit if anyone wants to dive in more, it's called the Sorcery of the Spectacle. You'll get some really far out things on there, but it's all about how the elites are living in a different reality than the rest of us. I've said it before and I'll say it here, we are living through a period of time that's a compressed Reformation. The Internet changed information dissemination and the powers that be are struggling to hold their grip. It's why Trump's support has tanked amongst under 40 voters, while older Republican voters aren't getting with the program. They fall for the scams.
Fvck yeah, Sorcery of the Spectacle! Where I can learn about things like Epstein isn't dead! Trump wasn't really shot! 9-11 was an inside job! On my way!
Didn't say that at all. I was putting context to your comment. Now, let me be clear - I have worked directly with teens who have been sexually abused and sex trafficked. Keep that in mind when I say that upon first reading about the Pakistani rape gangs, I was also concerned about the racism aspect. I did not deny that rape gangs existed, but was concerned that the story suggested it was limited to (focused on) the Pakistani community. I, of course, didn't have the information the police have, and have since learned in greater detail what was occurring. But it was a concern of mine. When the police view girls as "slags," that is a separate issue than covering up the crime. As I said, I know there was some covering up, and a fair amount of minimizing (and in retrospect, some of those have admitted they were wrong), but police officers who have those views are problematic in any context, in any place. And it is the reason why there are specific sex crimes departments that do these investigations. Of course, it is also well documented how bad that view is (talking more broadly about misogyny here) amongst UK police. I'm not denying this. And, again, I have taught student who were sexually abused and sex trafficked. I'm well aware of the issue surrounding police/law enforcement/people in authority. Let me give you a story of where I come from, that is specific to me. Several years ago, I was working at a school that for most of the students is residential. My typical week consisted of a lighter Monday assignment followed by increasing levels of difficulty as the week went on, before Thursday I gave an assessment. It was well known by the students, and I tried to be as consistent as possible for their benefit. One week, my first class happened to be mostly girls and they happened to be quite talkative. But they got their work done. And usually got less talkative as the week went on. This particular week it was really difficult to get them focused. So much that I stopped the Thursday assessment and asked them: me: "What's going on?" them: "Nothing, Mr. Nutter, we'll do this assessment." me: "No, something is going on. You've been talkative all week more than normal. Something is going on." They all looked at each other like there was something serious. I assumed it was something to do with a sister or family member of one of them, or something that happened over the weekend. I reminded them that I would do everything I could to keep it in the classroom unless it was a safety issue. Eventually, they let me know that a staff member was having a sexual relationship with a student (in another class). I did everything I could to keep their names out of it, but eventually told them I needed to have them write statements so I could fight for them harder. And a few did. And it turned out that this had been reported months before by a female student who had discipline issues, but was not fully believed. Pissed me off, but at least that staff member was fired. (Never learned if there were any legal consequences.) I tell you that as I've experienced, first hand, problems with males in authority minimizing or disbelieving females reporting an issue sexual in nature. And I agree. Though I would also track that back to people in authority as the FBI got notified of Epstein's acts as far back as the mid 1990s (the Farmer sisters). And there have been problems with investigating this for 3 decades. So this doesn't just fall on Democrats, this falls on everybody. And it was an absolute failure of the victims. There are really only 4 people (maybe a few more) who come out looking good in this: Julie Brown (reporter who reopened the investigation in 2018) Michael Reiter (Palm Beach Police Chief who directed an investigation in 2004) Marie Villafaña (ASUA who did the initial DOJ investigation in 2006) Vicky Ward (reporter who profiled Epstein, but had the sex abuse claims removed from her article after Epstein's lawyers met with her editor). She has admitted that she unwhittlingly outed the Farmer sisters.
While I agree with this in hindsight, we still had the after effects of the Pandemic and the J6 investigations. In the current context, it is directly linked to the Trump Administration's corruption. And they way Patel and Bonti and others are talking about this (just look at Bondi's defiance), makes it more of a story than the way that Lutnick answered. Yeah, Nutlick is getting mocked for saying he brought his nannies, but he was calm and measured and along the lines of "Yes, I made a mistake." Bondi, in particular, is making this worse for her and Trump, and better for the Democrats. Imagine if it was Barr testifying about the Epstein files. Do you think he would be talking about the Dow or saying somebody is not a real lawyer? No, he'd calm and passive-aggressive. Mind, this is only an explanation. This, in no way, should let Garland off the hook.
We talking about the moon landing? Apollo 11? Neil Armstrong? Hope you’re wrong, that was one of my favorite childhood memories.