Elyzabeth wrote:What the conservatives have to say IS often ridiculous, just as what the left has to say is often ridiculous, and increasingly violent.
We are discussing the new more violent LEFT /WOKE,
which has nothing to do with Epstein or Dershowitz,
Or your rather unpleasant and incorrect insults about me.
On topic, with a little less venom, please!
The OP was written by Alan Dershowitz, not you. You didn't bother giving a link to it, but here it is: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/1479 ... -hard-left . It's not about a 'violent' 'left/woke' at all, as you very well know. Dershowitz accuses the left of suppressing free speech, not violence. Yes, of course this is about Epstein - this is Dershowitz complaining about his own experience:
The other dangerous similarity between the Stalinists and the "wokers" is that both disdain due process for those they deem guilty of political incorrectness or other crimes and sins. They reject any presumption of innocence or requirement that the accuser bear the burden of proof. These bourgeois concepts are based on the recognition of human fallibility and uncertainty. For Stalinist and "wokers," there is no uncertainty or fallibility. If they believe someone is guilty, he must be. Why do we need a cumbersome process for determining guilt? The identities of the accuser and accused are enough. Privileged white men are guilty perpetrators. Intersectional minorities are innocent victims. Who needs to know more? Any process, regardless of its fairness, favors the privileged over the unprivileged.
Because he's hip deep in the Epstein scandal:
In a 2014 deposition Virginia Roberts Giuffre, the Australian-based woman who says she served as Epstein's teenage sex slave, said the financier had lent her out to powerful friends including Prince Andrew, modelling agent Jean-Luc Brunel and Dershowitz.
Giuffre asserted that she’d had sex with Dershowitz at least six times, in several of Epstein’s residences, on his island, in a car and on his plane.
Since Epstein's death, the accusations have received another wave of media attention. Dershowitz is asked about them everywhere he goes and has had speaking engagements cancelled as a result.
"Nobody I know believes her story about me," he says. "But people who don’t know me believe it."
Dershowitz insists the claims are completely untrue. He says he not only never had sex with Giuffre but that he has never met her.
This makes him, he argues, a major victim of the #MeToo movement.
"I am a victim of her false accusations and I’m speaking out,' he says. "Victims should speak out. False accusations are serious crimes and I would like to see her prosecuted."
Dershowitz believes that Giuffre concocted the allegations against him as part of a "shakedown scheme" devised with her lawyers. Pay up or we'll ruin your reputation like we did for Dershowitz, is how he believes the system worked.
https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-amer ... 52mm1.html
On March 2, Dershowitz tweeted, "I hereby accuse my false accusers of committing the felony of perjury and challenge them to sue me for defamation. They won’t, because they know the truth will land them in prison."
Most people would probably interpret this as an invitation for truth-settling in court, but now that Giuffre has taken up the challenge, Dershowitz is, to use a legal term of art, playing chicken. And what's galling about what's happening is that those who are merely watching Dershowitz's cries of innocence in TV interviews probably have no idea. On Wednesday morning, CBS News, for example, addressed Giuffre's defamation suit and Dershowitz's dismissal motion but omitted any of the nuance that showcases Dershowitz's utter cowardice. After brazenly entreating the very court action at hand, Dershowitz is attempting to seize on technicalities and broad immunities to elude fact-finding. That's not the impression conveyed on television. CBS viewers may believe there to be a war of words in court about the alleged occurrence of rape. In actuality, hardly.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-e ... rt-1223453