• MrSmith@lemmy.worldEnglish
      23·
      21 days ago

      It’s crazy to me that people still think law in the US equally applies to everyone, and are in shock every time they see that it doesn’t.

      • anomnom@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        9·
        21 days ago

        We’re not in shock, we’re increasingly dejected and occasionally it builds up enough to make us scream for a minute before worse news mutes us again.

      • surewhynotlem@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        21 days ago

        Well yeah. He was the fall guy, and it’s WAY easier to suicide someone when they’re inside your prison.

        • Serinus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          6·
          21 days ago

          You don’t like his tone, but it’s very important those two people went to prison. Should more people be in prison? Absolutely.

          We’re in a worse situation than that now. There was some rule of law when those two went to prison. They likely wouldn’t go today. They weren’t just some “faces”; they were the primary people responsible for the crimes.

          The murderers of Renee Good and Alex Pretti aren’t in jail.

        • FishFace@piefed.socialEnglish
          5·
          21 days ago

          So, “yes a single person”. Also Ghislaine was prosecuted. Glad we’re on the same page there.

          • Passerby6497@lemmy.worldEnglish
            6·
            21 days ago

            And just like Epstein, she’s getting all kinds of special treatments. Not nearly as egregious as Epstein got, but there’s still way too much preferential handling of her food and accomodations.

            But awesome, you’re up to 2 people charged in a massive conspiracy to rape children. Cool cool cool cool cool.

              • Passerby6497@lemmy.worldEnglish
                2·
                21 days ago

                So you’d agree then that no single person that really matters has been prosecuted then? Because the OP was slightly mistaken that no single person was charged. But hey, they got the 2 faces and none of the people facilitating or buying the services for the rich and powerful, so the rape gang can keep on keeping on.

                But yeah, you got’em!

                • FishFace@piefed.socialEnglish
                  4·
                  21 days ago

                  No I think it’s very important that Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, two child sex traffickers, former also a child sexual abuser, were convicted and imprisoned. They were not the “two faces”, they were facilitating (and in Epstein’s case, partaking in) the illegal, immoral acts we’re talking about.

                  You don’t know if the rape gang carried on. You’ve got no evidence for it. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, but it’s just wrong to say without evidence.

                  Saying it contributes to a world where it’s normal to just accuse people of shit. It doesn’t only blow onto the wealthy and the powerful who you think are bad - the giant paedophile conspiracy theory which you’re subscribing to helped elect Trump. It never mattered that Trump was mentioned in the files - it never mattered what was true because people like the OP, people like you, chat a load of shit and think it’s ok. You can do better.

                  That is why I care about it. So no, I didn’t got’em, because you don’t get it.

          • surewhynotlem@lemmy.worldEnglish
            5·
            21 days ago

            This is the second most autistic conversation I’ve had today. Please allow me to rephrase the conversation till now.

            " No one was arrested"

            " One person was arrested"

            “ONLY one person was arrested because they’re specifically NOT arresting anybody else. This is what we’re complaining about”

            " So you agree one person was arrested?"

            Like yes, we agree with you about the unimportant point that a nonzero amount of people were arrested, which specifically was NOT what OP meant, ya silly literalist.

            • FishFace@piefed.socialEnglish
              7·
              21 days ago

              I think it’s important to be truthful, and I also think it’s important that Epstein and Maxwell were both sent to jail.

              And I think it’s even more important to push back against statements that are made not for their truth but just for their vibes, and the idea that calling out their lack of truth is somehow an opposition to the vibe. You can just say something true that expresses your feelings adequately, and it doesn’t contribute to an environment where truth doesn’t matter.

              • surewhynotlem@lemmy.worldEnglish
                2·
                21 days ago

                See, that’s where I disagree. I think we should take that time that we’re using to self-police people on our side and their language, and then spend that time beating the shit out of Nazis. Verbally, of course.

    • [object Object]@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      20 days ago

      Not necessarily: the university just provides an email server, it doesn’t mean that the email can only be checked while on the premises.

  • Lysergid@lemmy.mlEnglish
    85·
    21 days ago

    Entire intelligence agencies will try to hack into your communications to ensure that cat does not resembles supreme commander. At the same time ignoring that dude which paid 5 bucks in taxes, has private island and absolutely not sus traffic from all over the world.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      43·
      21 days ago

      They had hard evidence of the Epstein classes crimes for DECADES.

      At this point it should be self evident that the global intelligence community — likely including the agencies responsible for CSAM — are corrupt to their core and all compromised by the Epstein class of lawless billionaire psychopaths. It’s highly likely Epstein and Trump’s entire pedo sex trafficking ring was created by American/Israeli intelligence orgs to extort and blackmail globally, considering Ghislaine Maxwells dad was so high up that every living Israeli PM attended his funeral; some giving speeches alluding to his espionage.

      Just like the police, these secret police exist to protect and defend capital. Capital IS “national security”. They don’t give a shit about laws, morality, democracy, or any of the other virtue signals Hollywood et al perpetuate. If they did, they wouldn’t have ignored the evidence about hundreds of billionaire pedophiles, for DECADES.

      • Serinus@lemmy.worldEnglish
        5·
        21 days ago

        the agencies responsible for CSAM — are corrupt to their core

        No. They mostly do good work. I don’t believe the people going to the island were generally passing around large amounts of CSAM sourced publicly, like forums or Reddit.

        I’m so tired of people just taking the vibes they want from words and ignoring the meaning of full sentences. It’s a form of illiteracy.

        I get that we’re angry.

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          20 days ago

          If our most top secret entities are corrupted by pedophiles — have enabled and protected pedophiles for decades — what are the chances that other high-profile secretive targets, like the agencies that deal with CSAM, are not?

          We’re talking about a tool that has been proposed for client-side scanning of every computer. You really think these people wouldn’t plan to get involved to ensure their own devices are excluded, or any logs that relate to them never get passed onto other law enforcement?

  • skisnow@lemmy.caEnglish
    59·
    21 days ago

    Mitch Webber’s original email to him was essentially “yeah you’re golden, fuck as many minors as you like, just bring them to another state first”. And he still seems to have kept his job at (checks notes) an antisemitism group.

    …what would happen if one were to transport a minor for sex — or transport oneself with the intent to have sex with a minor — into a state in which the age of consent is below eighteen (assuming the minor is above the age of consent in the given state)? And your intuition was right. The answer is that there is no violation of law.”

    Let’s be clear: everyone has a right to be represented by a lawyer in court, and we shouldn’t judge lawyers for defending rapists because they’re literally their job. But that’s not what’s happening here; this is him actively helping Epstein figure out the best way to rape children.

    https://jewishpostandnews.ca/uncategorized/antisemitism-group-keeps-board-member-who-emailed-epstein-on-the-legality-of-transporting-minors-for-sex/

    • Skullgrid@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      21 days ago

      he still seems to have kept his job at (checks notes) an antisemitism group.

      to be clear, this is a group for prevention of antisemitism and not a group who aims to be antisemitic, right?

          • andros_rex@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            20 days ago

            It’s just fucked that in a time where Nick Fuentes is getting mainstream airtime, organizations which claim to fight antisemitism are often more concerned with justifying Gaza.

            • Skullgrid@lemmy.worldEnglish
              2·
              20 days ago

              there are people like Ben Shapiro that are on the same side as those bastards while emphasizing the “JUDEO” part of “JUDEO-Christian values” which , btw, is a term that has been engineered specifically to exclude islam out of the group of “Abrahamic religions”, and/or to shove jews into the same bucket as the majority when “christian values” would be used instead.

              it’s fucking dog whistles all the way down.

      • skisnow@lemmy.caEnglish
        3·
        21 days ago

        Ostensibly, yes. As far as I can tell from their entry in influencewatch they also do something called “pro-Israel legal advocacy”, but I don’t know what that is. Either way it’s not a great look having Epstein’s consigliere on board.

  • infinitesunrise@slrpnk.netEnglish
    28·
    20 days ago

    Do however keep in mind that the entire intent here seemed to be the creation of blackmail, it’s not just banality of evil but also ol Jeffy making sure that the dark desires of his marks was properly documented for mossad or whoever he was being funded by. He wasn’t worried about being caught by the state, he was an actor of the state.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      20 days ago

      It’s the reason there’s so many pictures of Epstein photobombing near celebrities. And the celebrities knew it.

  • arc99@lemmy.worldEnglish
    21·
    20 days ago

    The fact that all these communications were pulled from GMail and presumably known to law enforcement for years shows its not signal.

  • Aeao@lemmy.worldEnglish
    15·
    21 days ago

    That quote could mean a lot of things /s

    It reminds me of my coke dealer

    Me: drugs? Him: drugs.

    Then I swing by. Say what you will about hard drugs least I’m not out looking for teenagers. What do you even talk to teenager about, even coked out. School?

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      6·
      21 days ago

      Me: drugs? Him: drugs.

      To be fair, that’s simultaneously specific enough that there’s no risk of miscommunication AND vague enough that it’s of absolutely no use to any narcs spying on your correspondence 😘👌 😄

  • MalReynolds@slrpnk.netEnglish
    14·
    21 days ago

    Complete arrogance about ever getting caught because you have blackmail on everyone is the signal of the rich.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.worldEnglish
    13·
    20 days ago

    This looks more like he’s discussing defenses to his case with his lawyer.

    Look at the e-mail that Epstein replied to, it seems to be specifically related to discussing his case. This appears to be from his lawyer

    <a bunch of discussion about hypothetical situations and the associated laws>

    Remember, though, that sex trafficking is inapplicable in your case. As I wrote in my August 11 memo, "In Epstein’s case, (1) he never transported any girl across state lines, and (2) he never traveled with the intent of soliciting prostitution from underage girls. (Because section 2423(b) is essentially an ‘attempt’ statute, it requires specific intent of wrongdoing. See, e.g., United States v. Sims, 428 F.3d 945, 959-60 (10th Cir. 2005).)

    Then the e-mail in the OP is sent.

    It’s gross, but my initial reading was that he’s creating a plan to travel and is trying to dodge laws. However, in reading the full context, it seems more like they’re talking about his cases.

    e: as discovered below, this e-mail is from August 2006, he was arrested 1 month before this, so this e-mail is almost certainly about his case and not about trying to find loopholes to do more crimes.