HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Epstein indictment to be ...

Mon Jul 8, 2019, 08:48 AM

 

Epstein indictment to be released at 9AM, USAO-SDNY presser at 11AM - UPDATED

Everything you've read so far about the Epstein indictment includes a heavy load of speculation, in varying degrees of mild to off-the-rails.

One of the ways to handle bad news with disinformation is to include fictitious or over-the-top information among the actual facts, in order to attempt to fixate attention on the fake stuff. That way, when the fake stuff is shown for what it is, the long-overlooked truth is simply brushed aside.

That is, for example, how the fake Texas Air National Guard Memo was a brilliant tactic. Rather than to attempt to counter the allegations that W had a no-show post in the TANG simply to avoid the draft, the fake memo "confirmed" and reinforced that narrative. Because of the attention it got, the actual facts of W's non-service were swept away in a wave of "oh, that's bullshit" once it was shown to be fake.

Too many people think that trolls and disinfo agents spread material that opposes the viewpoint they are attempting to counter. But, no, that's not how it works at all. Disinfo is much more likely to be stuff you agree with and/or are predisposed to believe, so that you'll latch onto things that will take you right down a rabbit hole.

In the media, and on social media, the "analysts" that get attention are the ones who are attention-getting, and not necessarily accurate or realistic in their prediction. Media doesn't run on being accurate. It runs on getting eyeballs and attention. There is a reason why "TV lawyers" are on TV, instead of actually practicing law.

The measure of whether something is true or accurate is not "I believe it" or "it suits my biases". It's the stuff with which you agree, which merits a healthy level of skepticism.

So, when the indictment is released, I would encourage you to READ THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT FIRST before turning to the Wheel of Soothsayers who will be happy to provide you with any opinion about it which tickles your particular fancy.

Original US legal documents are written in English, and they get easier to read the more you exercise your ability to find things out for yourself, instead of depending on the opinions of others to form your own.

UPDATE:

The original indictment is here:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6184408-U-S-v-Jeffrey-Epstein-Indictment.html

6 replies, 1073 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Epstein indictment to be released at 9AM, USAO-SDNY presser at 11AM - UPDATED (Original post)
jberryhill Jul 2019 OP
watoos Jul 2019 #1
hlthe2b Jul 2019 #2
WhiskeyGrinder Jul 2019 #3
jberryhill Jul 2019 #4
SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #5
jberryhill Jul 2019 #6

Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Mon Jul 8, 2019, 08:58 AM

1. I'm pretty sure that I have been the only person

 

here on DU to ask the question how does everyone know what Epstein is indicted for when the indictment is sealed?

I have been saying all along that I felt that the Florida miscarriage of justice with Acosta will never be rectified.

Who was the last billionaire to do real jail time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Mon Jul 8, 2019, 09:59 AM

3. The only thing I would add is that this is a case involving accusations of child rape against grown

men. To express disappointment or jubilation about who those men are (or aren't) and what it might mean for one political party or the other is to push the victims aside and discount the pursuit of justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to jberryhill (Original post)

Mon Jul 8, 2019, 10:43 AM

5. Question about Employee 1, 2 and 3.

Seems Epstein is the big fish. So we are to the point that the big fish is being indicted. Why would they not include the names of the three employees? I would think they would have been indicted at the same time unless some deal was made with them. Were they possibly offered anonymity? Might we not know who they are?

Thanks jverryhill. I know you often understand why they do or don't use names or something similar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SouthernProgressive (Reply #5)

Mon Jul 8, 2019, 10:52 AM

6. The general policy is not to name people who are not currently charged

 


They could be cooperating or not cooperating, and in all likelihood had been called to testify to the grand jury. But those factors don't determine whether they are named.

You might recall, for example, that Michael Cohen conspired to commit campaign finance violations with an "Individual-1" who was running for president.

It's just DOJ policy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread