• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

The Epstein Problem

Amuses me that I'm being called a centrist and a moderate just because I don't worship Trump. I've been considered a rabid right winger most of my life.

There is nothing wrong with being a Moderate or Centrist. I am very Moderate in many regards on social issues, I am pretty Conservative on fiscal and foreign policy. I get a bit sick of hearing people tear down each side in nasty ways all the time. It is heavily on the left nationally but it certainly rears it's head on the right too. We need to get over ourselves and learn that we can disagree without having to make it personal.

Neither side will ever win an argument by degrading the other side or making personal attacks, all you do is raise that persons defenses and help cement their opinions by simply being stubborn.

I don't think Tibs really believes half the things he posts but does it to get a rise out certain members of this board who rarely fail to come through.
 
So only Clinton’s association with Epstein is relevant because it’s slighlty more recent?

Ha! This ******* place!

You of course have no problem with Google editing its search engine and suppressing the undeniable fact that Clinton was vastly more closely connected with Epstein than Trump, and suppressing stories about the fact that Trump cooperated with a lawsuit against Epstein, and banned Epstein from Mara Lago.

Nope, none at all. Orwell would just shake his head at you and think, "Jesus, what I wrote was fiction, people."
 
There is nothing wrong with being a Moderate or Centrist. I am very Moderate in many regards on social issues, I am pretty Conservative on fiscal and foreign policy. I get a bit sick of hearing people tear down each side in nasty ways all the time. It is heavily on the left nationally but it certainly rears it's head on the right too. We need to get over ourselves and learn that we can disagree without having to make it personal.

Neither side will ever win an argument by degrading the other side or making personal attacks, all you do is raise that persons defenses and help cement their opinions by simply being stubborn.

I don't think Tibs really believes half the things he posts but does it to get a rise out certain members of this board who rarely fail to come through.

I didn't say there's anything wrong with being a moderate or centrist. Just said I've never been one. Certainly I've moved on LGBTQ issues, mostly because of having a lot of experience with the human beings involved. On virtually every other issue I'm conservative. Not liking Trump as a person has literally nothing to do with conservative vs. liberal, except for the fact that values and being a decent human being USED to mean something to conservatives.It certainly did when Clinton was being accused. Now suddenly to be "conservative" you have to jump on the "who cares who he is as a person" train. No thanks.

What bothers me more than that is that everyone has to be all or nothing, one side or the other, black or white. Pick your side and defend it to the death. There's no room for legitimate criticism of someone on your "side". There's no room for critical thinking anymore. Some people who support Trump are willfully blind to his flaws, which are numerous. Just like the Clinton supporters were. That bothers me.

When it comes down to it, "who is less likely to completely destroy our country" is more important than "who is a terrible human being". But that doesn't mean I have to like it, or stay quiet about it, or not wish for better.
 
Last edited:
Trump lost suburban Philly women in 2016, and in 2018 my county turned from staunch red to mostly blue for the first time in decades. 2020 ain't gonna be pretty for him here. We'll see if the middle of the state can turn out in big enough numbers to make up for it.

Midterms are not the general election, OFTB. Obama lost a **** ton of seats in 2010 and won easily in 2012 despite his terrible job performance.

Trump's economy is simply going to drive the lefty-socialist party off a cliff.
 
None of us (except the Libs) want any POTUS - current or former - to be tied up in any of this Epstein ****. Yet, as it turns out we have one former POTUS (Clinton) who has been to Pedo Isle 26 times.

Bunk. Goolag assures me that the only President associated with Epstein is Trump.
 
yeah, no ****. I tried that last night and again this morning. they've tampered down some of the "Epstein Trump" predictive search, but still nothing for "Epstein Clinton". Even "Epstein Clinton 26" is a search to the party from 1992 with Epstein and Trump.
 
Bunk. Goolag assures me that the only President associated with Epstein is Trump.

I just tried it again, and nothing. Tried Clinton first as well (Clinton, Epstein) and nothing there as well. Goolag for sure.
 
Type Epstein into Bing search and auto complete has Epstein Clinton as the second suggestion
 
I don't know if Trump is involved. I don't know if Clinton is involved. Wouldn't surprise me to find out either is involved, but that's mostly because nothing really surprises me anymore. I know most people have either declared Trump a pedo or exonerated him, depending on your political leanings, but I'm gonna wait until all of the information comes out. I mean, providing it ever does. It wouldn't be the first time rich people were able to hide things, you know like Robert Kraft getting a video of him receiving a happy ending inadmissible in court. Besides, I have no faith in our government to do the right thing. They would cover up for one person just so they could protect another. It's old.

Now that Alexander Acosta is being strung up to hang for this by the left, information is starting to come out about how Epstein's team of lawyers completely buried the U.S. attorney's office in paperwork and basically were running circles around them in objections and court filings. The cost to proceed to trial would have been astronomical.

Look, I hate that this is even possible, but there it is a FACT when someone has infinite money to throw at a team of top-rate lawyers, there is just too many loop holes and tricks in our system to even BEGIN to get a fair and just outcome for crimes committed by the ultra-wealthy (unless the evidence is just blatant and obvious).

Some are already defending Acosta that he got what he could and the evidence against Epstein wasn't as rock solid as the media is now portraying it to be (what a surprise!).
 
I do believe Epsteins lawyers flooded them with paperwork, but someone still dropped the ball. Its not like it was a he said she said case there were many many victims. I don't know what all evidence they had, but surely they had some kind of search warrants...I still think the prosecution team should have pushed for much more punishment or at least let it go to trial. They should have assigned Olivia and Elliot to the case.
 
I agree jitter, something this despicable shouldn't have been given up on because of loopholes and astronomical trial costs. This monster should have been jailed and never been able to see anything outside of a prison yard again.
 
I agree jitter, something this despicable shouldn't have been given up on because of loopholes and astronomical trial costs. This monster should have been jailed and never been able to see anything outside of a prison yard again.

Certainly agree with this. And the defense of, "Oh, they dumped so much paper on us" is bunk. The SDNY has dozens of lawyers and law clerks, a lot of whom are law students who could go through the discovery and documents and get them ready for the lawyers.

I routinely get served with 15,000 pages of documents that I have to go through, organize, and prepare for later use. One guy.
 
He isn’t gonna get away this time. The FedGov has trillions to waste, and obviously they aren’t afraid to do that.
 
I routinely get served with 15,000 pages of documents that I have to go through, organize, and prepare for later use. One guy.

Holy **** my man, you certainly earn your money.
 
Certainly agree with this. And the defense of, "Oh, they dumped so much paper on us" is bunk. The SDNY has dozens of lawyers and law clerks, a lot of whom are law students who could go through the discovery and documents and get them ready for the lawyers.

I routinely get served with 15,000 pages of documents that I have to go through, organize, and prepare for later use. One guy.

need you to organize my maint. office
 
Certainly agree with this. And the defense of, "Oh, they dumped so much paper on us" is bunk. The SDNY has dozens of lawyers and law clerks, a lot of whom are law students who could go through the discovery and documents and get them ready for the lawyers.

I routinely get served with 15,000 pages of documents that I have to go through, organize, and prepare for later use. One guy.

You hate the environment,..... racist!
 
Holy **** my man, you certainly earn your money.

I use Adobe XI. Scan the documents, and then use the text recognition function.

The text recognition for 15,000 pages takes a looooong, looooong time - usually 24 hours or more.

But once it is done, save the file as pdf.OCR and it is then searchable. I just put in the key search terms, and bingo!! Adobe finds them for me - even handwritten entries, though I do look them over as handwriting is sometimes tough to recognize by the Adobe system.

Once I search all 15,000 pages for a key term - "discipline" or "performance," for example - I can focus on those documents. I then search all sorts of terms to see what I can find.

The one thing that makes the search a bit more difficult is the habit of millenials to shorten words, or misspell them. "Discipline" will become "Disc," for example, or even "discapline." Bad spelling makes my life more difficult.

Also, I send the pages to my client and tell him or her to assist in the search. The pages are designated by something called a "Bate No." The Adobe program will automatically bate number the pages as well. I tell the client, "Anything interesting, you tell me that Bate number in the lower right corner."

So I use Adobe, my client, and my own review. We find what we need, unless the damn thing is misspelled. I have on occasion found a great document, late at night. Made a note of it ... bate number designated somewhere. Tired, go home. Next day, cannot find the note with the bate number. Do an Adobe OCR search ... no luck. @#$%ing thing was misspelled. I almost always remember the misspelling and can find it.
 
uh-oh


Chuck Schumer Received Thousands in Donations From Jeffrey Epstein

Sen. Chuck Schumer who recently said President Trump should “answer” for his friendship with Jeffrey Epstein, accepted thousands of dollars in donations throughout the 1990s, according to reports.

According to Federal Election Commission records, Schumer received seven $1,000 donations from Epstein between 1992 and 1997, first as a congressman from New York, then when he was running for the state’s senator in 1998, which he won.

https://nypost.com/2019/07/10/schumer-got-thousands-in-donations-from-jeffrey-epstein/
 
Im surprised that's accurate i have used OCR before and it was terrible accuracy. Anything with formatting / charts was horrible.
 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...KO2pjeQBQI-kczEJ3Ahm4_hP66HF1YOorktnBN15m1P4s

Was Jeffrey Epstein a SPY? Trump's Labor Secretary Alex Acosta won't deny he made non-prosecution deal with pedophile in 2007 because he was told the financier 'belonged to intelligence'

Former prosecutor Alex Acosta's plea deal with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was raised when Trump's transition team vetted him for labor secretary
Reporter claims he told questioners that he went easy on Epstein over teen sex abuse accusations because he was told Epstein 'belonged to intelligence'
Amid calls for his resignation, Acosta held a press conference on Wednesday to defend his actions in 2007
Asked point-blank if he was ever told Epstein was an intelligence agent, Acosta bobbed and weaved
He wouldn't confirm or deny anything but cautioned about reporters 'going down rabbit holes'

By DAVID MARTOSKO, U.S. POLITICAL EDITOR FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and WIRES

PUBLISHED: 17:34 EDT, 10 July 2019 | UPDATED: 17:34 EDT, 10 July 2019

e-mail
233
shares
125

View comments
Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta avoided on Wednesday answering a reporter's question about whether he consented to a lenient plea deal for pedophile Jeffrey Epstein in 2007 because he was instructed that the financier was a spy.

According to The Daily Beast, when President Donald Trump's transition team vetted Acosta for the top Labor Department post, he was asked about the deal and replied that he had 'been told' to go easy.

Acosta, in one source's telling, said he 'was told Epstein "belonged to intelligence" and to leave it alone.'

In a press conference Wednesday afternoon, he dodged a pointed question about whether that version of events was true.

'Were you ever made aware at any point in your handling of this case,' a reporter asked Acosta, 'that Mr. Epstein was an intelligence asset of some sort?'

Acosta neither confirmed nor denied it.

'There has been reporting to that effect,' he said. 'And let me say, there’s been reporting to a lot of effects in this case, not just now but over the years. And again I would hesitant to take this reporting as fact.'

'This was a case that was brought by our office,' he said of his then-position as Florida's top federal prosecutor. 'It was brought based on the facts.'

'And I look at the reporting and others, I can’t address it directly because of our guidelines, but I can tell you that a lot of reporting is going down rabbit holes.'

The Daily Beast reporter, Vicky Ward, wrote a profile of Epstein in 2003 for Vanity Fair but said later that her editor deleted many of the most salacious details in her story despite victims' willingness to go on the record.

The 2007 non-prosecution agreement ended a separate federal investigation into alleged sex crimes with minors and human trafficking.

'I tried to expose Jeffrey Epstein for what he is and I was silenced,' Ward tweeted. 'Everyone who knew about Epstein was – silenced by people with more money and power and influence.'

Epstein's lawyers parlayed their agreement with Acosta into a 2008 plea deal with local prosecutors that required him to register as a sex offender and serve 13 months in a county jail.

County officials later granted him permission to leave jail every day on a work-release program, a perk that Acosta called 'B.S.' on Wednesday.

A judge ruled this year that the plea deal was illegal; the U.S. attorney in Manhattan said Monday that it was not bound by it.

Prosecutors there accused Epstein of luring dozens of girls, some as young as 14, and coercing them into sex acts. He remains in jail while he awaits a bond hearing scheduled for next Monday morning.

The Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility, which investigates alleged misconduct by department lawyers, is reviewing how Acosta and the other prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida handled the Epstein deal.

Acosta said he would comply with any investigation.

The Justice Department disclosed the review into Acosta earlier this year after Republican U.S. Senator Ben Sasse raised concerns about the handling of the Epstein case with then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, according to Reuters.

A status of the review is unknown. The Justice Department has said Attorney General William Barr is recused from the matter because of his prior employment with the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, which represented Epstein at the time. Acosta also previously worked for the same law firm.

Democrats in Congress have called for Acosta to resign over the 'sweetheart deal.'

He dismissed those demands on Wednesday, saying that if his office hadn't stepped in at the time Epstein would have only faced one minor and non-jailable charge from state prosecutors.

'Without the work of our prosecutors, Epstein would have gotten away with just that state charge' and avoided jail time, Acosta told reporters. 'He was and is a sexual predator.'

'My relationship with the president is outstanding,' Acosta added.

Acosta would not say if he would make the same decision regarding Epstein again today.

'We live in a different world. Today's world does not allow some of the victim shaming that would have taken place at trial 12 years ago,' Acosta said.

'I don't think we can, say, take a case that is this old, and fully know how it would play out today.'
 
51PV6DQP2VL._SY445_.jpg
 
Heather Graham's always been easy on the eyes, but makes me lose skin.

Ug6yAYF.jpg
 
Top