Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jeffrey Epstein thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Why put that out as a statement?

    Comment


      Because he is an idiot and his handlers have no grasp of reality?

      Comment


        Suggests they're really rattled by that Marina Hyde article

        https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/1165247937951281154?s=20

        Comment


          It almost feels that his digging himself a hole here. Anyway got a spade handy to lend him?

          Comment


            As Ursus says, WTF are his handlers thinking? He is clearly shitting bricks and these statements seem to be expressions of panic mode, which simply make him appear guilty of the accusations against him, but there must be professionals with calmer heads around him who are not stepping up and doing their jobs.

            He can't ask the press to cool it when he's escalating the conversation.
            Last edited by Satchmo Distel; 25-08-2019, 08:23.

            Comment


              I'm just impressed that he's managed to blunder into pretty much the last sort of scandal that everyone is agreed is bad.

              Comment


                this interview is possibly even wilder than the one with the comedy russian MMA chauffeur. doesn't back down defending epstein, realizes halfway through how big a hole he is digging, continues to talk about crimes he was in direct proximity of.

                Yeah, I’ve heard the name in regards to Epstein.

                You’ve heard the name—he’s one of the greatest scientists of the age, and you heard his name, oh bravo, you’re very qualified. You’re so full of shit, it’s terrible. You should not be writing about this. You’re not qualified.

                Oh boy. Why did I pick up the phone? Why wasn’t I out to dinner?

                Do you think Dershowitz—

                What have I done? You’re going to distort everything I said. I just know it.

                You’re being very clear in what you’re saying, and it’s very easy to understand your point of view here.

                I never knew what the hell he was doing. On the other hand, however, I was instrumental—I hung out with the scientists. He introduced me to a lot of scientists I otherwise would not have known.
                kind of exploitative of someone who i am going to take a wild stab in the dark and say has dementia, also very illustrative of how a shitload of people made themselves blind to the horror and will break their spines bending over backwards to justify it. it's an uncomfortable read, but a truly remarkable one.

                Comment


                  That last sentence of scumbag Windsor's statement...

                  Comment


                    Leafing through the Irish version of the Sunday times in the shop, it seems that a lot of this book about Mountbatten is concerned with the Kincora Boys home. You wouldn't have got that impression from initial coverage of it. This could get extremely messy. Similarly, you have to go a long way down through the reviews before you discover that another chunk is about his role in that coup that nearly happened in 1968, and how the queen had to convince him not to be part of it. .

                    That is not a story that reflects well on the royal family in a very different way.
                    Last edited by The Awesome Berbaslug!!!; 25-08-2019, 12:46.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by beak View Post
                      this interview is possibly even wilder than the one with the comedy russian MMA chauffeur. doesn't back down defending epstein,
                      He says that he first met Epstein round at James Goldsmith's house. Of course, where else.

                      Comment


                        Berba, I can only access the UK edition, but the framing of their article is quite strange, starting with a dozen paragraphs or so on Lady M, then a few of his female dalliances, before getting to Kincora.

                        It wouldn't surprise me if the Palace is more worried about this than they are about Andy.

                        Comment


                          Is there a way out of the Epstein mess? Prince Andrew hasn't put his fat finger on it

                          https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...y_to_clipboard

                          Another excellent piece by Hyde.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Antepli Ejderha View Post
                            Is there a way out of the Epstein mess? Prince Andrew hasn't put his fat finger on it

                            https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...y_to_clipboard

                            Another excellent piece by Hyde.
                            People will eventually get bored of it when the news cycle moves on.
                            I suspect there will be an implied agreement from both parties to not mention it too much during the election.

                            Comment


                              Ours or yours?

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
                                Ours or yours?
                                The US, not UK.
                                It's not a very big story outside a bit of gossip or titillation in the UK.

                                Brexit, a general election and the new EPL season are higher priorities in the UK news cycles.

                                Under age Prostitution wouldn't even get Andrew into the pantheon of the top 20 worse British royals ever.

                                He might get into the top three of the last 100 years after Lord Lucan the murderer and King Edward the traitor.

                                Comment


                                  Lord Lucan wasn't a royal, was he?

                                  Comment


                                    Andrew claiming the photo is a fake just makes him look more guilty. Why do you desperately need to deny the photo is genuine if you didn't have sex with her?

                                    Not the sharpest knife in the draw.

                                    Comment


                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by ooh aah View Post
                                        Lord Lucan wasn't a royal, was he?
                                        I thought he was related to the queen, I know most Aristocrats are. Not sure where I read that.

                                        Comment


                                          There's a link to Diana in the Bingham family, in that a daughter of the first Earl of Lucan married the 2nd Earl Spencer in 1782.

                                          Comment


                                            Originally posted by TonTon View Post
                                            There's a link to Diana in the Bingham family, in that a daughter of the first Earl of Lucan married the 2nd Earl Spencer in 1782.

                                            That wins my Most Unexpected Post-Poster Of The Day award.

                                            Comment


                                              Originally posted by TonTon View Post
                                              There's a link to Diana in the Bingham family, in that a daughter of the first Earl of Lucan married the 2nd Earl Spencer in 1782.
                                              And Dianna was related to the Queen mother through the Bowes-Lyon family tree. I only know that because we had a plaque growing up in our house from the royal wedding in 1981 showing their family trees. It took pride of place on our mantlepiece next to white Jesus of course.

                                              Comment


                                                Originally posted by Nocturnal Submission View Post


                                                That wins my Most Unexpected Post-Poster Of The Day award.
                                                Yes!

                                                Originally posted by Tactical Genius View Post

                                                And Dianna was related to the Queen mother through the Bowes-Lyon family tree. I only know that because we had a plaque growing up in our house from the royal wedding in 1981 showing their family trees. It took pride of place on our mantlepiece next to white Jesus of course.
                                                Aha! Yes of course. So you were right all along.

                                                Comment

                                                Working...
                                                X