General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFlight Logs Put Clinton, Dershowitz on Pedophile Billionaire’s Sex Jet
http://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-clinton-dershowitz-on-pedophile-billio-1681039971Flight Logs Put Clinton, Dershowitz on Pedophile Billionaire’s Sex Jet
Nick Bryant
1/22/15 2:55pm Thursday 2:55pm
Flight Logs Put Clinton, Dershowitz on Pedophile Billionaire’s Sex Jet
Bill Clinton took repeated trips on the " Lolita Express"—the private passenger jet owned by billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein—with an actress in softcore porn movies whose name appears in Epstein's address book under an entry for "massages," according to flight logbooks obtained by Gawker and published today for the first time. The logs also show that Clinton shared more than a dozen flights with a woman who federal prosecutors believe procured underage girls to sexually service Epstein and his friends and acted as a "potential co-conspirator" in his crimes.
Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 in Florida to one count of soliciting underage girls for sex (and one count of adult solicitation), for which he served just over a year in county jail. But sprawling local, state, and federal investigations into the eccentric investor's habit of paying teen girls for "massages"—sessions during which he would allegedly penetrate girls with sex toys, demand to be masturbated, and have intercourse—turned up a massive network of victims, including 35 female minors whom federal prosecutors believed he'd sexually abused. He has reportedly settled lawsuits from more than 30 "Jane Doe" victims since 2008; the youngest alleged victim was 12 years old at the time of her abuse.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who is Jeffrey Epstein? Click here for our primer about the billionaire pedophile.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Epstein's predatory past, and his now-inconvenient relationships with a Who's Who of the Davos set, hit the front pages again earlier this month when one of his victims, Virginia Roberts, claimed in a federal court filing that Epstein recruited her as a "sex slave" at the age of 15 and "sexually trafficked [her] to politically-connected and financially-powerful people," including Prince Andrew and attorney Alan Dershowitz. (The latter, the filing claimed, had sex with the victim "on private planes"; Dershowitz vigorously denies the charges, as does Prince Andrew.)
Two female associates of Epstein—the socialite Ghislaine Maxwell and Epstein's former assistant Sarah Kellen—have been repeatedly accused in court filings of acting as pimps for him, recruiting and grooming young girls into their network of child sex workers, and frequently participating in sex acts with them. Kellen in particular was believed by detectives in the Palm Beach Police Department, which was the first to start unraveling the operation, to be so deeply involved in the enterprise that they prepared a warrant for her arrest as an accessory to molestation and sex with minors. In the end, she was never arrested or charged, and federal prosecutors granted her immunity in a 2007 non-prosecution agreement that described her as a "potential co-conspirator" in sex trafficking.
Flight Logs Put Clinton, Dershowitz on Pedophile Billionaire’s Sex Jet
Maxwell, the daughter of the late media mogul Robert Maxwell, has been accused by Roberts of photographing Epstein's victims "in sexually explicit poses and [keeping] the child pornography on her computer," and "engag[ing] in lesbian sex with the underage females she procured for Epstein." She has denied the allegations in the past.
Clinton shared Epstein's plane with Kellen and Maxwell on at least 11 flights in 2002 and 2003—before any of the allegations against them became public—according to the pilots' logbooks, which have surfaced in civil litigation surrounding Epstein's crimes. In January 2002, for instance, Clinton, his aide Doug Band, and Clinton's Secret Service detail are listed on a flight from Japan to Hong Kong with Epstein, Maxwell, Kellen, and two women described only as "Janice" and "Jessica." One month later, records show, Clinton hopped a ride from Miami to Westchester on a flight that also included Epstein, Maxwell, Kellen, and a woman described only as "one female."
Flight Logs Put Clinton, Dershowitz on Pedophile Billionaire’s Sex Jet
In 2002, as New York has reported, Clinton recruited Epstein to make his plane available for a week-long anti-poverty and anti-AIDS tour of Africa with Kevin Spacey, Chris Tucker, billionaire creep Ron Burkle, Clinton confidant Gayle Smith (who now serves on Barack Obama's National Security Council), and others. The logs from that trip show that Maxwell, Kellen, and a woman named Chauntae Davis joined the entourage for five days.
That last name—Chauntae Davies—shows up elsewhere in papers unearthed by the various investigations into Epstein's sex ring: his little black book. Davies is one of 27 women listed in the book under an entry for "Massage- California," one of six lists of massage girls Epstein kept in various locales, with a total of 160 names around the globe, many of them underage victims.
more at link above...
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Not good for the upcoming race. This girl pressing charges did not just do this recently. This came out over a year ago. Now that the papers are winding through the courts, it's coming out.
After she filed charges, Clinton was flying with him again.
To keep Epstein alive? He must stay alive, so the 'pictures' don't come into play. This girl who was trafficked says the homes were outfitted with cameras. Ala Larry E. King of the Franklin Scandal!
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)is shit. little girls. Prince Andrew and Bill clinton. peas in a pod.
The rich. They aren't like you and me.
Good luck being President, Hillary, when this really gets going.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)reckless & dangerous for the Dem. Party & foremost us, The People. This puts us in a heck of a situation with two years to go & few choices even as great as Bernie Sanders & Eliz. Warren are. Additional self-inflicted damage from a compulsive, entitled, selfish man with real illness who got off at least twice already- Jen Flowers & Lewinsky. No more. Even if we nominate a Saint, this scandal will fill the media & damage our chances. Thanks Bubba, strikes again.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I'm already hearing peeps about the sexism in this discussion of Bill's latest adventures, aparently it's sexism against Hillary when Bill is the one who treats women like trash. He humiliates his family and comes out laughing and blushing about it, he uses women like kitchen utensils and that;s such a cool thing to do. Ah, Bill ya ole dog you.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)a personable charmer, less so now. I've been through this for 23 years since Jen Flowers in 1992. That was a real shocker, so hard to stomach him but carried on. This news is concerning as said in my posts, that he would jeopardize her chances, the Party, the people in such a time of need. But it's always that way with the selfish, compulsive, addicted or whatever types- it's all about them.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)She could have left Bill a long time ago.
get the red out
(13,704 posts)But whether or not, he's hauling some BAGGAGE, and that can't do her campaign any good. Nor the Democratic party. This is worse baggage than I ever knew about.
merrily
(45,251 posts)when it's a one sided open relationship, isn't it simply cheating and being cheated on?
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)I won't repeat it here but I'm sure if you google it you'll find some info
merrily
(45,251 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)I think it comes from disney fairy tales or something. The idea that the cheated on woman is somehow powerless and unable to herself be sexually free. Women often are portrayed as powerless victims, which is itself a strange stereotype.
Many many couples have discrete agreements and understandings. It's probably none of our business anyway.
I don't really care if a man or a woman has a mistress. It shows they can multitask and are social beings. Pity more those that don't.
Fairy tales of love are just that, they set up unreasonable expectations that we are naturally monogamous, which we are not.
Obviously referencing consenting adults.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Even though the media used to maintain codes of silence back in the day, we also have fairly credible evidence that Eleanor Roosevelt had at least one female lover and I have no problem believing that. Whether she came to that independently or because of FDR's dalliances is a question in my mind, but I believe the evidence shows that she had an affair.
We have fairly solid evidence that Bill has had extra marital affairs. I saw nothing from a credible source saying Hillary had them. Moreover, if there were an open marriage, why would Bill not have been honest about Monica, as opposed to letting Hillary make a fool of herself on the Today Show?
It's probably none of our business anyway.
You brought up open marriage. And I always disagreed with the meme that the Clenis was none of our business.
I think breaking a marriage vow--or any vow--says something about character. Not holier than thou, here. If I broke my vow, it would say something about my character, too.
According to Flowers, she and Bill had sex in the john at the Governor's mansion during official events. That says something about judgment and too risky behavior, IMO. The Paula Jones thing, if true, was not a mere affair, but just awful all the way around. And both Gennifer and Paula were his employees while he was an elected official. Monica was an intern. He was "the boss" in all three instances.
We know Monica gave him a bj while he was on a call with a head of state.
His lying about his affairs led to an impeachment. Second of a President in all of US history. And just imagine having to teach THAT high school history lesson.
None of the above was my business? Why the hell not? It isn't now, either, now that my party apparently wants to drag us through it all again? Why not?
As far as Hillary, so many have made her the poster child for feminism. So, it does indeed make a difference in my mind if she and Bill struck an equal bargain about their marriage or whether he cheats on her repeatedly and she just takes it and takes it.
whathehell
(30,117 posts)I've heard they actually "live in", not just "own" two different houses, his in
New York, hers in DC.
Whatever the story there, I don't care, but KIDS?!..No, that will NOT fly,
if true, and I truly hope it's not. 
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)But yes, for an ex-president to be doing this - he should have known better.
And you can't say he had no inkling, because given that he was in the plane with the girls, he did. There is just no way he didn't have an idea, and he had already had enough problems with his past connections so that he should have known not to do this. Nor did he have to beg a ride from a person like this. It strongly suggests that the girls were the draw.
This is not one of those stories that can be put down. It's better to let it hit now and for everyone to at least get used to the disgust.
I feel very sorry for Hillary and Chelsea - but people are what they are and you can't change that.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)multiple affairs and adultery going back to his terms as Arkansas Governor when he had the State Police Troopers procure for him, women like Paula Jones. She was another long legal case and media spectacle, maybe you remember it during his second term.
In 1992 his first year campaign for Pres. he had to face up to Jenifer Flowers, the attractive PR woman in Texas he was having a 6 year affair with up to the campaign. He and Hillary did a grim public address together about it; it was hard to swallow and really uncomfortable to see. Then the Lewinsky ordeal came up.
That he's a serial, habitual woman chaser and a huge liability is fact. To expect the GOP, Media and voters to ignore this, esp. from him is delusional. The Dem. Party and this country, the left particularly, can't afford more sleazy associations and behavior- giving the GOP the gun to shoot her with as one DUer wrote. In another post I commented also that this is very unfair to Hillary, Chelsea and husband and child.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I was thinking this over last night, and the problem is (I am a woman) that we all know of people like Bill Clinton. They're men in power. They think with their dicks. They do a lot of damage to women's lives. They may be cops, executives, politicians or business owners, but in some way they all seek power in part because they have a kink and a twist and they are driven to it.
And they sometimes have women who cover for them. No matter how sympathetic one is to Hillary, the fact is that she did in some sense enable his political career by her silence and her ability to shut down media coverage.
The fact that this has to do with underage girls - ah, some people will react and just not vote for her. Their gut won't let them do it.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)Haven't we had enough of Bill Clinton? If we nominate Hillary, we'll have to deal with his "indiscretions" all over again, ad nauseum. And, if he did indeed spend time with Epstein, who did not face the consequences any POOR "common folk" pedophile would face, then he is a time bomb ticking away. He disgusts me, and I think you are right--quite a few people I know would not support Hillary because of this.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)No way.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I don't think we have anywhere near enough facts yet to say he was guilty of doing anything with minors. I meant she puts up with his behavior in general.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Then use it against us later.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)
Hekate
(96,973 posts)...immediately if not sooner. Why do you think if this topic is stinking up the conversation now it won't be "used against us later"?
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)As reported in The Atlantic: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/01/the-juiciest-revelations-in-game-change/33226/
"The war room within a war room dismissed or discredited much of the gossip floating around, but not all of it. The stories about one woman were more concrete, and after some discreet fact-finding, the group concluded that they were true: that BIll was indeed having an affair -- and not a frivolous one-night stand but a sustained romantic relationship. .... For months, thereafter, the war room within a war room braced for the explosion, which her aides knew could come at any moment."
The authors do not identify the woman.
The Democrats need this kind of salacious crap like they need a hole in the head. A good reason in itself for the party to look past the Clintons for a candidate in 2016.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)adigal
(7,581 posts)It's the only way she'll win. Or she might just kill her husband, or at least want to.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)If she wouldn't kick his sorry ass to the curb after he not only lied to her about Lewinsky but got her to repeat his lies on national TV, with the consequent international humiliation at the hands of her charming husband, I can't see her "separating" from him now as convincing anyone she cares about anything but the negative publicity - granted she MIGHT do it if her private polling says this will get her the nomination. Granted, all the women who turn a blind eye to their own husbands' adulterous behaviors may take comfort from Hillary's acceptance of Bill's lifelong cheating. But I have no respect for her as a woman. She makes a mockery of feminism. And what a miserable role model for marriage they gave their own daughter.
No wonder there was a Secret Service prostitution scandal - after decades of watching the Big Dog screw around, it must have seemed just business as usual. If Clinton could do it, why couldn't they?
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)unfortunately. It took a lot for me to get past he Jen Flowers incident, that was huge, shocking with such a young attractive couple like the Clintons and the Gores. It was the beginning warning, for the public. It's very ugly, painful and shameful for the children, wives, families, neighbors. Many women have to or will endure it.
Remember CO Pres. candidate Gary Hart and the Money Business party boat with Donna Rice? Henry Cisneros, Bill's HUD Secy. had a an affair and during it his son was born with a serious heart condition, considered punishment by some. Before that there was RR with Jane Wyman, JFK, Ted K., FDR, Harding's antics, and whoever before that. Woody Wilson's nickname was appropriate. Awful subject and reality.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Nixon's scandals weren't about sex but were far more damaging to our country. Same for GWBush.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)chauffeur and later secretary until the end of the war. A career officer brother in law of a woman I worked with heard the discussion Ike had with General George Marshall in 1945 in Washington. He said Marshall told Ike that if he married Summersby his career was over. Some claim instead that Ike met with Marshall to request bringing Mamie, his wife to Europe. Summersby's 1952 marriage to a NY stockbroker was brief and ended in divorce.
We'll never know the full nature of the personal affairs and relationships of many public figures, J. Edgar Hoover, R.E Lee, Lincoln. I was just reading about Bush Sr.'s long term relationship with a staffer in Washington that was posted by a DUer recently.
ripcord
(5,553 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)is burned out, who knows. No she's not at fault at all, and to read that he was hanging with Epstein bill. partyman in 2001-02, then 2008 when she was running hard in the Pres. Campaign that he supported is so bizarre. He wants her in office, and he wants to maintain his and their legacy- but can't stop putting himself in danger-like an alcoholic, gambler, any other risk addiction.
They've been married 39 years, she went after him about women years back in the Arkansas Governor's Mansion, then had him watched in the WH. That was in staff books, writings like George Steph. I think. It must be exhausting, or else get away from it physically and mentally if you can. Eleanor R., many, many women of all times and cultures have gone through it and their children and families.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Last edited Sun Jan 25, 2015, 04:41 AM - Edit history (1)
Tall with dark hair. In her forties. I don't want this shit again. No more clintons.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)I too am so over this sordid mess and don't want it back in the White House.
What I find surreal are Clinton apologists claiming sexism perpetrated against the Clintons when the truth is Bill Clinton as an older, powerful male took/takes advantage of young, virtually powerless women, and Hillary enables his sexist horseshit by implied consent with her silence.
There’s a great article up at The Nation on ‘The Lewinsky Double Standard’. It discusses how differently we view men who have sex with much younger, less powerful women and women who have sex with older, more powerful men. Admitting an affair with an older, powerful man can, for many women, have severe consequences:"Clinton’s reputation has largely recovered from the affair that sparked his impeachment trial; Lewinsky’s never did. She got a master’s degree from the London School of Economics, hoping to do communications for a charity, but has been unable to get a full-time job. “Because of what potential employers so tactfully referred to as my ‘history,’ I was never ‘quite right’ for the position,” she writes, noting that the only offers she’s gotten have been those that would market her notoriety. She’s watched her friends marry and have children, their lives moving forward while hers has not. “With every man I date…I go through some degree of 1998 whiplash,” she writes. Imagine, at 40, being defined by a blowjob you gave at 22. Lewinsky is scarcely exaggerating when she compares herself to Hester Prynne. Her life has been deformed by slut-shaming, a phrase that had not yet been coined when she was catapulted into infamy."
And, perhaps discouragingly, this is sometimes an area in which feminists have contributed to the harm:"During the scandal, the primary feminist argument was about sexual harassment, about whether or not the affair was consensual. In their zeal to argue that the dalliance wasn’t exploitative—and thus that Clinton hadn’t committed a public transgression—some feminists went so far as to argue that Clinton was Lewinsky’s victim. “Here’s a cute, sexy, young president, he’s known to have had a lot of sexual affairs,” said Erica Jong during an all-female discussion of the scandal that The New York Observer convened at Le Bernardin. “He might stimulate the fantasies of all the young women who work in the office. And particularly the ones who are a bit father-obsessed and obsessed with older men and feel neglected. So, it’s possible that Clinton has had many more such attacks than we even think.” Attacks! As if the poor president only capitulated under the intern’s siege. There was little room, back then, to see Lewinsky as both an active agent in the affair and a person whose dignity and privacy deserved protection."
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Who brought up Lewinski's past, who she slept with and how old they were, etc., all in rage and anger and how disgusting Lewinski was tempting the wonderful little Billy with her witchery ways - same type of attacks on her as on a victim in a rape trial.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)How insupportable of you to throw out that bon mot without a scintilla of proof.
I don't know a single feminist on this forum who holds anyone other than Bill Clinton responsible for his sexual proclivities. I would have to see such a post before I'd believe it.
So, let's see it. Where is it?
zappaman
(20,621 posts)But nice to see DUers helping Repubs smear.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)but your response got me thinking. I do recall one specific incident that I can post here around which was a related conversation. I cannot, however, state with any real certainty whether or not the person(s) with whom I am conversing is/are in reality feminists, that being the sticking point in my example in response to your specific question.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8205925&mesg_id=8210476
OLDMADAM
(82 posts)I not only fear we could lose the election because of Bill's behaviors, past and present, but even if we win, what then? Four or more years of scandal, accusations, revelations, followed by deceits, lies, cover-ups, and mental gymnastics to distort the facts..
Anyone that doubts this isn't a possibility is an idiot or troll, wanting to bait us into placing our future, and the future of our party, not to speak of the millions of our country already in jeopardy.. And like Bill, what will Pres. Hillary do to deflect the attention away from the obvious, bomb, cut taxes, cut welfare, SS, Safety net deals???
Hardly a speculation, but an anvil ready to fall on our heads.. Sorry, fire away, I ready for this fight, better now than later..
merrily
(45,251 posts)Also, what kind of victory is it to have the first female President (if she actually makes it--which I doubt) be a perpetuallly wronged wife who would rather keep putting up; with this shit and falling for his lies than leave him?
It was clear when she was getting grilled by Matt Lauer that he (Bubba) had let her go on that show, where she was 100% sure to get grilled about Monica, to make a fool of herself defending him. "Vast right wing conspiracy?" No, dear, just your husband cheating on you. Yet again.
How did she keep falling for his lies?
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)and how disastrous it would have been for him to have won then the scandal revealed to be truth?
You would think this kind of story in the OP would have the same reaction, but no. The story has to be false or if you think there may be some truth in it, you must be a Right winger.
We cannot afford having a possible WH with Hillary and with this continual Clinton dripping pus of their dramas.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)as I do not believe Hillary is one either. But generally, I have to question people that forgive Bill for things they would not forgive anyone else for.
Sorry, no links, I guess you will have to have a sleepness night worrying about it.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)To this day he gets a free pass for his appalingly
reckless and inappropriate behavior.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)Nor from countless other women who recognize his narcissistic drive to get his rocks off no matter who it hurts.
I have said this of other popular presidents: beware putting such individuals on pedestals lest you see their feet of clay.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)I don't think so.
Dredging up one "example" that may or may not have been advanced by a feminist does not support your insupportable claim.
Just as I suspected...
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)It's completely different for me, I am not torn at all because I see clearly that neither Hillary nor Bill treat women with respect and do not deserve my support as a feminist.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)So, now we're talking about women who are not true Feminists?
I stand by my initial rebuttal. I do not know of any true Feminists who dismiss or diminish or deflect responsibility for Bill Clinton's sexual proclivities.
(Whenever I read a statement that begins with "There are others...," I am reminded of our slanted and partisan media. That's a common ploy on almost all of our co-opted media. I am repulsed when I see this on DU.)
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)the dress and even more important would have had it dry-cleaned. Something very strange about that dress part of the story. Who in the world would save such a thing? For her grandchildren? What was that about?
chervilant
(8,267 posts)In November 1997, Monica Lewinsky told her confidant and supposed friend, Linda Tripp, that she had in her possession a blue Gap dress that still bore the semen stain that resulted from her administering oral sex to President Clinton in February of that year.
Tripp called her literary agent, and fellow Clinton-hater, Lucianne Goldberg to report the news that evidence existed in Lewinsky's closet that could prove a sexual relationship between Monica and the President. Goldberg and Tripp, according to published reports in both Time and Newsweek, discussed stealing the dress and turning it over to investigators. Goldberg admitted having such a discussion with Tripp, calling it a "Nancy Drew fantasy."
In late November, Lewinsky mentioned to Tripp that she intended to have the dress, which she had been saving a souvenir, dry-cleaned for a family event. Tripp, anxious to preserve the dress to nail the President, discouraged her from doing so. "I would tell my own daughter," Tripp told her, that she should save the dress "for your own ultimate protection" should she later be accused of lying about the affair with Clinton. When Lewinsky expressed skepticism that it would ever come to that, Tripp told her that the dress made her look "really fat" and she shouldn't wear it again in public.
In late July, 1998, Lewinsky turned the dress over to Kenneth Starr's investigators after signing an immunity agreement. A blood sample was taken from Clinton on August 3, and on August 17, the FBI reported its conclusion that Clinton was the source of the semen on the dress "to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty."
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Would you want to hire her?
She saves a dress with semen on it as "a souvenir"?
Sorry.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)Sorry?!?
Linda Tripp's manipulation of Monica Lewensky in no way excuses Monica's behavior, and I never said nor implied that it did.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)
Yupster
(14,308 posts)Bill Clinton would still be lying about her. It was the only evidence she had.
Also, not so strange to me. Some people keep sheets unwashed so they can smell their lover if he/she goes away. It' a connection.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)she was selling a line of purses, maybe 10 years ago. This complete shut out of jobs is real bad, old world stoning, outcast stuff although these are very regressive times for women. I'm surprised at Erica Yong, what a crank. But M. and her name are so recognizable and employers are sensitive to that. Her mother was in LA, close to Placido Domingo, so no family connections to help with employment? There's a brother. This is troubling, there have to be many other women in similar instances who weren't finished. Hmm.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)evidence of a scandal. Why didn't she have the dress dry cleaned? Her story is very strange. She was not a victim. She was a mature woman.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)flying around with a pedophile.
https://twitter.com/search?q=taedavies
Divernan
(15,480 posts)How out of control is he, to pose for this picture? Are we talking the beginnings of senility? Drunk? What?
I can hear Bill now - Oh, honey, who you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?
Hekate
(96,973 posts)Major dirty mind there.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Here's the definition:
noun
1.
an act or gesture expressing affection, as an embrace or kiss, especially a light stroking or touching.
verb (used with object)
2.
to touch or pat gently to show affection.
3.
to touch, stroke, etc., lightly, as if in affection:
The breeze caressed the trees.
4.
to treat with favor, kindness, etc.
I posted he was caressing the blonde, and then added a description of what was, to Bill, her most attractive, albeit surgically enhanced, feature.
If there is any "major dirty mind" involved, it is Bill's, as anyone can tell by the look on his face.
Hekate
(96,973 posts)Matt_in_STL
(1,446 posts)The woman's husband was cropped from this photo taken at an event in order to make it look like Clinton was doing something he shouldn't be doing. Congratulations on falling for it and continuing to push it.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)Matt_in_STL
(1,446 posts)It was actually the young woman's mother in the photo, so my mistake on that.
http://m.digitaljournal.com/internet/photo-of-bill-clinton-with-blonde-held-in-his-grasp-goes-viral/article/421358
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)my my.
merrily
(45,251 posts)
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)and frankly the sun will burn out before any male has the reverse done to him.
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)more from an insider and it is making me sick.
We have to choose between the disgusting person who will NOT go out of their way to starve us to death, and the one who will.
At this point these are our choices.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)NAFTA Bill & Friends,
or More Free Trade Hillary? 
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)Hekate
(96,973 posts)NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)Yupster
(14,308 posts)Supposedly he didn't run for president because of his wife's bad behavior.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)believe that a lot of voters won't.
City Lights
(25,577 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)
moondust
(20,832 posts)He was on CNN Smerconish show apparently yesterday or today. Here's the clip about the Gawker flight logs:
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/01/24/smerconish-dershowitz-01232015.cnn
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)the Clintons. But what I believe or do not believe is not relevant to what other people, especially politically less sophisticated people, less knowledgeable people will believe.
This is a very ugly accusation. It has political feet.
It could divide our party. It is going to be difficult to disprove it in a country in which people believe Fox facts and not true facts.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)has had very little to say. Pres Obama, supported by the Left, didn't thank the Left by making some progressive appointments, he did the opposite. The Conservative Wing, with the Ruling Oligarchs behind them, are very powerful and will be hard to defeat.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Before a question was even fully asked he would start yammering automatic canned denial like a programmed robot.
Talking real fast and being loud and being, well, lawyer like trying to say how he can't wait until he can "question" his accuser LOL..
He is going down and only thing that may save his ass is money....
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Here's Mike Papantonio talking about the sweet deal Dershowitz negotiated for Epstein who admitted soliciting sex from a minor, a crime most would serve a life sentence for, in exchange for a 13-month sentence in a Palm Beach jail where he was free to come and go during the day and just spent the night there. Sweeeeet!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017240039
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Then confirms flying with a woman some 40 years younger than him, seeing as he claims she was 25 and he is in his seventies. He also says the women did not "appear" underage, as opposed to being underage. His words are a bit technical for someone with nothing to hide.
The students at Harvard are even writing about this in the university paper.
It's one thing to defend OJ quite another to pal around with him like best buds.
The witness testified under oath about him, he may yet see his day giving a deposition, especially after slandering the lawyers.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Even if he is a celebrity, accusing people of bad conduct without absolute proof is very foolish.
I do not believe that Dershowitz is so stupid as to be involve in something this craven. He is a lawyer and knows the consequences. I do believe that someone might want to tarnish his reputation.
I will only believe these stories when there is proof of the violation of the law.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)My guess....they need to keep Epstein safe, or the pictures start slipping out...so watch the media ignore this! Until Hillary is the nominee.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)to disqualify HRC NOW... unless the Dem-Death-Wish prevails.
Hopefully it won't.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Would you disqualify a male caandidate for the actions of his wife?
Just wondering.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Dude, we're talking pedophilia here, sex slaves, etc.
Isn't it precisely this kind of stuff that "vetting" a candidate is all about?
To know where are the bodies buried, etc.
So as these sordid trials unfold, the 2016 race is taking shape, a sadly perfect storm IMHO.
Do i think it's "right" for Hillary's candidacy to be sunk by Bill's indiscretions? No.
Do I think if Hillary is the Democratic nominee that this shit will likely explode in the Democratic
party's face to deliver the WH to ReThugs? Absolutely.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Unsavory rich guy.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)to disagree.
Honestly, my main objection to Hillary is Hilary's Third Way orientation,
and that it's just a continuation of the Bush/Clinton Dynasty, and I
think we can do better.
But this whole thing with Epstein raises my objection to a new level
of concern.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)policies, you have a discussion.
They whole attempt to tar her with her husbands flight on the Jet of a millionaire in 2002, is accusing her of guilt by association.
Guilt by association is what Republicans do. We don't need to sink to their level.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Ignoring this is risking a Republican President if Hillary still decides to run after this has been made public.
But there always is the possibility Bill's adopted Dad, George Bush Sr., and his connections can make sure this never comes up in the campaign by the media and would snuff out any stray little voices trying to speak about it.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)And you are saying you honestly think ReThugs WON'T 'stoop' to dropping
the Epstein ticking time-bomb on Hillary as some kind of "October Surprise"??
Did I get that right?
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)so please.....
That stinky fart came out of the Clinton camp.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)sexist.
Let Bill Clinton answer questions about a flight in 2002.
And, yes, I suspect Republicans will happily a sexist attack on her. That is what they do.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I am opposed to the push to get her disqualified because Bill may or may not have done something. Disqualifying a wife because her husband did something smacks of sexism.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)not have done will result in some people choosing not to support her. Smear tactics do work with some people.
For me, it will be the policies she proposes and her answers to substantive issues of policy that matter.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)more than the 'dressed up' campaign promises, as these rarely
mean a whole lot. See Obama.
Capt.Rocky300
(1,005 posts)Anyone can get a logbook and put whatever they want in the columns. For example, pilots seeking to show they have more flight time than they actually have do it to secure a better flying job. In the trade it's called "Parker P-51 time" in honor of the old pen made by Parker and the North American P-51 Mustang. And yes, it's illegal. I'm not saying it's the case here with the passenger list in Capt. Rodger's logbook but I'd need more definitive proof than the logbook pages shown in this article that anything improper was going on behind the cockpit door. It may have but I'm just saying this doesn't prove anything.
Ilsa
(62,662 posts)would never make it through the media as it creates a huge moneymaking scandal. If Clinton is this close to it, he's mud and a liability for Hilary.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)This issue reminded me of Jennifer Flowers, the mess he & we got through early on, then it was Lewinsky, now this. He's a wreck, pursues politics yet can't stop himself and damages Hillary's chances and Gore's. Not just the libido, compulsion & entitlement, he must love the high risk, danger, adrenaline or smthg. He makes John Edwards look like a good guy & stable. Mess. Seems the GOP would let H. win the primary, then release all this to finish her off.
treestar
(82,383 posts)He's the one actually doing it.
Hillary is the one with the spouse doing it.
It'd be like having a scandalous First Lady. There hasn't been one before that I know of. Figures Bill Clinton would be the first.
Maybe unless you count Nancy Reagan and her astrology nonsense.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)at a work conference. This isn't Europe, Berlesconi in Italy or France's Holland with mistress or wife. Bill's a global figure, by choice, they've been married 39 years, at least 23 years of which he's messed up that I know of since 1992. It's a drain and a risk. Today it's tiring, to me fidelity is very impt., adultery's real bad.
He's also a former US Pres.& Head of the Dem. Party. Bill will be in the news like always, at her campaign events, maybe the Inauguration. (I went to both Inaugural Balls, jubilees. Have met her twice, him once).
The 12 and 14 year olds on Epstein's party flights and associating with a sex offender is really serious. Think of young women voters, how this makes Hillary look-condoning or enabling his behavior which is really cruel. And family men, conservatives. Hillary's also not viewed too well by some who dislike her long ties to big $, banks and corps. Messy.
I was pretty young, m. when the Jen Flowers TV explainin' happened, awful, I could hardly believe it or vote, except I liked Hill, the Gores, am a life long, 3rd gen D., and had been under the 12 year Occupation of Dutch and Bush 41. His behavior really, really bothered me. Later it was the Lewinsky lie, Paula Jones. Whew.
Nice photo of Joe B. you have. I'm fond of Del., esp. Delmarva, the coastal beach area of Del, Md., Va.
You asked about the Bastille Key. Monticello is also great unless you have seen it, or finished the DC tour that many folks do with young families. There's so much stuff to do and see, never finished.
treestar
(82,383 posts)as he did as bad while he was actually president, or running for President, yet he was re-elected and left office with high approval ratings. So if it did not affect him while he was actually in office, it follows it should not affect Hillary, who isn't even guilty. People recognize Hillary as the victim here and it is no one else's business.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)yes.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)I remember he said the affair was 'when she was in remission' - so it was ok, sure. What a mess he made, wow. Like Arnold and Newt.
samsingh
(18,027 posts)
karynnj
(60,186 posts)It was unthinkable that Clinton would continue his friendship with Epstein after he was found guilty. IF, he had stayed away - the first time that comment was made in a reliable media - someone working for Clinton would have put out a clear denial.
Seriously, imagine that it was you (or your husband). Would you correct the record? Add in that you (for sake of this question) have political ambitions and expectations.
Therefore this is likely true - and the only saving grace is that there is absolutely no claim that Clinton had sex with anyone.
Not to mention it is Hillary Clinton running - though it would likely be a net negative if she divorced Bill Clinton - so he will be there.
Major Nikon
(36,917 posts)I also never list passengers and it's not required, so I think it's a bit unusual that anyone would although everyone has their own logging practices.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)someone found out because those men would keep him safe? I see that there opposite has also been suggested. But why else would he write all this evidence in his logs? I don't know what to think.
One thing I do know is that this is the Rs 2016 issue and we are in trouble.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Capt.Rocky300
(1,005 posts)I thought it odd that he listed the names of passengers. Perhaps he did it for bragging rights and/or in retirement to sit on his front porch in the rocker and read back and remember the good ol' days.
Major Nikon
(36,917 posts)I've never flown anyone even remotely famous so not much need to record names. I only fly part 91, so sometimes I don't even log my flights if I don't need it for currency. I do often include details about the trip if it's something I want to remember someday, so I can see someone doing this.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)I asked him if he ever flew anyone famous.
He said he flew the monkey from Pirates of The Caribbean from California to the Caribbean where they were filming.
Capt.Rocky300
(1,005 posts)
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)I have not been asked my name when flying privately. I am introduced to the flight crew and as long as the attendant keeps feeding me beers all is well.
Are names routinely kept? What if I wanted to keep my trip quiet?
Major Nikon
(36,917 posts)Capt.Rocky300
(1,005 posts)I flew many prominent athletes, politicians and Hollywood types. None of their names are in my logbooks. I'm able to recall the good experiences I had with them and do my best to forget the bad ones. And there were only a few of those.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Do I think bc was on these flights? Sadly, it feels like it has the ring of truth.
But it could be bs. Remember, this is Gawker, an utterly unreliable reporter. Could the logs be fake?
Capt.Rocky300
(1,005 posts)#12 and #193. Other than info required by FAA Regs, the comment column in a logbook is up to the individual. I went so far as to check on whether this pilot exists, he does. The aircraft exist. The flight times between departure and arrival points are typical. I may be going out on a limb but I think the log pages are valid. But they don't state, nor can I conceive they would, what went on in the cabin. That could be revealed only by deposition and/or court testimony if the crew witnessed it. Unless the crew sees something during a trip to the lav, the cockpit crew doesn't know what's going on behind the cockpit door. Hope that makes sense, I just finished my second margarita.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,934 posts)
AnnieBW
(11,675 posts)Just when you thought it was safe to go back to DU... The Mighty Clenis makes a return engagement!
Newcomers may ask, "what is this Clenis thing?"
It's Bill Clinton's magical male member. It appears whenever Republicans need it to smear Bubba about his proclivities. Now, to be fair, Bubba has a well-known problem with keeping it to himself. But, the Mighty Clenis has SUPERPOWERS! It's able to leap tall buildings in a single bound!
In other words, the Repukes will definitely use this to smear Hillary and Bill on their quest for a return trip to the White House.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)made this up. Bill can't keep his pants up. He gave them the gun. No one can complain when they shoot him in the face with it. It also doesn't matter that others do the same thing. This idiot imbecile apparently hasn't learned a fucking thing.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Waaaaay irresponsible.
jollyreaper2112
(1,941 posts)The man knew they were gunning for him. So what did he do? Provided a pistol, loaded the chamber, cocked the hammer, put it in their hands and rested the barrel right against his head. Then he's looking up at them with his aw shucks grin and winks.
He made getting some strange a higher priority than the presidency. I hate the Republicans for fighting so dirty and I hate bill for giving them all the ammunition they needed.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)He needs to be taken away from politics for good, for our sake now, after as many times he's got off, what he's put us, the Dem. Party, Gore and the people through. Not to mention Hillary, Chelsea, husband & grandchild. He's reckless, irresponsible & as sick or sicker than a junkie or alcoholic. Done.
A recent 'Law and Order' episode was so close to this story, about a powerful jet setter billionaire defense contractor, egoist, pedo & partier with young girls procured by an aged- out 20 something girlfriend. Had room cameras that taped his 'massage' sessions with them at his mansion. Servants covered for him, the girlfriend was charged as an accessory. He didn't help her, had just been using her all along.
Beaverhausen
(24,613 posts)Gman
(24,780 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)
msongs
(70,978 posts)BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)Double standard at work again.
Triana
(22,666 posts)even while they proclaim how "moral" and "Gawd-lovin" and "Christian" with "family values" they are.
Dems make no such pretentious claims -- yet being a sociopath or womanizer/philanderer hurts them.
There's definitely a double standard.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)and who got thrown so far under the bus he's still not sure what happened. Governor Appellation Trail just got elected again. There is no coincidence that this is in the news again.
Triana
(22,666 posts)Absolutely not. This is timed very interestingly - right after that recent poll which showed Hillary heads and tails above any potential 2016 Repub nominee. 
jollyreaper2112
(1,941 posts)Neither party should want these scumbags in it. Remember weiner wasn't just carrying on with an adult woman, he was sending dick pics to everyone. It was dumb luck none were underage.
The thing to remember is the Republicans always get away with it. And they are not shamed by having these people in their ranks.
dsc
(52,849 posts)funny I didn't get one, did you?
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)Guess you didn't make the cut. Sorry.
Lordquinton
(7,886 posts)it was only caught because he was being cyber stalked by the republicans, which should have been the real story, but we know how that goes.
hunter
(39,436 posts)... becomes useless to their big money patrons.
Part of the problem may be it's too disgusting to imagine a Republican politician having sex.
Who did either Bush "do" in the Oval Office???
It's like imagining Rush Limbaugh naked somewhere in the Dominican Republic...
Just, just... NO!
Octafish
(55,745 posts)City Lights
(25,577 posts)The GOP whips up the hysteria whenever a Democrat is involved in something like this and the corporate sack of shit media follows right along. When a Republican does something similar, they poo-poo it, acting like "everyone does it." They make me sick. Both the GOPee and the corporate sack of shit media.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Democrats take the moral high-ground on most issues, so more is expected of them when it comes to their sex lives. That's just the reality.
fbc
(1,668 posts)I don't think your average voter wants a pedophile as first husband.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)A pedophile is a man or woman who is attracted to or has sexual relations with prepubescent boys or girls.
Calling someone a childfucker demands proof beyond mere association.
Behind the Aegis
(55,205 posts)What are you a Commie?! (
, of course).
What is worse is the implication that someone how Hillary will suffer, while true in some respects, it demonstrates the public's lack of nuance and intelligence.
Of course, pedophile is so often misused as a word, it creates its own set of problems.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)That being said a pedophile is a man or woman who is attracted to prepubuscent boys and girls. A prepubescent boy or girl hasn't developed secondary sex characteristics. This is tenth grade biology. Accusing someone of such a heinous crime demands proof.
Behind the Aegis
(55,205 posts)I know what the meaning of the word means which is why I was commenting. That, and this bullshit "guilt by association" being leveled against Ms. Clinton. It is one of those words which is routinely misused, usually to make something seem even worse.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)And we have confirmation bias in this instance. For the people who like or hate the Clintons this doesn't move the needle at all...
IMHO, there is nothing lower than a pedophile (childfucker) except for the person who knowingly and with malice aforethought falsely accuses somebody of it.
Bearing false witness is a biggy, specially on a crime as heinous as this. That's why it made the top ten.
Behind the Aegis
(55,205 posts)It isn't just the Clintons who are in the crosshairs. Some are taking too much "glee" with this story and the stories swirling around it. Personally, I find that almost as disgusting as what has happened. It is a jaded use of a vicious, soul-crushing crime.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)"It is what it is" but you and I can take solace in the fact these attempts will fail as they always have.
Behind the Aegis
(55,205 posts)Justice needs to be served, but those who aren't responsible shouldn't be tarred and feathered, no matter the political reasons. I can't say I am surprised by this story happening now.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)It really is Godfather like stuff, sans the killing usually.
This doesn't move the needle a bit.
I met Arnold Schwarzenegger. It doesn't mean I'm a six time Mr. Universe.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)that he had any idea that the owner of the plane was a pedophile plus I don't think Clinton or Dershowitz had anything to do with pedophilia. The crime is too obvious.), it is a political reality that dealing with all these rumors is going to be a distraction during a presidential campaign.
It isn't fair, but that is how it is. How do you suggest that the Clinton campaign deal with these rumors and this innuendo?
You can't blame the messenger even if the message is false. Because of the Lewinsky scandal, because it turned out to have a lot of truth about it, it makes it look like the Clintons lead wild lives, revel in wild parties and then lie about it. A total falsehood, but what is the political strategy to deal with these kinds of falsehoods that fit for many people into the overall picture?
I think Hillary should not run, but if she does, what kind of tactic can deal with this sort of mud-slinging?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The Republican negative campaign machine will take this story (which does not yet at any rate prove any pedophilia on the part of Clinton as you point out) and every American who doesn't read critically will be quite convinced that Hillary was somehow an accessory.
I have had a feeling for a long time that something could, would mess up a Hillary campaign. This could be part of it.
The Republicans have been planning on defeating a Hillary candidacy for a long time in my opinion. That is one of the reason I don't want to see her run.
They are now starting to attack Elizabeth Warren. That suggests to me that they are beginning to believe that Hillary will not run.
This story could be part of the reason that the Republicans are starting to attack Warren.
Facts mean nothing to Republicans.
We still have to give Bill Clinton the benefit of the doubt. But we have given him the benefit of the doubt before and learned that the rumors about him were true.
Same for John Edwards. He had the strongest platform in 2008 and would have made a great president. But the rumors about his sex life were true and his candidacy was ended.
The Clintons run with a rich crowd some of whom are bound to be spoiled brats with no respect for others.
Sad and maybe this will go away. But I've seen this stuff before. If it is going to throw doubt on the Clintons' being able to represent our country with dignity, then I'm glad it is coming out now before Hillary has thrown her hat in the ring.
Fpr 2016, Democrats need a candidate whose sex life and whose spouse' sex life are above reproach.
There are too many important issues about social and economic justice that need attention. We do not need to have to deal with accusations of exploitation of sex workers or children in the campaign.
Bernie Sanders is probably above reproach in these areas. He has been in the political spotlight in a small state for many years.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)Oh wait, Bill Clinton left office with an approval rating of seventy three percent:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116584/presidential-approval-ratings-bill-clinton.aspx
and has a favorability rating of 64% currently
http://www.gallup.com/poll/171794/clinton-elder-bush-positively-rated-living-presidents.aspx
Oh, pardon my French but fuck the Republicans. We know there is no perfidy they will not rise or fall to. DemocratSinceBirth fears no one except his maker, much less the Republicans, and you shouldn't either.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)What has Clinton running around with a pedo got to do with the Republicans? Yes, they will use this against Hillary and him, but it is Bill's damn fault for being such a gigantic millstone around Hillary's run for President. Are you suggesting that Republicans made up this whole story - that there is no truth to it at all or are you suggesting that this should be hidden and swept under the rug and not talked about because, yaknow it might tarnish the inevitable one?
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)That's why Bill Clinton left office with an approval rating of 73 percent and still has a favorability rating of 64%..I will furnish the citations if you so desire.
But please don't let DemocratSinceBirth prevent you from flogging this story. It will have all the efficacy of flatulating in the wind.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)is all that matters. yup.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)Joe McCarthy smeared people by suggesting they were communists because they unknowingly associated with one just like you are smearing people by suggesting they are pedohiles because they unkowingly associated with one.
I await your response, I'm just getting warmed up:
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)omg 
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)They are "exactly the same." Accusing somebody of being a communist without evidence in the 1950s and ruining their lives and getting them blacklisted is not different than accusing somebody of being a pedophile without evidence and ruining their life now or at any time.
KISSES
DemocratSinceBirth
P.S. Keep reading my posts. There is hope for you. No man or woman can't be educated.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)as having suspicions about a man that is a proven liar and a cheater and that likes to be known as some hot rod sex pistol. This man was/is friends with a proven pedo and has been in his company many, many times at the place the rape of underage girls was happening. Sorry, that makes some antennaes twitch a bit. We are talking about rape of children, but you can talk about McCarthy all you want and make some kind of connections to me being Exactly like him.
How ridiculous, but thanks for the hilarity. It's great to watch these little developments - I can't wait for your next installment. I am having a wiff of Hitler now. That card might be waiting in the deck as well.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)Are they pedophiles too?
*she of Barack Obama's Security Council.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)you must be one who believes in that Multi Universe theory.
I dunno, did Spacey and others fly around in a pedo's fancy jet to the scene of the crimes?
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)I get it. You only smear the people you don't like. You're a real prince or princess...
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)gives him an edge?
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)Is Bill Clinton?
I digress. I digress...
If you unwittingly associate with a pedophile you are only a pedophile if you run for office. Amirite?
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)He likes twinks.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)1. As you suggest, this scandal proves to be about nothing. In that case, diehard Republicans will use it as a reason to hate Hillary anyway. But nothing can be done about that because they will find any reason to hate her. The suspicion of scandal will continue to haunt the subconscious minds of millions of Americans -- a suspicion that can be easily exploited by some outright lie or horrid innuendo in the final days prior to the 2016 election . . . . with the outcome being closer if not quite damaging for the country.
2. Doubts remain into the 2016 election as to whether Clinton knew about the pedophilia ring or was (and I have difficulty believing this) involved in some way however remote -- like unknowingly traveling on a plane with one of the victims. The election conversation would be hijacked by the scandal. Did he or did he not? Clinton's denials will not be believed because after all many view his denials of the Lewinsky matter as proof that he lies about his personal life. But the election, the campaign is hijacked. One way or the other, it is hijacked.
Under No. 2, I need to add that one of Hillary's strong points is her stance on women's and children's rights. The suspicion of a tie to a pedophile much less a pedophile ring would hurt her credibility on this subject.
3. Further, this rumor could place in question the honesty of the Clintons about their marriage. And that could raise all kinds of ugly nonsense about Hillary. Remember how long the lies about Obama's birthplace captured headlines around the country? A person cannot help where they are born, but they can choose the friends they hang out with. And I question this: if it is true that this wealthy friend of Bill Clinton (or at least wealthy plane=ride-giver of Bill Clinton) was so obsessed by sex as to run a ring of very young prostitutes, then what was the tone of the conversation, the nature of the jokes when Clinton was riding in the plane? Were there witnesses? This matter is going to court. I hate to think of the potential embarrassment.
Personally, I wish we as a nation were less obsessed with sex scandals. I wish that a pure sex life were not a requirement for the presidency or a member of Congress because it does not tell the story about the candidate's desire for justice or hankering for equality although it may reflect on their lust for honesty, but Americans, especially Democrats, are idealistic and want honest, clean candidates. Last time we had one was Jimmy Carter and even he admitted to lust in his heart if I remember correctly.
I think this story could make it really hard for Hillary Clinton to maintain her dignity and maybe her credibility through a long campaign. It could be really tough on her.
Then again it may prove to be just so much rubbish. But - - - Hillary supporters need to think carefully about its repercussions for any campaign she might run. And even about the toll on her person and on her health. This is one ugly story even if Bill had nothing to do with these young girls.
When you pander to the rich to get them to support you and your campaigns, you run into some really bad people.. Not all fortunes are made through crime, but some are. Money is not a very good test of character.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)and is America's most popular living former president.
As I said, ad infinitum and ad nauseum, these sex scandals go nowhere.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)Most Americans have no idea who Jeffrey Epstein even is.
That might be about to change.
I've had enough Clintonism for other reasons.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Raping children is not about sex. This is what the story is, the underage girls that were involved, not old men looking for adult sex. I know you didn't mean it this way, but it stands out like a real bad sore thumb...
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)karynnj
(60,186 posts)I think you missed that President Obama is pretty scandal free. If you are speaking just of his marriage - it is hard to get a more picture perfect family than the Obamas.
Not to mention, John Kerry was honest and as clean as it gets in DC. Al Gore's family was an asset and at the point that he ran his marriage was seen as strong. There was no scandal about Dukakis - Kitty dealt with depression, but that was not a sign that her husband was not clean and honest. George McCovern was accused of many things by Republicans but not dishonesty of any dirty politics or actions. I honestly know almost nothing of Mondale.
So, really it is Clinton who is the aberration -- not Carter. By and large, the nominees chosen by the Democrats have been honest, clean and decent men. (John Edwards never was near to being the nominee - he won only one contested primary - South Carolina - in two years of running for President. Although there were early hints in late 2007 that he had been unfaithful, the media pretty much helped him blow the accusations off. )
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)interests. You are correct. The topic came up in Carter's campaign, maybe because he was very open about his devout Christianity.
I'm a big fan of Kerry, McGovern and Mondale. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression about my opinions about them.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Patting me on the head like you were the superior and me the small ignorant one that shouldn't question your greater intelligence so you distract my questions by throwing me a cookie/bone?
I know the types who rely on this sort of thing when they lose an argument. Try again, a bit more subtle tho.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)joining some do-gooder 'communist front' organization?
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)I sat next to the owner of Ringling Brothers when I got bumped from coach to first class on a NY to MIA flight. That didn't make me a trapeze artist.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)point.
they've been married for 39 years, and were close political partners for a lot of those years. And Hilary certainly knows that Bill has a (to put it kindly) wandering eye. She's no naïve young thing.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)C'mon , you can hate somebody's guts but to call someone a ped or a ped enabler requires a level of hate I can't begin to fathom.
There are people who physically harmed me and I wouldn't call them that. it's actually worse, imho, than calling somebody a killer because I can think of instances where killing if not justified is understandable.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)This isn't really funny any more...
I can't think of anything worse than calling somebody a kiddyfucker or saying a person enables kiddyfuckers but if you feel comfortable trafficking in such there is nothing a random internet poster can do to stop you.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)People knew who Epstein was because he was a very rich Democratic donor; and one who'd been convicted of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution in 2008.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The issue is not whether Clinton was involved in any illicit activities. I don't think he was. The question is whether this kind of issue could hijack Hillary's campaign if she runs. I think it could. Not early on. But much, much later. Sort of an October Surprise kind of thing.
The risk should be considered seriously.
For me this is just one more issue that makes Hillary's candidacy a risky matter. She is way ahead now. But it is precisely this sort of controversy, no matter how ill-founded, that can defeat a candidate. I remember the problems with McGovern's running mate, Eagleton. That was not nearly as controversial as a mere rumor no matter how false of this sort could be.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)Chocolate chip or oatmeaL?
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)some Americans will still defend him.
The problem isn't whether the accusations are true. (I do not believe they are. I could change my mind if more proof is presented.) The problem is whether the accusations will be believed by enough Americans to harm Hillary's candidacy should she run.
I think they would.
Right now she is ahead in the polls. But Bill's reputation is not her only negative. And those negatives could become more and more important as the public watches her campaign. She has some other even bigger problems than this.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)In fact I can't think of anything worse than being accused of than being accused of being a pedophile, including a murderer because at least in the latter instance I would have an easier go of it in prison.
It's just an awful accusation and to hurl it at someone for political gain, wow.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)This is one of my primary objections to another Clinton run at the Presidency. Even if Bill isn't guilty in this, he has used up the whole of the Clinton name's "benefit of a doubt" in the publics eye. And after watching the burn out of more than one Democratic big name after the other because of initially "denied" sexual allegations that turned out to be true, having to deal with yet another Clinton scandal is the LAST thing we need.
vankuria
(948 posts)And I couldn't agree more, the last thing we need going into the 2016 race is a sex scandal. While Bill most likely is entirely innocent of partaking in the sex romps with underage girls, it doesn't bode well for him that he's friends with Epstein now listed as a registered sex offender. And Hilary will be considered guilty by association and of course I know this isn't fair but the GOP doesn't play fair and they are going to run with this and make it into a main campaign issue, where she will be on the defensive the entire campaign.
Too many important issue at stake to take a chance on a Hilary campaign, I wish this wasn't the case but it is.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)association with the Pedo, even after the conviction I wonder about his mental state & genuine concern for the Dem. Party, the people & this country. It's beyond compulsive, twisted, & entitlement; there's obvious uncontrollable attraction to risk, danger, with adrenaline high like a junkie. The well known concern for his 'legacy'? Almost delusional. He, they'll be tarnished for a longer time if this is true. He already got away with a lot in the earlier scandals. I don't want to hear more for years.
Seems to want it both ways, like always- for her, him before to win the highest office while simultaneously risking it all, for them & us. Real sickness. Jennifer Flowers, next Lewinsky, then survived a major heart attack that didn't slow him down- nice legacy for Gore & Hillary. They're wealthy, could easily step back from politics so he can to continue his addiction-disease/romping. Yes this needs to come out now, not have the Reich hold back until she's nominated which would be the best strategy for them.
still_one
(98,266 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)still_one
(98,266 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Which is a no brainer that some can't accept.
still_one
(98,266 posts)what someone else does, or what the candidate does or says what they will do? Obama seemed to handle Ayeres and Wright issues fine. Vitter and other repukes seemed to get through fine also
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Incredible the lengths people will go through to protect the Clinton's bad behaviour.
Obama had to face made up shit, and some of that made up shit came from the Clinton camp.
There is evidence that Bill and this Dirtshitowitz guy visited the place where underage girls were sexually abused. That is quite enough to raise eyebrows a few stories high. It would be for anyone else so it should be for precious Billy.
still_one
(98,266 posts)Office from an intern, and still won reelection
The one thing predictable about Americans is that they are not predictable
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)They weren't married to Obama.
Vitter and the other Republicans get by with this because they have friends who own the media.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)is party of her own baggage, though. So is putting up with one of his infidelities after another.
Beacool
(30,361 posts) 
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Bombshell Interview: Teen ‘Sex Slave’ Reveals Alleged Details Of Bill Clinton’s Trip To Jeffrey Epstein’s Orgy Island — With ‘Two Young Girls’
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2015/01/jeffrey-epstein-sex-scandal-victim-bill-clinton/
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)Many of the so called progressives were as enamored of the Lewinsky brouhaha as the Red Staters and their ilk. Ostensibly it seems like a most odd confluence of interests but it really isn't.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)
BeyondGeography
(40,379 posts)
So tabloidy.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)It was so "tabloidy" I was sure it was another of their made up tripe and said as much to the lady behind me who started to "tsk, tsk" when she read it. She replied, "well we are talking about Bill Clinton."
Turns out she was right!
What a creep.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)That's Lady Ghislaine Maxwell at the right with an (almost unimaginably stupid) Prince and young friend:
Ms. Maxwell's late father, Robert, had spooky ties with Israel and met a murky end. Wiki:
Maxwell had a flamboyant lifestyle, living in Headington Hill Hall in Oxford from which he often flew in his helicopter, and sailing in his luxury yacht, the Lady Ghislaine. He was notably litigious and often embroiled in controversy, including about his support for Israel at the time of its 1948 Palestine war. In 1989, he had to sell successful businesses including Pergamon Press to cover some of his debts. In 1991, his body was discovered floating in the Atlantic Ocean having fallen overboard from his yacht. He was buried in Israel.
Maxwell's death triggered the collapse of his publishing empire as banks called in loans. His sons briefly struggled to keep the business together, but failed as the news emerged that Maxwell had stolen hundreds of millions of pounds from his own companies' pension funds.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Thomas says Tel Aviv used the tapes to stop the probe of an operative code-named “MEGA,” who was, and could still be, deep within the White House.
“So far as anyone knows, the Israeli agent MEGA – a much more important spy than the imprisoned CIA traitor Jonathan Pollard, and probably his controller – is still in place at the White House,” Thomas said last night from London.
Meaningful context, if you know who Gordon Thomas is, and have read the book he wrote, Gideon's Spies - The Secret History of Mossad.
And, then, there's this from the Starr report: http://articles.latimes.com/1998/sep/12/news/ss-23060/14
If ever questioned, she should say that the two of them were just friends. If anyone ever asked about their phone sex, she should say that they knew their calls were being monitored all along, and the phone sex was just a put on."
2banon
(7,321 posts)I think it's high time I make a point of checking that out from the library.... I respect Gordon Thomas.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Funny her attorney at the time brought it up...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/newsweek29.htm
You'll have to ask William Ginsburg what Israel had to do with the lewinsky affair.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)girls, held against well, raped, sex slaves, ... children. and we have a couple men that reduce that to a big fucking deal and a so what?
says a hell of a lot about how little concern there is for some, when it comes to agenda. arent they the privileged and entitled.
if one does not believe it, discusses how it effects hillary or any number of directions the conversation can go, then fine.
but to say, big fucking deal about the powerful, the ones with money, using our girls in this manner is so insignificant? fuck that.
Dreamer Tatum
(10,934 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)back to the old school lesson of: Rape is not sex. Raping a child is not sex.
fishwax
(29,332 posts)Pedophilia involves attraction to prepubescent people. As far as I know, all the victims confirmed or alleged in Epstein's case were teenagers. That doesn't make it remotely okay, of course, but we might as well get the language right.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Golf clap..
and
fishwax
(29,332 posts)George W. Bush is also not a pedophile. But saying so is not defending him.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)That being said there is a difference between a teenager and a nine year old and the man or woman who has sex with the latter is on a different level of messed up.
It's the difference, imho, from being a creep to the lowest of the low.
B2G
(9,766 posts)fishwax
(29,332 posts)That's obviously a crime, but it's not pedophilia.
Calling him a serial rapist and a human trafficker would fit the allegations in the article, though.
Marr
(20,317 posts)So someone convicted of having sex with underage people can be reasonably called a pedophile in legal terms, I should think.
fishwax
(29,332 posts)And that's what Epstein having sex with underage girls would be.
What Epstein is alleged to have done is heinous enough in its own right. It doesn't require inaccurate labels. Calling him a serial rapist and a human trafficker would be plenty dramatic, and would also have the advantage of matching the facts and allegations in the article. Alas, throwing around terms that one's own reporting doesn't support tends to undermine credibility.
Marr
(20,317 posts)You've convinced me.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)and from what is known and was proved, the attraction to Ms. Lewinsky was oral in nature, verified by the fact that the act took place in the Oral Office.
The language is definitely right. But the truth and the law are another matter.
fishwax
(29,332 posts)You seem to be saying that the fact that Bill and Monica had oral sex means that Epstein really is a pedophile, but that doesn't make sense. Can you clarify for me?
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)concerned about E. and perhaps others, not being called or labelled pedophiles. Only that they commit sexual acts with underage females against the victim's will like E. did, a convicted sex offender. It's like trying to insist that a person who broke into car is not and can't be called a thief, or a burglar; or that a heroin addict is not and cannot be called an illegal drug user or a junkie.
The example I gave of Clinton's well known and well worn BS is the familiar attempt to obscure, re-label and minimize the true action, verbally and legally. To call it something else, other than a spade is a spade. You keep insisting pedophilia is limited to 'prepubescent' children, and that if girls have reached puberty they are not in the strict child molester, pedophile category if raped. I wonder what the courts think of that.
fishwax
(29,332 posts)"From your posts, you are very concerned about E. and perhaps others, not being called or labelled pedophiles. Only that they commit sexual acts with underage females against the victim's will like E. did, a convicted sex offender. "
I'm not concerned about Epstein, who is apparently a serial rapist and a human trafficker, if the allegations are true. That's enough for me to be outraged. I don't need him to also be a pedophile. I do think the term should be used correctly. I think victims of both pedophile predators and non pedophile predators deserve that.
"It's like trying to insist that a person who broke into car is not and can't be called a thief, or a burglar; or that a heroin addict is not and cannot be called an illegal drug user or a junkie. "
It's nothing like that. A person who breaks into a car fits the definition of a thief. A person who is a heroin addict fits the definition of an illegal drug user.
"he example I gave of Clinton's well known and well worn BS is the familiar attempt to obscure, re-label and minimize the true action, verbally and legally. To call it something else, other than a spade is a spade."
Sorry, but I have no idea what you mean by this or why it's relevant. Are you saying Clinton is a pedophile too? 
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)the nation on camera? It's well known she was 21 or so and surely not raped. But God don't scare me like that, please no underage children!
Actually I think he ought to return to food, switch addictions- it helps many. Get off the life saving Dr. Ornish cardio diet he went on before Chelsea's wedding, and back to burgers, fries, donuts. It may cut the cravings, dunno though.
I said that C.'s statement 'I did not.." was trying to deny his actions- hint, it was something lesser, not actual sex as we all know to get out of the allegations.
Quite a few people here refer to E. as a pedo, or ped, that's common with underage females who are held, raped against their will as sex slaves.
Like many gays who also feel strongly about this subject b/c they are sometimes incorrectly lumped into this group, you want to make the hard line case that true pedophilia pertains to only prepubescent boys and girls. Not to underage girls or boys. I don't know about that legally or ethically.
What I do know is that the reason pedophiles are attracted to the young, androgynous ones, is that boys are soft like females and the girls boyish w/o female developed breasts. And those who molest them should be charged and punished as criminals. This is a huge subject that I don't want to get further into this evening.
There must be some kind of Pedophile Anti Defamation Group for concerned, accused people, seriously.
fishwax
(29,332 posts)I was confused from your first post because in that post seemed to connect the fact that Clinton and Lewinski had oral sex with Epstein's status as a pedophile. But now I see your point about "it was something lesser, not actual sex as we all know to get out of the allegations."
For the record, I never said what Epstein has apparently done was was any less serious. Indeed, the whole point of my posts has been that it's plenty serious enough without using a label that doesn't really fit. I do think the distinction in terms is worthwhile, though, because (among other things) the experience of the victims and their paths towards healing tend to be different. I think maintaining the distinction helps in the fight against abuse (of all types) and in the struggle to help people cope with the aftermath. That was my impetus for posting the definition.
"What I do know is that the reason pedophiles are attracted to the young, androgynous ones, is that boys are soft like females and the girls boyish w/o female developed breasts. And those who molest them should be charged and punished as criminals. This is a huge subject that I don't want to get further into this evening.
There must be some kind of Pedophile Anti Defamation Group for concerned, accused people, seriously. "
I've no clue as to the accuracy of the first sentence or the point of the last, but I agree with your second sentence and can well understand not wanting to get further into it the subject this evening--enjoy what's left of it
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)out my stepmother was abused as a girl, explains a lot. And I've seen a grown man looking hard at my niece, once when she was 8 in a nice restaurant, another time a creep followed her home walking from school in a truck when 12. I'll say good nite now. This long topic has been heavy, as DU can be at times, but also a great learning source.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)I agree that it is not as heinous as going after little children, but rape is rape if the victims cannot consent under law. Having a whole lot of money doesn't make it better in my opinion.
And 12 - 12 is getting close to the pedophile line. This is one sick character, and that appears to be already proven.
fishwax
(29,332 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)This is also about HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND HOW THIS CRIME PROTECTS SO MANY ELITE FROM THE CRIMES OF PEDOPHILIA.
tridim
(45,358 posts)Hillary remains the worst possible Democratic candidate I can think of. It is nothing but a nightmare.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)are way off the reality mark.
This sort of news besmirches her as well. He has a history of being dishonest so it is not unusual for a special dollop of suspicion to be put upon him for this. I mean, what the hell was he thinking jetting around with Epstein. And bullshit to anyone to defend him by saying he didn't know. That's bullshit. He knew, or had to have strong suspicions - how could he not.
The richie power boys club have to push the envelope for their thrills because just being rich and powerful isn't enough for some. Let's hear what Bill's definition of is is on this one.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)but I can solemnly swear that I have never, EVER, ridden on a "pedophile billionaire's sex jet". And I am fairly confident that I never will.
treestar
(82,383 posts) I wonder what that is. "Billionaire's" is probably redundant with "jet." But what's a sex jet? Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)It seems that "sex jets" are more for billionaires. And horndog ex-presidents.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)to tackle and restrain him? Oh no, maybe he missed Epstein's party plane and got on the wrong flight.
Our ex-president behaving badly again. Some would say go back to food but with with less bimbo, to switch addictions. Who knows but it's clearly destructive, habitual behavior.
2banon
(7,321 posts)Dem's better come up with someone else pretty fast I'd say...
MineralMan
(148,775 posts)If not, what difference does this make to anything? That's my question.
2banon
(7,321 posts)i can just hear the question echoed a million times over now: "What did you know, and when did you know it?" To be followed with, "How does this news impact your marriage? Will you be filing for a divorce?" and how will this matter impact your ability to be President?"
No matter how this pans out, it does not bode well for her personally or professionally and particularly for any thought of a Presidential bid, regardless that she has/had nothing to do with her hubby's socio-pathic sexual proclivities and inclinations.
MineralMan
(148,775 posts)despite everyone knowing that he had done something pretty ugly. He survived an impeachment attempt, too. What makes you think that this old crap and speculation would affect Hillary Clinton's chances in the election?
Or do you care? What you think bodes well or poorly doesn't really seem to matter, as far as I can tell.
2banon
(7,321 posts)the fact that the repugs were so beyond the pale in their reaction had an adverse effect on their agenda to impeach the president over a sex scandal with a young intern. But the current news is quite a different matter with a significant distinction. I really don't understand how anyone would logically be optimistic under these circumstances and the political world we're enslaved in.
MineralMan
(148,775 posts)That's what I think.
2banon
(7,321 posts)MineralMan
(148,775 posts)One thing's certain, though: whoever the Democratic candidate turns out to be, the rest of the Democratic candidates will support the nominee. Of that I'm certain. Whoever it is will also have the strong support of President Obama. Who won't support the eventual candidate? Well, that remains to be seen. That will be interesting.
2banon
(7,321 posts)up until this point, it appeared to me that there was no question that selection would be HRC.. I could be wrong, but i'm thinking that the Reich Wing will never let go of this current story..
It will be interesting how this will be handled..if it ends up being a game changer for the party, and ultimately the up coming 2016 race. We shall see how this unwinds..and xing fingers plan B is a good one, whatever it is..
MineralMan
(148,775 posts)I know what they will do. I'm more concerned about what Democrats will do. That's the reason for my post today.
OilemFirchen
(7,232 posts)In the thread "Would you vote for Hillary?" 2banon writes:
The angst! The drama! The... oh, never mind.
Others are welcome to peruse the remainder of the pearl-clutchers here. No doubt their concern is similarly deep and heartfelt.
Not me, though. Just the one, and I'm now officially bored.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)He left office with a 66% approval rating after the L'Affair Monica was fulled vetted :
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116584/presidential-approval-ratings-bill-clinton.aspx
and is our most popular living president with a favorable rating of 64%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/171794/clinton-elder-bush-positively-rated-living-presidents.aspx
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)mistress revelation and public apology well into Bubba's first presidential campaign. What makes you think his reckless, selfish behavior is acceptable and that it won't come up again? And explain how this will be good for the country, the Democratic Party and the voters.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)just how sick I am of that egotistical creep Bill Clinton.
I've seen him interviewed in the past several years, and he just has this incredibly annoying arrogance in the way he speaks to other people, cuts them off, lords it over them. And that's not even touching on how he doesn't seem to have any self-control over his own pee pee.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)It's got no relation to a husband's roaming johnson.
OilemFirchen
(7,232 posts)Though you've made it clear it's somehow about a woman who might run for President.
BTW, why do you give even the smallest shit?
From the treasure trove: Would You Vote for Hillary?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5814903
162. Her record and history have already spoken.
I don't care what she dreams up to say in the primaries, I wouldn't believe it - I believe what she has already said and done. And that means a big fat NO from me.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)and her becoming President would be a disaster.
Another one ready with the cuffs for future crimes?
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)
RadiationTherapy
(5,818 posts)I can't justify it, but I do think it to be widespread. I suppose it is a prejudice.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts) quadrature
(2,049 posts)Iran?
Cuba
Russia
China
Venezuela
Israel
somebody else?
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
kwassa
(23,340 posts)
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)google is enlightening
hint: he is interviewed on youtube by Jeff Rense... of rense.com.
He LOVES pedophile conspiracy. Johnny Gosch for one. Long time DUers will remember this mess.
Gosch/Gannon/Franklin Conspiracy
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)But if you wish to believe this story is fabricated, nothing I can do about it. Are they all making this up?
https://www.google.ca/search?q=clinton+and+epstein+scandal&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=62fFVNP2JoingwS18oL4Aw
https://www.google.ca/search?q=clinton+friends+with+epstein&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=e2jFVI2-FMP2ggSIhoPIDA
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)as do many who have written about it. Mostly right-wing nutcases.
It's going nowhere. I absolutely believe Dershowitz and riding on an airplane is no crime.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Take a similar scenario of just ordinary Joe making trips with his friend Sam, to and fro. Innocent or aware of Sams' crimes are to be questioned. Sam is later charged with a crime, Joe should not be automatically in the clear but should be questioned.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Stories started by FOX, WA Times, Drudge, etc.
I know there are many DUers who pretend to be life-long involved Democrats (but really only got involved during the Dean and Obama campaigns) You may be one of them. If you are, it's understandable that you don't recall these right wing Clinton battles of the 90s. If you want to be a part of the scandal-mongering before any evidence is in, be my guest. If history is any indication, you're going to be wrong. And embarrassed.
Keep waiting for your 'progressive' savior. It at least keeps people like you out of the way while the grownups run campaigns.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)One must automatically assume Bill is not to be suspect of any knowledge of wrong doing like the honest guy he has proven to be in the past, or you are a dumbass that knows nothing, shut up while the grown up Clinton fanclub speaks.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Posts on DU are not stressful to me. They are a source of amusement.
One must automatically assume Bill is not to be suspect of any knowledge of wrong doing like the honest guy he has proven to be in the past,
Crudely put, but that is the basis of our legal system.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Why does this topic have to be disappeared to please some folks?
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)But one must also be careful what the gossip and speculate about, lest they have to walk it back when someone becomes the Dem nominee.
Why is it do you think some people here NEVER pile on any Democrats based on rumor? Because they'll have no credibility if the time come when they have to support that person. Have fun with this.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I can look after myself and my credibility, and you look after your own, fair? I do not bend to anyone who suggests or demands I should be careful of what I say.
We'll see how things pan out, won't we? Guaranteed tho, it won't be me that is embarassed no matter the turn out.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Sound familiar?
When Bill Clinton wants to galvanize his audience, he thunders from the podium that the top 1 percent of families got 60 percent of the gains from economic growth during the 1980s and owns more wealth than the bottom 90 percent.
Governor Clinton, the likely Democratic Presidential nominee, had been searching for months for facts to illustrate his claim that America’s middle class benefited little from 12 years of Republican rule. The explosion of riches at the top struck him as a perfect vehicle. Not only did the widening gap between the rich and the rest of Americans conflict with traditional notions of democracy, but it also went right to the pocketbook sources of middle-class discontent.
In 1992, one might conclude, the nation chose to reverse the plutocratizing effects of neoliberalism. What we got was something else—a soft Reaganism that admitted, “the era of big government is over.” And that’s why, in the months and years to come, we will see Clinton loyalists do all they can to delete that New Gilded Age from memory even as they rail against the current New Gilded Age. Were we to judge Bill Clinton by the standards of 1992, his presidency was something of a failure, eight years of deregulation and New Economy platitudes. If we judge him by the rich rewards that his booming stock market showered on the wealthy, however, his term in the White House was a towering success.
The original Gilded Age ended when Democrats and Republicans came together around the old populist program of financial regulation, antitrust enforcement, income tax, and legitimacy for organized labor. This time around there is no end in sight, because Republicans and Democrats have come together on a program that is almost the opposite—dismantling the regulatory state at the behest of the One Percent while assuring an ever angrier public that they feel our pain, that they’re Putting People First, that they’d be great to have a beer with, that Yes We Can. The heart sickens at the thought of these many long years of fake populism, and the stomach turns to imagine how little time there is before we are swept up in it all over again.
http://www.salon.com/2014/06/22/hillary_clinton_forgets_the_90s_our_latest_gilded_age_and_our_latest_phony_populists/
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)That is, after Mario Cuomo broke your hearts and Tom Harkin dropped out.
It's hysterical how you always make claims about yourself, then post editorials as 'proof.'
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)diminish the fact that Clinton first ran as a populist. And he was faking it.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Perhaps just you and the Salon writer.
I honestly don't believe I'm having this conversation. More of the historical revisionism the left is getting a reputation for.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)... you had blinders on.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Published: April 26, 1992
Bill Clinton:
.... "I want to make just a few sort of basic points about this election. And I'd like begin with two little statistics, one of which was published a day or two ago in America's newspapers and one of which will be out tomorrow. Statistic No. 1: According to the Federal Reserve Board, 1 percent of America's people at the top of the totem pole now have more wealth than the bottom 90 percent, the biggest imbalance in wealth in America since the 1920's right before the Great Depression.
Statistic No. 2, out tomorrow: For the first time in a decade personal income in our country as a whole fell last year. That says we've got problems. And I want to tell you that behind that, I live in a state that is one of the worst states in America, where we were abandoned with farm income going down, factories closing and moving away. The Federal Government cutting back on money for economic development, education, environmental protection. We've got a lot of counties that went through just what you went through in this county.
And in the last 11 years, I had to try to put together an economic strategy to deal with it. I don't like to bore people with statistics, but let me tell you, what's happened here might be worse than what's happened in some other places in Pennsylvania, but it's not all that different from what's happened in America.
For more than two years now, the average middle-class family has worked harder for less money to pay more for health care, for housing, for education, for taxes. Poverty has exploded, especially among working people.
I just got out of a rather bruising campaign in New York State. You might have read about it. But one of the things that really moved me about that was that I met so many courageous people, people you never see on television, who live in the Bronx and Brooklyn, who live in high-crime neighborhoods and get up every day and literally risk their physical security, going to and from jobs that still pay them less than top-level wages, to support children in difficult circumstances, playing by the rules.
For millions and millions of Americans, the dream with which I grew up has been shattered. The ideal that if you work hard and play by the rules you'll be rewarded, you'll do a little better next year than you did last year, your kids will do better than you. But that idea has been devastated for millions of Americans.
How did this happen? I would argue it happened for two reasons. No. 1: We lost our economic leadership. Other nations began to do some things better than we do, and their economies started growing faster and faster as ours slowed down. Big, Simple Ideas
No. 2, and this is why I'm running for President: We elected people to high office who had the wrong response to the problem. And that's what this election is all about. Three or four big, simple ideas, even though the problems are complex.
What is President Bush's theory about what's good about the economy? That the Government would mess up a one-car parade, and you can't trust anybody in politics or Government. So the answer to our economic problems is to make taxes lower on corporations and high-income individuals, and get out of the way and let the market do the rest.
That's their idea. The other day, the President vetoed a bill passed by the Congress that a pro-business Democrat, Lloyd Bentsen from Texas, got through, a tax bill that would have made it easier for plants to modernize their equipment, for people to start small businesses, for people to buy houses, for people to invest in housing in low-income areas. All these things would have been done and George Bush vetoed the bill. Why? Because those incentives were going to be paid for by raising taxes on upper-income people. And he didn't want to do that, because his theory is keep the taxes low on the rich and the corporations and everything will be fine....
Speech continued here~
http://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/26/us/the-1992-campaign-clinton-s-standard-campaign-speech-a-call-for-responsibility.html
Nother "centrist"
rethug lite) here to foreshadow what was really coming our way.wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)That speech is no indication he campaigned as a progressive. parts of it are very "new Democrat" - like raising taxes to finance small businesses.
But while you base your entire revisionist history on one speech, you probably don't recall Paul Tsongas calling Clinton "pander bear" who "will say anything, do anything to get votes (which is the typical knock on him from 'progressives' - even in '92)
Clinton campaigned on NAFTA, as a 'tough on crime' Democrat.
Short memory you have. But I suspect your memory is only 'google searches.'
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Bill Clinton was a well-known Southern Democrat and former chair of the DLC at the time he ran. That organization had already had several ideological skirmishes with the left, Jesse Jackson being the most noteworthy. If you thought Bill Clinton was a 'progressive' saviour you were sleepwalking through the the '92 election.
Here's a Clinton ad from '92:
http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials/1992/leaders-2
And here is the transcript:
MALE NARRATOR: They are a new generation of Democrats, Bill Clinton and Al Gore, and they don't think the way the old Democratic Party did. They've called for an end to welfare as we know it, so welfare can be a second chance, not a way of life.
TEXT: Welfare can be a second chance, not a way of life.]
MALE NARRATOR: They've sent a strong signal to criminals by supporting the death penalty.
TEXT: Support the death penalty.
MALE NARRATOR: And they've rejected the old tax and spend politics.
TEXT: Clinton has balanced 12 budgets.
MALE NARRATOR: Clinton's balanced 12 budgets and they've proposed a new plan investing in people, detailing $140 billion in spending cuts they'd make right now.
TEXT: Cut $140 Billion in wasteful spending.
MALE NARRATOR: Clinton/Gore. For people, for a change
Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)
LawDeeDah This message was self-deleted by its author.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Will be staying tuned.
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)We need something to keep us entertained until the next round of polls show Hillary leading all her Republican and Democraric challengers.
Atman
(31,464 posts)They get busted doing this kind of stuff all the time. I'm not trying apologize for any of Clinton's pecadillo's, just pointing out a fact. IOKIYAR.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)philosslayer
(3,076 posts)National (not local) Republican figures get busted associating with pedophiles ALL the time? Do you have any links?
Atman
(31,464 posts)Grow up.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)who, as it turned out 5 years later, had a weird and illegal sexual fetish.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Just a few weeks ago, after the girl filed her charges.....Clinton and Epstein went up in the air again....
so....it's not a casual association. The girl also stated that two of the girls from the Island house showed up at Chelsea's wedding. Nice, eh?
The girl also states in her court papers, Clinton was a guest at the homes, and flew with them to parties, on the jet. In 2007 when he was charged in Palm Beach, FL, Clinton's very close association came up then. So....Clinton did not think to end the friendship. After this mess with Prince Andrew, Bill's back on the plane. Probably calling judges to make deals like the last time! Epstein has the pics. All the politician's coming and going and having sex. Clinton is his clean up guy, and Epstein has bragged about it.
HW Bush went to these parties too! Ala the Franklin Cover Up. While other pols were having sex around the room, HW Bush leaves with his toys....like Bill. Don't be so darn naïve.
All the info has been posted here on DU.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Last edited Mon Jan 26, 2015, 10:46 AM - Edit history (2)
</end sarcasm>
I'm sorry. I'm just really not concerned that a friend of Bill Clinton's is a sexual deviant. Epstein was convicted and jailed. If Clinton is guilty of any crimes, let him be convicted.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)and laugh at the loyalty to their special 'greatness'.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Last edited Wed Jan 28, 2015, 04:14 AM - Edit history (1)
Is there no end to its clenistic perfidy?
..what is next, the space clenis?
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I truly believe we will win as long as our nominee is clean and not a fool. We turn out well during presidential elections. The demographics are heavily in our favor.
One of the few things that could destroy everything is another Bill scandal. That would be a circus, Monica all over again. A tabloid feeding frenzy. Even someone like RMoney or Rubio could win under those conditions. The risk is unacceptable.
Party has to come before her personal ambitions.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Why now, why again Monica?
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)nothing to see here, move along.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)By spreading as much horse shit as they can.
"Apparently".
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)protecting wild bill hickcock and his stupidities is what is important.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)ering it
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)speak up, don't be shy, don't whisper. Yell at the top of your lungs that a candidate's husband who was friends with a PEDOPHILE will have no effect on the race.
lolzer.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)to call out another poster?
zappaman
(20,621 posts)...ering.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)asking if there has been a thread on this poster, where you would come in here and accuse the poster of being someone else.
zappaman
(20,621 posts) seabeyond
(110,159 posts)an accusation. hence, two simple questions to you, that you refuse to answer.
i want to know why.
misogynist troll after misogynist troll comes to du. allowed for their count to get high. i have never seen you question all these men, we clearly know are returnees.
so, i ask again. does mirt have a thread going on this particular poster, and you decided to come into this thread to cal them out?
pretty basic and simple.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)And returning homophobic ones as well.
I get that you're upset that people are on to your buddy.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)zappaman
(20,621 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)and still no answer.
whatever
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)He's not on it.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)thank you for the information he could have easily answered, with my first post that explains i did not want to hunt the info down.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)and informed me that another person that has the same obsession about peoples 'papers' and worthiness is on MIRT. Residence PIs I guess. 
zappaman
(20,621 posts) LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I bet you would say the exact same thing of someone who was a very strong Hillary supporter. I am sure you would!
zappaman
(20,621 posts)It's so important, you need to know but not important enough to click a couple of times?
Once again though, I must thank you for confirming that we do indeed have a zombie here.
I wasn't sure until you just HAD to step in!
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)of obsession and bullying and pestering, relentlessly of the kind on display here now. Coincidentally someone on MIRT has those same qualities.
I don't mind if you follow me around, it's a bit cute how hard you try to get me to say something you can alert on, but that ther person was very upset and couldn't handle the harassment and left.
Do you make notches on some special stick for all the people you call names and harass here?
zappaman
(20,621 posts)Perhaps you can show me "following around"?
I came into this thread after you posted allegations under the guise of "apparently".
So, this post, like many of your others on this thread, is bullshit.
But hey, welcome back...again.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
zappaman
(20,621 posts)
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts) Beaverhausen
(24,613 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I know what a pedophile is tho. There could have been girls as young as 12 in this disgusting story, and anyone fucking them is a pedophile and anyone pimping them out is even worse.
Beaverhausen
(24,613 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)DU is a hive of speculation - didn't you hear that Obama wants to kill old people and boil them up, sell them, then give all that cash to Wall Street behind our backs?
Beaverhausen
(24,613 posts)By the way, Warren isn't running.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)Some people like to say "apparently" a lot.
Looks like the Repubs are going after Hilary early and some here happily help.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I know you would prefer not a word be said against the Clintons, but they do it to themselves. Lummoxes in so many ways that depend on the fold to hide their lummoxing.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I put up my Warren sig.
If you think she is not running, why does it fret you so that I think she should? Nevermind, I know the answer.
Beaverhausen
(24,613 posts)If you are going to throw accusations around you might at least want to show some proof.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)And they have every right to support her, but I notice some people get really upset when Warren for President sigs appear. I didn't do that to upset people, I put that signature in because I believe Warren is the best bet for President. Hillary didn't say she is running either, in fact back in '08 after her defeat I believe she actually said she wasn't running again. So, at this early stage, anything can change.
leftyladyfrommo
(19,643 posts)I don't care what Bill Clinton did years ago. He's not any different than a ton of other guys. Just look at what all those Secret Service agents did on their off time. Doesn't make it right. But it sure seems to happen a lot with guys.
Would I vote for him again? No.
I guess I can say that because I'm not really a Hillary fan.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Only thing that tops the OP are some of the replies. This is fucking great.
alarimer
(17,068 posts)Good to know.
And Gawker? Seriously? You trust a gossip site to be anything other than full of innuendo?
By this standard, all Presidents should be in jail because they have dinner with war criminals.
dilby
(2,273 posts)So that just makes this a non story for a non issue.
reddread
(6,896 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Unless he's accused of having sex with underage girls it's a nonstory. As far as I'm aware Clinton's name hasn't been mentioned in relation to Epstein's underage prostitute issues. He's known to have a roving eye and a history of, shall we say, peccadilloes, but I've never seen any really convincing evidence that any of those were nonconsensual or involved underage girls. Hillary has clearly forgiven him for his transgressions, whatever they may be; not really anyone else's business. And it also seems to be a non-issue for most of the American people; last I saw he had a 66% favourability rating (and it stayed above 50% during his impeachment trial, when the Lewinsky thing was fresh in the public's mind).
olddots
(10,237 posts)Gawker ? 
:banghead
any other stories about this out there ?
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Here's Mike Papantonio talking about it:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017240039
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Like when Hillary claimed that back when Bill was horn dogging. She said it was all a lie, a vast right wing conspiracy. Then he fessed up.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)What do your gossip and conspiratorial sources tell you?
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)1. Denial (the story is totally false, we know that Bill never lies and doesn't even like sex!)
2. Anger (at those who dare bring this story here and 'attack' the Clintons)
3. Bargaining (well, it's not Hillary that did this! Hillary is not Bill, Bill is not Hillary!)
4. Depression (some have retreated to silence to think of the huge impact this story will have if Hillary does decide to run)
5. Acceptance (that the Clintons will always be drama, and people are getting sick to death of their drama)
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)6. Wishful thinking: the formation of beliefs and making decisions according to what might be pleasing to imagine instead of by appealing to evidence, rationality, or reality.
7. Guilt by Association: guilt ascribed to someone not because of any evidence but because of their association with an offender.
8. Clinton Derangement Syndrome: [The acute onset of paranoia or political expediency in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of the Clintons.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)and his 'guilty' association to President Obama, that one the Clintons let out of their fart bag in their desperation.
But that is okay, because, you see when the Clintons do it, it is blessed and necessary and just being politics.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)I, personally, never said anything about it. So that fart bag of desperation reply is yours - and further proof your motives have little to do with the truth but rather a right-wing style (attempted) takedown.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I can repaste it here but where you said that is very close ^ up here.
As I anticipated, it's okay for the Clintons, but not so okay for anyone else. Special rules for special people. 
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)And, further down thread, an admission you're retaliating against attacks on Obama. But typically, you're missing the target. The people attacking Obama are 'progresssiiivvveesss.' You'd do better to dig up some BS stories on Warren or Sanders.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I am pointing out the gargantuan megaweight of hypocrisy.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)oops! Sorry, don't want to be accused of attacking John Kerry by using 'flip flop.' You might go over to FOX Nation or Free Republic and dig something else up.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)Especially when they can just make shit up on their own!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026133742#post241
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)when I inadvertently quoted a right winger in a discussion. He'd been quoted in an actual mainstream source (Time? CNN? Something like that) and I included his quote in an excerpt. I was taken to the cleaners for it.
THESE days one can post anything from the vilest of sites and use the "it's a legitimate new story" as cover.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)I once did the same thing and immediately corrected it.
Now, people just double down.
reddread
(6,896 posts)people wont even be able to act genuinely surprised.
The sheer lunacy of trying to force this issue back in the box,
while promoting a doomed campaign?
It is as if the Democratic Party has a cancer that cares nothing for the Democratic Party
or the American people, just personal ambition and whatever allure the office holds.
Obviously, nobody (except Hillary) really wants to be President bad enough to attract
the right quantity of money to qualify as "serious" enough to be in the one person primary.
Do I have all that straight?
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Pleasant! the song, I mean:
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Used Car Salesman and told to fuck off?
I have never seen anything Close to that kind of crazy name calling done to Hillary here.. Now THAT was RW brainrot that belongs at a TeaParty rally.
I am sure you denounced that openly in some post somewhere here.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)How petty of you. But not surprising.
Have you EVER seen me disrespect President Obama?
But your reply is irrelevant anyway.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)Why is that?
I judge Hillary simply by what she has said and done. If she didn't say stupid and cruel things, and didn't do monstrous stuff like vote for the Iraq war I might be supporting her. There are really, really good reasons not to trust or like her. Calling people rightwingers who don't like and trust her is schoolyard and weak sauce.
Saying I don't support her for any other reason than Her history and record, is wrong and a cheap way to avoid talking about this seriously. YOU were the one that first mentioned guilt by association in regards to this OP. When I return with my example of exactly that that the Clintons did to Obama, you fly into a different direction and don't address that you were wrong to bring it up because you weakened your 'argument' by doing so with the example of Obama and Rev. Wright and how that was an unfair guilt by association.
It's okay for the Clintons, but not anyone else. People are getting a little sick of that special snowflake treatment they get.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Again, your anger is misplaced. Dig up some BS on Warren and Sanders if you want to rile up those attacking Obama.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)I am not looking at your shiney thing you threw out so you can avoid talking about the real thing.
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Good thing is we only have to tolerate the likes of you for a short time.
appalachiablue
(43,505 posts)Response to TheNutcracker (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
merrily
(45,251 posts)I think I will withhold judgment to see if more info, pro or con, comes to light.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)as a witness to this case - whether that has already happened I don't know. And Dirtshowitz is involved and spitting up blood for self defense maligning the opposing lawyers, so there has Got to be some fire to this Smoke. There is a legal ongoing process.
zappaman
(20,621 posts)Don't let that stop you!
Hopefully, we can skip the charges and a trial and burn everyone involved at the stake.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)yes, it's all about stake burning. No hyperbole from you, nope, naw, nothing like that!
benz380
(534 posts)LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)*Fingers wagging heartily... face turning beet red, blood vessels on nose resembling the Mississippi Delta.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)That is crazy.
LawDeeDah
(1,596 posts)
From Urban Dictionary:
burner phone
A prepaid cellular phone, replaced frequently (weekly) (monthly) to avoid leaving a trail and getting caught up in illegal activities
Dude you want some of that herb, hit me up on the burner phone.
by gmoney21 July 30, 2009
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Karmadillo
(9,253 posts)Beacool
(30,361 posts)It warms the cockles of one's heart to see the unity, the friendship.........the continuous utter bullshit!!!
Virginia Roberts denied ever having sex with Bill Clinton in court documents filed in Florida.
"During the period that Roberts worked for Epstein he was good friends with Clinton, but she denies sleeping with him despite rumors to the contrary.
'I have seen reports saying or implying that I had sex with former President Bill Clinton on Little St James Island,' she writes in the filing.
The island, part of the U.S. Virgin Islands, is owned by Epstein.
'Clinton was present on the island at a time when I was also present on the island, but I have never had sexual relations with Clinton, nor have I ever claimed to have had such relations. I have never seen him have sexual relations with anyone,' Roberts wrote."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2921218/I-never-slept-Bill-Clinton-Sex-slave-Virginia-Roberts-denies-rumors-relations-former-President-explosive-court-filings.html
reddread
(6,896 posts)not that all the names associated with Clinton sex scandals are as easy to remember.
Beacool
(30,361 posts)It is beyond sexist to conflate a woman's political career with the actions of the husband. Although in this case, Bill's only sin appears to have been being friends with Epstein. No one has come out to accuse him of having sex with them on Epstein's island or elsewhere.
reddread
(6,896 posts)maybe they will stick with Benghazi?
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Last edited Wed Jan 28, 2015, 12:51 AM - Edit history (1)
I agree with a few of the posters, we need a clean candidate. Heck, republicans would vote for that one too!
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Hillary agrees to testify. Didn't she do that already?
Rex
(65,616 posts)Well well well...some interesting sub-threads and replies. Looks like someone might have outed their sock inadvertently.
autorank
(29,480 posts)Isn't it...none of this would have happened if Epstein had been charged, prosecuted and sentenced for taking multiple minor females across state lines for sex. You get one Hell of a lot more than 18 months for that very accurate description of his behavior.
It just shows that under the right circumstances, multi billionaires can buy special justice no matter what their crimes.
N.B. Epstein had elaborate security, which means ... CAMERAS ... which means VIDEO tapes. Maybe that's what got him the special treatment.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Epstein's got the pics!
zappaman
(20,621 posts)Do you have inside information?
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)zappaman
(20,621 posts)Riiiiiiight....
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)and will come apart in a few days.
vote for her or don't but how many times will people fall for some insane clinton conspiracy theory?
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Now, to you keep hanging with human traffickers, and pedophiles? Why would Bill do that? And, he's with Bill again, after he's popped again! Court records on Epstein shows 21 different phone numbers he has for Bill Clinton? Believe what you want.
Have you studied "Mena, AR"? You should. Billy's not really a good boy.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)but more about the pics, and the politicians, military, judges that Epstein services.
There are pics of two of the hookers at Epstein's house attending Chelsea's wedding. That's an old story now. I find your comments about what a girls says and swears to, a little sexist.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Seriously. And you're buying this shit.
Bwahahahahahaha
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Monica and Jennifer Flowers were of age and consented. Epstein the perv, only liked them under 15 for himself, and even BOUGHT two poor white kids from France!
wyldwolf
(43,891 posts)Unless they belong to secret cult!!!
laserhaas
(7,805 posts)Let justice be done through the heaven's fall!
Progressives seek equality in truth and justice.
AND
[center][font size=4]"res ipsa loquitor"[/font][/center]
The thing(s) itself speaks!
If you lay down with pedo dogs, you wake up with much more serious thingy than V.D.!
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)laserhaas
(7,805 posts)How quaint
Monk06
(7,675 posts)call him what he is.
Really, news editors are a craven lot.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)All aboard the 'Lolita Express': Flight logs reveal the many trips Bill Clinton and Alan Dershowitz took on pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's private jet with anonymous women
Flight logs for Jeffrey Epstein's private plane dubbed the 'Lolita Express' were published for the first time on Thursday
They show that former President Bill Clinton boarded the plane with women believed to have been involved in creating underage sex slave ring
Alleged victim Virginia Roberts says she was recruited as a slave when she was 15, and that she was forced to have sex with both Prince Andrew and Harvard law profession Alan Dershowitz
The latter, she says, molested her mid-flight on the private jet
Both the Duke of York and Dershowitz have fiercely denied their involvement in the ring
By Dailymail.com Reporter
Published: 23:14 EST, 22 January 2015 | Updated: 15:54 EST, 23 January 2015
According to court documents, Epstein's former assistant Sarah Kellen and socialite Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly found and groomed the underage girls to pimp out to Epstein and his friends. Kellen received immunity for her part in the ring during Epstein's court case in the mid-2000s, while Maxwell was never charged and has furiously denied involvement.
In court filings, Roberts maintains that she never had sexual relations with Clinton - or knew of him taking an interest in any of Epstein's other 'massage' girls - though he was sometimes present on the banker's private Caribbean island during her years of work.
On Thursday, Dershowitz appeared on the Today show to emphatically deny claims he had sex with then-underage Roberts, saying she was 'making the whole thing up'.
'I was never in the presence of a single underage woman,' he said. 'I never saw [Epstein] doing anything improper. I was not a witness. I was not a participant. And I will prove it.'
On Wednesday, Roberts lodged fresh documents in Florida detailing the alleged abuse she suffered at the Duke of York's hands, including how she had an orgy with him and eight other young girls.
more at link above....
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)All that Scratching to get to the top is the " American Exceptionalism " that has robbed us , and facilitated scoundrels that Kill us .
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)The media will screw us royally!
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)a snip!
Power, Pedophilia and the US Government
Posted by Veterans Today on February 7, 2015
By Jaochim Hagopian for Veterans Today
As the West charges full speed ahead towards World War III with its incendiary epicenter Ukraine, simultaneous headlines are breaking with pedophilia sex scandals implicating the highest levels of elite power and privilege involving both US presidents and the British royal family. There now exists incontrovertible evidence confirming that members of the world’s most powerful and wealthy ruling class have for decades been regularly engaging in predatory violent and sexual acts involving the most brutal and perverse crimes including ritualistic torture underage children and even murder. Yet apparently these most heinous crimes against the most powerless and defenseless in our society – thousands of child victims – have been preyed upon for many years with complete impunity, systematically covered up at the highest levels by the American and British governments. Yet these sophisticated child sex trafficking syndicates have never been exposed as they are now. Unfolding shocking developments on both sides of the Atlantic have finally been exposing pedophile scandals not only committed in the US and UK but apparently all around the world including Portugal, Chile, Mexico and Belgium.
While these sex scandals unravel in the West, it’s important to understand their geopolitical context. At the same time as these criminal shockwaves are politically rocking the global elite, they are accompanied by unprecedented frenzied activity at the highest echelons of global finance involving dozens of murders and suicides of high profile figures within the central banking cabal, an incredible amount of covert movement of gold and silver, spiraling rock bottom oil prices on the impending eve of the US dollar and petrodollar collapse dumping it as the standard international reserve currency. Also unprecedented now is the David and Goliath story of bankrupt European Union member Greece defying the longtime predatory debt practice of thievery that’s been the economic paradigm of Western oligarchy.
As if to take all this mounting pressure and dog wagging heat off, with increasing desperation the West has relentlessly been engaging in a nonstop propaganda blitz of lies and false flags in order to demonize and bait Putin into all-out war after the ethnic Russian citizens of Crimea voted overwhelmingly for annexation with Russia. After investing $5 billion tampering with the internal affairs of a sovereign nation and pulling off an internationally outlawed coup overthrowing a democratically elected Ukrainian president, which Obama recently copped to, Putin merely beat the US-NATO imperialists to the punch by preventing the US Navy from taking over Russia’s critical fleet in Crimean port. For a full year ever since the West has been frantically trying to prod and bait nuclear powered Russia into world war. The US has caused a Ukrainian civil war and is now sending heavy arms to only enflame the already volatile hotspot.
All of these desperate, seemingly suicidal gestures by the Western oligarchs are clearly a knee jerk reaction to the major global shifting of power moving rapidly from West to East. It’s been underway for a while but is now reaching critical mass. So on top of all these cataclysmic changes on the geopolitics chessboard, now that the Western Emperor’s been stripped naked in the face of the latest sex crimes involving the elite’s most powerful rich and famous, all hell is about to break loose.
The biggest names floating around as probable patrons in the billionaire Jeffrey Epstein scandal that’s been recently gaining some traction are former President Bill Clinton and fifth in line to the British throne Prince Andrew. Gawker recently obtained flightlogs going back to the late 1990’s through mid-2000’s that place Bill Clinton repeatedly on board the private jet dubbed the “Lolita Express” belonging to convicted pedophile Epstein in the company of a soft-core porn actress and underage girls listed in Epstein’s black book under “massage.” The flightlogs implicate Bill as a possible participant on board Epstein’s planes where girls as young as 12 provided sexual favors for the financier’s most powerful friends. Records confirm that Bill flew the friendly skies of the Lolita Express more than a dozen times over a several year period in the early 2000’s. It goes without saying that Senator Hillary never once escorted Bill on these pleasure air cruises.
On one Clinton trip he traveled for a week on Epstein’s planes with an entourage that included Kevin Spacey to Africa on an anti-poverty anti-AIDS tour. Among the women also on board for that weeklong tour were key Epstein employees who were the victims’ handlers Sarah Kellen and Ghislaine Maxwell along with soft-porn actress-masseuse Chauntee Davies.
Because of such potentially incriminating evidence that a popular former president could possibly be a pedophile, in conjunction with an already long trail of mysterious deaths surrounding dozens of suspicious “suicides” and murders of people at one time closely associated with the Clintons, great lengths by the feds top on down to conceal this latest damning truth from the public eye have been exerted. Yet there exists volumes of documented proof traced to high up in the Justice Department obstructing justice at every turn by disregarding and dismissing overwhelming evidence while quietly letting the guilty power broking offenders off the hook, only issuing a mere slap on the hand to the billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein as the child molesting ringleader of the sexual human trafficking ring.
Despite Epstein’s 2008 conviction on two felony counts of soliciting underage victims as well as adults for sex that would bring anyone else up to twenty years in federal prison, Epstein was allowed to freely leave jail during the day and only come back for overnight visits at his Palm Beach County Jail for a mere thirteen months of an eighteen month sentence. He had up to thirty-five victims of underage girls willing to provide incriminating testimony against him and his powerful pals who all went Scot-free. Since 2008 Epstein has escaped further punishment by simply buying thirty of his victims off as his attorneys have been busily negotiating settlements to his multiple lawsuits.
When Harvard law professor Dershowitz’ name came up as a frequent flyer on the Lolita Express, he plunged into full damage control in an interview with American Lawyer insisting that he has always been a faithful husband of 28 years to his wife who he claimed always traveled with him. Yet the flightlog records show while flying with Epstein and company he never was accompanied by his wife. Another discrepancy was his statement that he was only a mere “professional” acquaintance with Epstein because Epstein was a financial donor to Harvard and since Clinton’s former Secretary of Treasury Larry Summers was a close friend of Epstein’s, while Summers was president of Harvard, it was only in this “job related” context that while Dershowitz was raising money for his and his boss’ top Ivy League school did he briefly interact with Epstein at all.
Records again dispute this claim as well showing that Dershowitz knew and flew with the billionaire pedophile on numerous occasions as early as 1997. Looks like the fast talking lawyer was just doing some fast talking damage control. In a more recent interview with Gawker, Dershowitz did some fast explaining when he suddenly remembered flying back in 1997 to Epstein’s friend’s birthday party where former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres and ex-astronaut-Senator John Glenn were also attendees. Again he unequivocally denied having sex with any young women. Sounds vaguely familiar to another Lolita Express frequent flyer named Bill. Wonder what Bill and Hillary Clinton were visibly arguing about at a recent public event. Perhaps how the latest bad press might be hurting her 2016 presidential hopes.
Federal prosecutors even violated the Trafficking Victims Protection Act in allowing a plea bargain agreement for the human trafficking kingpin Epstein without even informing the victims. Obviously their civil rights were violated when prosecutors chose not to try Epstein and company for human trafficking and sex crimes. The current law specifies that human traffickers who also commit aggravated sexual abuse, which of course the guilty parties repeatedly did and much more, stipulates a lifetime prison sentence. Yet a slap of Jeffrey’s hand while allowing everybody else to walk away free is the grossest, most obscene miscarriage of justice possible. Thankfully two of the victims joined by two more are currently still pursuing Epstein and the feds protecting all guilty parties on charges that their civil rights under the Protection Act were violated. Hopefully this can lead to the other guilty big name pedophile criminals to also get charged. But if status quo prevails, don’t hold your breath.
A month ago one of the girls, Virginia Roberts, now 31, went public with her detailed account of how Epstein recruited her at age 15 forcing her for an extended three-year period into a life of sexual servitude as his sex slave, also coercing her into having sex with Epstein’s high roller friends, allegedly among them royal Prince Andrew as well as renowned American attorney Alan Dershowitz. Virginia Roberts stated in her court papers that she had sex with Andrew three times in New York, London and on a Caribbean Island owned by Epstein. Fear of reprisal from the still very powerful billionaire has her fearing for her life. According to Virginia’s aunt, several months ago just prior to the court allegations going forward, Virginia felt she had to flee Florida and is believed to be currently living incognito somewhere in Colorado with her husband and three children.
Roberts’ court filing in late December 2014 specified that Jeffrey Epstein made sure his underage sex slaves provided detailed descriptions of their sexual encounters with the world’s most famous and powerful politicians, businessmen and world leaders in order to potentially blackmail them. That of course is the Modus Operandi employed by all global powerbrokers to buy insurance for both their survival longevity as well as their legal license to get away with the most evil crimes in the world. The US master at this shady practice was none other than the half century FBI Director transvestite J. Edgar Hoover.
Right after Politico published its New Year’s Eve bombshell making Virginia Roberts’ Florida lawsuit public, from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Prince Andrew vehemently denied ever having sex with any underage girls. In a rare public appearance since Roberts’ allegations, on Wednesday this week the Earl of York was defended as a “true beacon as an ambassador for UK trade and enterprise” by the President of the Royal Academy of Engineering Professor Dame Ann Dowling. Because a photo of Andrew with Epstein right after Epstein finished his jail time had surfaced in 2010, his association with the convicted pedophile embarrassed the royal family enough to force Andrew to step down from his official role as ambassador for UK trade.
much more at the link above....
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Kick!
DemocratSinceBirth
(100,824 posts)
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)tammywammy
(26,582 posts)And secondly, you should limit your excerpts to 4 paragraphs per the site rules.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)connecting the dots of pedo rings. This topic thread has nothing to do with Jews or any nationality. It's about pedophilia in our highest institutions of government.
Dersh, is just one of the players...of so many.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)with known pedo Epstein?
randys1
(16,286 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)crosspost....right here.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026210721#post37
That thread shows a new exposed money pot connected to Epstein and the Clinton's.
Lots of money in the sex slave biz. Remember Larry King of Franklin Cover up was caught laundering 41 million to the Contras. So much more was left to party and fly jets like Epstein's, all from a poor community credit union...savings and loan. Just look at this news.....
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)For Hillary to be the nominee! That's what they're waiting for.....
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts) Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)
Keeps returning from the dead to haunt those implicated.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)
lpbk2713
(43,203 posts)Can you give us a rough idea how long you will continue to kick this hate piece?
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)lpbk2713
(43,203 posts)Deal?
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts) nilesobek
(1,423 posts)If a normal laborer in the USA like me was was doing these things I would be placed in the darkest dungeon in the realm. The double standards of justice in America have reached intolerable levels. I'm thinking about getting a passport before its too late and the new Republican POTUS takes us all down for the last time in 2016.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)Last time it was solicitation of prostitution. With a minor??????? See, his friends in the highest of places make sure he gets off somewhat, as Epstein has the 'pictures' the girls say were taken via cameras placed inside his residences, ala the 'Franklin Scandal" Google that one!
Dems to Win
(2,161 posts)I hope she does it soon, so others have time to put together their campaigns.
It's pretty crazy to believe America will vote to put a buddy of the billionaire pedophile into the White House as First Spouse. I sure don't believe it.
If Hillary is the nominee, I can pretty much guarantee there will be a woman come forward in October 2016 with her story of having sex with Bill on the plane while she was a minor. And we know Bill likes 'em young, so it will be plausible.
If Hillary cares about the country and the Democratic Party, she will announce she is not running. Soon.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)The source is gawker. Even Faux news hasn't touched this story and you know Faux news would jump on this story if it had any chance of remotely sticking.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)LynneSin
(95,337 posts)Do you think they would just keep quiet about something like this? Sure you think maybe they will just keep silent and wait until it could hurt Hillary the most but the right wing can any subject and keep it relevant for years. Heck they kept harping on Jeremiah Wright during Obama's 2012 campaign and that was a hot topic issue that came out during the first one.
But even the right-wing can see a story that has absolutely no merit and will back away from it if they know in the end it will only make the look stupid. So why are we still grasping at straws.
If you don't like Hillary that's one thing but seriously, try not to act like a 3rd rate wanna be Faux news broadcaster in the process of doing so.
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)I like Hillary. I don't like the policies that she supports. Neither does this board. But many like you who accuse me, refuse to acknowledge any problem here. That's fine.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)and never fails to mention Hillary's involvement in it.
Look whatever keeps your hopes up then that's fine. But the rest of us are here in reality and know that if there was any legs to this story it would have been blown wide open ages ago by someone other than Gawker.
I give you credit you're dedicated, but the rest of us prefer living in reality.