LaxPower Back-Up Stick

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:35 am

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:13 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:56 pm Seems to me we reach a new low when we try to cast doubt on just how much of a slime a guy like Epstein is.

And I’m puzzled as to why.

Is it simply that because Acosta was appointed by Trump that he needs to be defended from criticism?

Really? No on here in the least bit thinks that Acosta is the lone bad actor in this sorry affair. We want them all to be held accountable.

But will Acosta flip on those who leaned on him back then, or is he still scared to buck the powerful or enticed by the rewards of ‘loyalty ‘.

If he doesn’t flip, Epstein or his employees may well go first.

Determining how much damage was done after the plea deal is not casting doubt on how much of a slime Epstein is.
It's determining how much actual damage, if any, Acosta enabled.

Why is there more media attention on Acosta than on Epstein & his powerful enablers ?
What makes Acosta a "bad actor"? Did he do something illegal or just go along to get along ?

When did you become a defender of Acosta?

Was it before or after the trial?

Did you like him more or less after the trial?

So many questions...

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:26 am

Meanwhile, the judge in the case, Richard Berman, also included in the file released Monday a transcript from a 2011 hearing before Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Ruth Pickholz, in which Assistant District Attorney Jennifer Gaffney, then the deputy chief of the Manhattan DA’s Sex Crimes Unit, actually argued for Epstein to get a more lenient sex-offender classification.

Pickholz was taken aback by the argument, according to the documents, which have been public.

“I have to tell you, I’m a little overwhelmed because I’ve never seen the prosecutor’s office do something like this,” the judge said. “I have never seen it.”

They need to look at Jennifer Gaffney as well....

https://nypost.com/2019/07/15/court-pap ... -is-worth/

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:47 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:35 am

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:13 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:56 pm Seems to me we reach a new low when we try to cast doubt on just how much of a slime a guy like Epstein is.

And I’m puzzled as to why.

Is it simply that because Acosta was appointed by Trump that he needs to be defended from criticism?

Really? No on here in the least bit thinks that Acosta is the lone bad actor in this sorry affair. We want them all to be held accountable.

But will Acosta flip on those who leaned on him back then, or is he still scared to buck the powerful or enticed by the rewards of ‘loyalty ‘.

If he doesn’t flip, Epstein or his employees may well go first.

Determining how much damage was done after the plea deal is not casting doubt on how much of a slime Epstein is.
It's determining how much actual damage, if any, Acosta enabled.

Why is there more media attention on Acosta than on Epstein & his powerful enablers ?
What makes Acosta a "bad actor"? Did he do something illegal or just go along to get along ?

When did you become a defender of Acosta?

Was it before or after the trial?

Did you like him more or less after the trial?

So many questions...

.. ...I knew nothing about Acosta until he became the scapegoat in this sordid affair.
I heard of Epstein back when the Lolita Express flight manifests hit the internet, but were ignored by the MSM,
That's why I'm amused at the % of MSM attention focused on Acosta as opposed to Epstein.
Anybody seen George & Katie's reportage on this story ?

MDLF76:
It really is amazing how you're such an apologist for so many slimy folks.
"scapegoat"

You have no idea whether he was bribed or just intimidated by 'friends of Jeffrey'.
Or just a huge wimp of a federal prosecutor.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:47 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:35 am

old salt wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:13 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 9:56 pm Seems to me we reach a new low when we try to cast doubt on just how much of a slime a guy like Epstein is.

And I’m puzzled as to why.

Is it simply that because Acosta was appointed by Trump that he needs to be defended from criticism?

Really? No on here in the least bit thinks that Acosta is the lone bad actor in this sorry affair. We want them all to be held accountable.

But will Acosta flip on those who leaned on him back then, or is he still scared to buck the powerful or enticed by the rewards of ‘loyalty ‘.

If he doesn’t flip, Epstein or his employees may well go first.

Determining how much damage was done after the plea deal is not casting doubt on how much of a slime Epstein is.
It's determining how much actual damage, if any, Acosta enabled.

Why is there more media attention on Acosta than on Epstein & his powerful enablers ?
What makes Acosta a "bad actor"? Did he do something illegal or just go along to get along ?

When did you become a defender of Acosta?

Was it before or after the trial?

Did you like him more or less after the trial?

So many questions...

.. ...I knew nothing about Acosta until he became the scapegoat in this sordid affair.
I heard of Epstein back when the Lolita Express flight manifests hit the internet, but were ignored by the MSM,
That's why I'm amused at the % of MSM attention focused on Acosta as opposed to Epstein.
Anybody seen George & Katie's reportage on this story ?

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:25 pm

MDLF76:
It really is amazing how you're such an apologist for so many slimy folks.
"scapegoat"

You have no idea whether he was bribed or just intimidated by 'friends of Jeffrey'.
Or just a huge wimp of a federal prosecutor.

.. ...& it's amazing how you're such a fabulist, willing to conjure up all sorts of TDS conspiracy theories.

Trinity wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:37 pm https://www.mediaite.com/politics/exclu ... -and-2017/

Jason Miller, putting up Bob Kraft numbers.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:39 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:25 pm

MDLF76:
It really is amazing how you're such an apologist for so many slimy folks.
"scapegoat"

You have no idea whether he was bribed or just intimidated by 'friends of Jeffrey'.
Or just a huge wimp of a federal prosecutor.

.. ...& it's amazing how you're such a fabulist, willing to conjure up all sorts of TDS conspiracy theories.

I don't know what to think happened.
There are a variety of plausible explanations, none of them, however, leave him 'a scapegoat'.

The only such explanation is quite implausible.
I'd have to be a dunce not to think otherwise...or such a knee jerk apologist for anything sordid that I can't help but defend slime and those who enable them.

Your pattern is nothing if not consistent.

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:47 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:39 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:25 pm

MDLF76:
It really is amazing how you're such an apologist for so many slimy folks.
"scapegoat"

You have no idea whether he was bribed or just intimidated by 'friends of Jeffrey'.
Or just a huge wimp of a federal prosecutor.

.. ...& it's amazing how you're such a fabulist, willing to conjure up all sorts of TDS conspiracy theories.

I don't know what to think happened.
There are a variety of plausible explanations, none of them, however, leave him 'a scapegoat'.

The only such explanation is quite implausible.
I'd have to be a dunce not to think otherwise...or such a knee jerk apologist for anything sordid that I can't help but defend slime and those who enable them.

Your pattern is nothing if not consistent.

It's a secret Harvard sex ring. Acosta was Harvard Law, so was Dershowitz.
Epstein was embraced by Harvard as a high $$$ donor.
Did you see Jeffrey at any taligaters, sporting his Harvard gear ?

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Jul 17, 2019 1:20 pm Sneak peek of the upcoming MSNBC documentary -- The Victims of Mar-a-Lago.