jimjam wrote:There is irony to be found in the conspiracy theories swirling around Epstein's death. Both camps, left and right, have identified a bogeyman directing the conspiratorial murder: The right, the Clintons; for the left, Trump. The mainstream press applies equivalent scorn to both views, but when trial norms are applied and the "evidence" is filtered through the perspectives of motive and opportunity, the cases to be made are not equal. The Clintons are not running for office in 2020 and certainly have less motive to silence a possible source of incriminating evidence. It has been proven already in the cases of the affairs Trump had conspired to keep silent before the 2016 election that he is willing to take extraordinary and illegal measures and lie repeatedly about the same. The Clintons are not in seats of power to affect the current workings of the government and they did not appoint Acosta to a prestigious cabinet position. There is definitely more of a record of Trump interacting with Epstein and some that seems to suggest Trump knew of Epstein's criminal activity. That Trump would retweet the Clinton conspiracy fits his well-known pattern of calling others the very thing that describes his own actions.
The establishment hates Trump, so it's a bit of a misdirection to assume that only the left dislikes Trump. That's why you and the establishment are trying to direct people's attention to Trump. For example, what "illegal" measure did Trump use to silence Stormy Daniels? The reality is that Trump supporters don't care either way, because what motivates Trump supporters is upending the establishment. Acosta made his deal when he was working for George W. Bush, not Trump. It got to the federal level, because there was evidence of sex trafficking and Epstein was given a light sentence where just about anyone else would have gone to the state penitentiary. The Clintons are still playing behind the scenes and they have the goods on a lot of people. You'll notice of the 20 Democratic presidential candidates, Terry McAuliffe isn't one of them. Yet, he has the qualifications. Why isn't he running? Probably because the Clintons haven't green lighted his candidacy. The idea that there is more of a record of Trump interacting with Epstein than Clinton is laughable. If anything, there's clear evidence that Trump had a falling out with Epstein, and Trump didn't like him--so the modern Clinton-era innovation of character assassination evolving into the politics of personal destruction fails here too. Roger Stone resurfaced to give his theory.
The reason this goes back to Clinton and Bush speaks to what Code Rood said earlier: Epstein was running a honey pot operation. Roger Stone theorizes that he was an information source on foreign dignitaries and that's why they let him off easy. The reason Clinton over-figures into this is because of his personal proclivities--and the fact that the FAA records have him on 26 separate flight manifests with Epstein. Google, CNN and MSNBC can scrub their search results and misdirect their reporting, but it is Clinton's track record that gives rise to people speculating about him. The recently released court docs have George Mitchell and Bill Richardson in the mix too.
You have to remember that the establishment's recovery from Reagan was George H.W. Bush--the former CIA director. Every president since until Trump has been a spook; although, George W. Bush wasn't much of one. Now you have a president who has no ties to the deep state. They are trying to fuck him up, and he's trying to fuck them up. Of course, for the last 15 years of shit, I'm rooting for Trump.
Notice how the judge in one of the cases has died now too? Carter appointee, so he was old and frail...
It's great to see the deep state melting down. Motherfuckers.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden
Better to laugh than cry...
- By Unthinking Majority
- By Fasces
- By paeng