ABC knew that Amy Robach was interviewing Virginia Roberts Giuffre they paid for flight to NYC and her Central Park Ritz-Carlton hotel room. They killed it cause Alan Dershowitz called them up and threatened to sue and the producers are fucking cowards. All O'Keefe did was leak an old video of Robach ranting after it got killed about how ABC are in cahoots with British Royals and killed it as a favor for them. All he did was dig up an old story with a new conspiracy story twist to smear ABC cause fuck the fake media.
Hey, the Drudge Report broke the Lewinsky scandal. Shitheads can be right. It doesn't make them less shitty!
Also, it's concerning if it imbues these people with credibility, given their penchant for fraudulent reporting.
I don't want to see the next O'Keefe claim be given less scrutiny, because this one apparently panned out. He's not a fucking journalist, and shouldn't ever be given the benefit of the doubt.
ABC knew that Amy Robach was interviewing Virginia Roberts Giuffre they paid for flight to NYC and her Central Park Ritz-Carlton hotel room. They killed it cause Alan Dershowitz called them up and threatened to sue and the producers are fucking cowards. All O'Keefe did was leak an old video of Robach ranting after it got killed about how ABC are in cahoots with British Royals and killed it as a favor for them. All he did was dig up an old story with a new conspiracy story twist to smear ABC cause fuck the fake media.
Ironic that one of the movie threads was just recently talking about The Insider, which was this with the tobacco industry and CBS.
ABC knew that Amy Robach was interviewing Virginia Roberts Giuffre they paid for flight to NYC and her Central Park Ritz-Carlton hotel room. They killed it cause Alan Dershowitz called them up and threatened to sue and the producers are fucking cowards. All O'Keefe did was leak an old video of Robach ranting after it got killed about how ABC are in cahoots with British Royals and killed it as a favor for them. All he did was dig up an old story with a new conspiracy story twist to smear ABC cause fuck the fake media.
This is why you don't give ratfuckers an inch. This is not the first "real" tape that Project Veritas has released, but like all of those, they strip it of context and frame it within a false context to show something that it doesn't.
Remember Drudge Report only "broke" the Lewinski scandal by publishing partial and unsourced rumors they bought from a mail room employee at one of the papers who they claimed had cancelled the story, which was the same way they broke Clinton's affair with his lawer, a supreme court justice, Vice President Gore, and the mother of his illegitimate son who had a positive paternity test with a different man. The two papers whose editors they claimed canned the story both came out hours later with verified information, names, and dates. It was a blind squirrel finding half of a nut and adding it to the treehole horde of dirt clods.
Firebrand attorney Alan Dershowitz has filed his own lawsuit against accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre — claiming she’s a money-grubbing opportunist out for a payday.
“Dershowitz never met Giuffre and never had sex with her,” lawyers for the Harvard Law professor write in new court papers, filed Thursday in Manhattan federal court.
The counter-suit, which is a response to Giuffre’s own legal action against Dershowitz for defamation, claims she only began to accuse him after lawyering up.
“She then met her lawyers, who ‘pressured’ her to falsely accuse Dershowitz, suggesting to her that she could make money by doing so,” the documents read.
Jeffrey Epstein’s self-proclaimed “sex slave” says she was farmed out to various men for sex during her years with the late financier — including Dershowitz.
This feels like Dershowitz trying (again) to take control of a narrative that he's lost.
ABC knew that Amy Robach was interviewing Virginia Roberts Giuffre they paid for flight to NYC and her Central Park Ritz-Carlton hotel room. They killed it cause Alan Dershowitz called them up and threatened to sue and the producers are fucking cowards. All O'Keefe did was leak an old video of Robach ranting after it got killed about how ABC are in cahoots with British Royals and killed it as a favor for them. All he did was dig up an old story with a new conspiracy story twist to smear ABC cause fuck the fake media.
It's only a BS story if you're willing to accept what Robach said in her apology and not take her recorded words at the time at face value, which I don't believe should be immediately discounted as some misdirected angry rant.
ABC knew that Amy Robach was interviewing Virginia Roberts Giuffre they paid for flight to NYC and her Central Park Ritz-Carlton hotel room. They killed it cause Alan Dershowitz called them up and threatened to sue and the producers are fucking cowards. All O'Keefe did was leak an old video of Robach ranting after it got killed about how ABC are in cahoots with British Royals and killed it as a favor for them. All he did was dig up an old story with a new conspiracy story twist to smear ABC cause fuck the fake media.
It's only a BS story if you're willing to accept what Robach said in her apology and not take her recorded words at the time at face value, which I don't believe should be immediately discounted as some misdirected angry rant.
Apply Occam's Razor here - which is the more likely scenario:
*That ABC killed an interview that they had spent good money on as a favor to the British royal family (who wield no real power over them beyond access control), or
*That ABC killed the interview in response to a threat of legal action from an individual who was considered one of the foremost lawyers in the US, and who has a reputation for wielding the legal system as a club.
Remember, Dershowitz has openly bragged about killing this interview as a demonstration of how he is "right". You keep saying to take the frustrated ranting of an understandably angry reporter at face value, but give no reasons why - which is especially unpersuasive given all the evidence that we shouldn't, from the fact that this video is being pushed by a known ratfucker who openly creates falsified videos to the point that we have Dershowitz openly asserting that he killed the story as a demonstration of his power.
David Boies filed a defamation suit in Manhattan Supreme Court on Friday — just one day after Dershowitz made accusations against him and his clients in his own suit in federal court.
That legal move by the famed Harvard professor was a response to legal action taken against him by one of Boies’ clients, Epstein accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre.
Boies, who also represents accuser Sarah Ransome, called Dershowitz in court papers a “long-time friend and lawyer for convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein” who has been “personally accused under oath by two women of sexually abusing them when they were young,” the court papers say.
“In an effort to distract attention from his own misconduct, Defendant has engaged in a campaign to attack and vilify each of the lawyers who have represented his victims, one of which is Plaintiff,” the suit claims.
The document lists a number of times Dershowitz accused him of extortion and telling his clients to “intentionally lie about having sex” with him as part of Epstein’s sex ring.
“Defendant has essentially challenged Plaintiff to sue him for defamation,” the papers state.
Besides, we already knew what happened to kill it - Alan Dershowitz got wind, and called up ABC and made his usual legal threats.
That's a coverup.
That's not a coverup.
A news organization not wanting to go to court isn't a coverup, it's cowardice.
How do you think coverups work?
If it's a coverup, it's a coverup on the part of Alan Dershowitz, who has been doing everything he can to spike Virginia Roberts Giuffre's claims against him both in the courts of law and public opinion - and is more or less losing his mind over the fact that he's been having much less success in doing so in the past few months.
Besides, we already knew what happened to kill it - Alan Dershowitz got wind, and called up ABC and made his usual legal threats.
That's a coverup.
That's not a coverup.
A news organization not wanting to go to court isn't a coverup, it's cowardice.
How do you think coverups work?
If it's a coverup, it's a coverup on the part of Alan Dershowitz, who has been doing everything he can to spike Virginia Roberts Giuffre's claims against him both in the courts of law and public opinion - and is more or less losing his mind over the fact that he's been having much less success in doing so in the past few months.
Dershowitz then alleged that Boies and other lawyers had Giuffre “falsely accuse” him of sexually assaulting her, claiming he never met her or had sex with her. This prompted Dershowitz to hawk his latest book, saying he wrote it in response to false accusations.
“And let me tell you, if I can be accused by sleazy, sleazy women and lawyers, anybody can be accused,” Dershowitz added.
Varney, however, felt that Dershowitz went a step too far in his attacks on Giuffre and Boies.
“We can’t—I don’t want to be using words like that on this program,” the Fox Business host replied, “on someone who is not here to defend themselves.”
VanguardBut now the dream is over. And the insect is awake.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
A prison worker on duty at the time of Jeffrey Epstein's death was offered a plea deal, sources say
(CNN) — At least one federal prison worker on duty the night before Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in his prison cell was offered a plea deal in connection with the multimillionaire's death, two sources familiar with the case said.
The initial plea offer made by prosecutors is considered an initial step in negotiations between prosecutors and attorneys representing federal workers at the New York facility where Epstein was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, one source said. Negotiations with prosecutors are ongoing
Prince Andrew, longtime friend and alleged client of Epstein, had an hour-long interview on the BBC defending himself. (Disclosure: I only heard the highligths on a segment on the BBC World Service.)
To summarize: Prince Andrew is completely innocent, chose to stay overnight at Epstein's place after Epstein was first convicted of sex trafficking as some sort of misguided "stand by your friends" thing, and has no recollection of ever having met (let alone raped) the sex trafficking victim he's been photographed with. All according to himself.
And if you can't trust a man who can't remember if he raped a sex trafficking victim or not, who can you trust?
A prison worker on duty at the time of Jeffrey Epstein's death was offered a plea deal, sources say
(CNN) — At least one federal prison worker on duty the night before Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in his prison cell was offered a plea deal in connection with the multimillionaire's death, two sources familiar with the case said.
The initial plea offer made by prosecutors is considered an initial step in negotiations between prosecutors and attorneys representing federal workers at the New York facility where Epstein was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges, one source said. Negotiations with prosecutors are ongoing
Yeah the fact he's offered a deal means there's an ongoing investigation into his death that may actually go to trial and frankly that seems like good news no matter how you think Epstein died.
Prince Andrew claimed last night that he had an alibi for the night he had allegedly spent with a “sex slave” in London in 2001: he was taking his daughter Beatrice, then 13, to a pizza party.
The Duke of York said he remembers “weirdly distinctly” going to a Pizza Express in Woking, Surrey, because it was “very unusual” for him to have gone to a high street restaurant chain.
Last month a Channel 4 Dispatches documentary claimed the night spent with Virginia Giuffre (née Roberts) was “likely” to have been on March 10, 2001. She has never specified the date on which she was allegedly forced by the American paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to have sex with the prince.
"I didn't raped her because I have an alibi that night".
"Which night?".
Also, the alibi he came up got all the Q-Anon people all hot and bothered so one has to wonder if it wasn't on purpose or he's just that much of an idiot.
When asked by Emily Maitlis why he stayed in the house of a convicted sex offender in a pre-recorded interview, understood to have been the result of six months of negotiations with the royal household, Andrew described it as a “convenient place to stay”. He said: “I’ve gone through this in my mind so many times but at the end of the day with the benefit of all the hindsight that one can have it was definitely the wrong thing to do but at the time I felt it was the honourable and right thing to do.
“I admit fully my judgment was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable but that’s just the way it is.”
When asked by Emily Maitlis why he stayed in the house of a convicted sex offender in a pre-recorded interview, understood to have been the result of six months of negotiations with the royal household, Andrew described it as a “convenient place to stay”. He said: “I’ve gone through this in my mind so many times but at the end of the day with the benefit of all the hindsight that one can have it was definitely the wrong thing to do but at the time I felt it was the honourable and right thing to do.
“I admit fully my judgment was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable but that’s just the way it is.”
Holy moly. Dig up!
People aren't buying that....right? Because that makes Trump talking about how he's the humblest person ever look tame.
When asked by Emily Maitlis why he stayed in the house of a convicted sex offender in a pre-recorded interview, understood to have been the result of six months of negotiations with the royal household, Andrew described it as a “convenient place to stay”. He said: “I’ve gone through this in my mind so many times but at the end of the day with the benefit of all the hindsight that one can have it was definitely the wrong thing to do but at the time I felt it was the honourable and right thing to do.
“I admit fully my judgment was probably coloured by my tendency to be too honourable but that’s just the way it is.”
Holy moly. Dig up!
People aren't buying that....right? Because that makes Trump talking about how he's the humblest person ever look tame.
Maybe I'm just excessively cynical but I take the "maybe I'm just too damned honorable" comment as an admission of guilt rather than what it is supposed to convey on its face. Like I'm pretty sure that comment in and of itself would have convinced me of his guilt if none of the other circumstances had.
Yeah the fact he's offered a deal means there's an ongoing investigation into his death that may actually go to trial and frankly that seems like good news no matter how you think Epstein died.
Hopefully and/or a widening probe of systemic negligence at that facility. I'd be willing to bet there's at least a well meaning shift supervisor who lets the night shift skip patrols on a regular basis.
Yeah the fact he's offered a deal means there's an ongoing investigation into his death that may actually go to trial and frankly that seems like good news no matter how you think Epstein died.
He was off suicide watch when he shouldn't have been, wasn't watched while he was on suicide watch, and a guard posted pictures of his dead body to one of the chan boards before even calling responders. There's plenty to investigate without indulging in theoreticals.
A plea deal would be the way to break through a unified lie - this was probably the literal prisoners dilemma game. They could probably proove all the guards were lying but not what the truth actually is, so either everyone goes down for lying or the first guy to roll keeps the money.
Yeah the fact he's offered a deal means there's an ongoing investigation into his death that may actually go to trial and frankly that seems like good news no matter how you think Epstein died.
He was off suicide watch when he shouldn't have been, wasn't watched while he was on suicide watch, and a guard posted pictures of his dead body to one of the chan boards before even calling responders. There's plenty to investigate without indulging in theoreticals.
A plea deal would be the way to break through a unified lie - this was probably the literal prisoners dilemma game. They could probably proove all the guards were lying but not what the truth actually is, so either everyone goes down for lying or the first guy to roll keeps the money.
I don't know that I have seen the evidence that he was taken off suicide watch inappropriately. Have they released the report from the psychiatrist? I also haven't seen any evidence that the body was posted before calling responders, but I am also not certain that would make a difference. It takes one guy to call 911, and they don't teleport to the location.
There is definitely something worth investigating, but this continues to not be a shadow of what the internet wants it to be. It saddens me that his suicide has taken this as the story to run with instead of all the crimes he definitely committed with the help of others that have disappeared into the background.
+2
Metzger MeisterIt Gets Worsebefore it gets any better.Registered Userregular
Yeah the fact he's offered a deal means there's an ongoing investigation into his death that may actually go to trial and frankly that seems like good news no matter how you think Epstein died.
He was off suicide watch when he shouldn't have been, wasn't watched while he was on suicide watch, and a guard posted pictures of his dead body to one of the chan boards before even calling responders. There's plenty to investigate without indulging in theoreticals.
A plea deal would be the way to break through a unified lie - this was probably the literal prisoners dilemma game. They could probably proove all the guards were lying but not what the truth actually is, so either everyone goes down for lying or the first guy to roll keeps the money.
I don't know that I have seen the evidence that he was taken off suicide watch inappropriately. Have they released the report from the psychiatrist? I also haven't seen any evidence that the body was posted before calling responders, but I am also not certain that would make a difference. It takes one guy to call 911, and they don't teleport to the location.
There is definitely something worth investigating, but this continues to not be a shadow of what the internet wants it to be. It saddens me that his suicide has taken this as the story to run with instead of all the crimes he definitely committed with the help of others that have disappeared into the background.
The suicide watch decision is very likely people just applying protocols without thinking
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Posts
THIS IS NOT A NEW STORY!
ABC knew that Amy Robach was interviewing Virginia Roberts Giuffre they paid for flight to NYC and her Central Park Ritz-Carlton hotel room. They killed it cause Alan Dershowitz called them up and threatened to sue and the producers are fucking cowards. All O'Keefe did was leak an old video of Robach ranting after it got killed about how ABC are in cahoots with British Royals and killed it as a favor for them. All he did was dig up an old story with a new conspiracy story twist to smear ABC cause fuck the fake media.
Also, it's concerning if it imbues these people with credibility, given their penchant for fraudulent reporting.
I don't want to see the next O'Keefe claim be given less scrutiny, because this one apparently panned out. He's not a fucking journalist, and shouldn't ever be given the benefit of the doubt.
Ironic that one of the movie threads was just recently talking about The Insider, which was this with the tobacco industry and CBS.
This is why you don't give ratfuckers an inch. This is not the first "real" tape that Project Veritas has released, but like all of those, they strip it of context and frame it within a false context to show something that it doesn't.
Remember Drudge Report only "broke" the Lewinski scandal by publishing partial and unsourced rumors they bought from a mail room employee at one of the papers who they claimed had cancelled the story, which was the same way they broke Clinton's affair with his lawer, a supreme court justice, Vice President Gore, and the mother of his illegitimate son who had a positive paternity test with a different man. The two papers whose editors they claimed canned the story both came out hours later with verified information, names, and dates. It was a blind squirrel finding half of a nut and adding it to the treehole horde of dirt clods.
This feels like Dershowitz trying (again) to take control of a narrative that he's lost.
It's only a BS story if you're willing to accept what Robach said in her apology and not take her recorded words at the time at face value, which I don't believe should be immediately discounted as some misdirected angry rant.
Apply Occam's Razor here - which is the more likely scenario:
*That ABC killed an interview that they had spent good money on as a favor to the British royal family (who wield no real power over them beyond access control), or
*That ABC killed the interview in response to a threat of legal action from an individual who was considered one of the foremost lawyers in the US, and who has a reputation for wielding the legal system as a club.
Remember, Dershowitz has openly bragged about killing this interview as a demonstration of how he is "right". You keep saying to take the frustrated ranting of an understandably angry reporter at face value, but give no reasons why - which is especially unpersuasive given all the evidence that we shouldn't, from the fact that this video is being pushed by a known ratfucker who openly creates falsified videos to the point that we have Dershowitz openly asserting that he killed the story as a demonstration of his power.
It's a gooseshit story.
He has negative credibility, and for good reason.
That's not a coverup.
A news organization not wanting to go to court isn't a coverup, it's cowardice.
How do you think coverups work?
If it's a coverup, it's a coverup on the part of Alan Dershowitz, who has been doing everything he can to spike Virginia Roberts Giuffre's claims against him both in the courts of law and public opinion - and is more or less losing his mind over the fact that he's been having much less success in doing so in the past few months.
Yes.
That was...unexpected.
Oh for fucks sake
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
To summarize: Prince Andrew is completely innocent, chose to stay overnight at Epstein's place after Epstein was first convicted of sex trafficking as some sort of misguided "stand by your friends" thing, and has no recollection of ever having met (let alone raped) the sex trafficking victim he's been photographed with. All according to himself.
And if you can't trust a man who can't remember if he raped a sex trafficking victim or not, who can you trust?
Couldnt this just be him agreeing to plead guilty to negligence or whatever in exchange for a lighter sentence?
Same thing thousands of defendants do every day to speed themselves through the court, not some indication of conspiracy.
MWO: Adamski
"I didn't raped her because I have an alibi that night".
"Which night?".
Also, the alibi he came up got all the Q-Anon people all hot and bothered so one has to wonder if it wasn't on purpose or he's just that much of an idiot.
People aren't buying that....right? Because that makes Trump talking about how he's the humblest person ever look tame.
Maybe I'm just excessively cynical but I take the "maybe I'm just too damned honorable" comment as an admission of guilt rather than what it is supposed to convey on its face. Like I'm pretty sure that comment in and of itself would have convinced me of his guilt if none of the other circumstances had.
Hopefully and/or a widening probe of systemic negligence at that facility. I'd be willing to bet there's at least a well meaning shift supervisor who lets the night shift skip patrols on a regular basis.
It keeps going:
He was off suicide watch when he shouldn't have been, wasn't watched while he was on suicide watch, and a guard posted pictures of his dead body to one of the chan boards before even calling responders. There's plenty to investigate without indulging in theoreticals.
A plea deal would be the way to break through a unified lie - this was probably the literal prisoners dilemma game. They could probably proove all the guards were lying but not what the truth actually is, so either everyone goes down for lying or the first guy to roll keeps the money.
I don't know that I have seen the evidence that he was taken off suicide watch inappropriately. Have they released the report from the psychiatrist? I also haven't seen any evidence that the body was posted before calling responders, but I am also not certain that would make a difference. It takes one guy to call 911, and they don't teleport to the location.
There is definitely something worth investigating, but this continues to not be a shadow of what the internet wants it to be. It saddens me that his suicide has taken this as the story to run with instead of all the crimes he definitely committed with the help of others that have disappeared into the background.
Privilege is never having to learn to keep your fool mouth shut.
Fuad Alakbarov is a political commentator.
That's a particular gross comment from Andrew, so fuck him specially for that.
Aamer Anwar is the rector of Glasglow University.
Yeah, fairly good question, why isn't Andrew getting interviewed for the FBI or any UK authority?
The suicide watch decision is very likely people just applying protocols without thinking
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Isn’t he the Queen’s favourite?
He’s always been in the wrong place at the wrong time, and I want to say he was one of the least popular royals before all of this.
This interview surely is making the case stronger that he should be interviewed by the police.
And, indeed, the Prince Charles, William & Harry.