• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was Alex Acosta Forced into Giving Jeffrey Epstein a Light Sentence due to Deep State Corruption?

Was Alex Acosta Forced into Giving Epstein a Light Sentence due to Deep State Corruption?

  • Total voters
    18
Surrealistik said:
So standard corruption then; the sort of that has been going on since time immemorial but worsened since the floodgates of money in politics opened in the 70s, albeit this time with a probable touch of blackmail.

And I don't really buy the idea that he was an intelligence asset; certainly not at this point in time. Any blackmailing was probably done for purely defensive/insurance purposes in the event any politico/connected individual he had material on dare crossed him and/or to coerce them into being an asset and ally in stopping investigations/attempts to bring him to justice.
Click to expand...

Your replies do make a lot more sense than most people on this thread, but consider this; why would Epstein, who by all accounts was a very intelligent, worldly character, be so stupid as to videotape hundreds of hours of damning evidence that could be seized by law enforcement at any time, and used to send him to prison? Unless he was videotaping and storing the sex tapes because he was under the impression that he was immune from justice, due to some arrangement with intelligence that would protect him and his trove of child porn.
 
Surrealistik said:
So standard corruption then; the sort of that has been going on since time immemorial but worsened since the floodgates of money in politics opened in the 70s, albeit this time with a probable touch of blackmail.

And I don't really buy the idea that he was an intelligence asset; certainly not at this point in time. Any blackmailing was probably done for purely defensive/insurance purposes in the event any politico/connected individual he had material on dare crossed him and/or to coerce them into being an asset and ally in stopping investigations/attempts to bring him to justice.
Click to expand...

I have the impression that being flagged as an "intelligence asset" is the billionaire\federal version of having a fraternal order of police sticker on your car.

Maybe he was backchannel to his Arab friends or something, maybe he was actively insulating himself from legal dangers, but either way but I don't see it as an acceptable counterweight to child molestation.
 
Fruityfact said:
Hey man if you want to defend pedophiles and those who give pedophiles a pass, by all means do so.
Click to expand...

I want to know the truth of what happened. If that leads to corruption charges filed against Acosta, then so be it.

Now prove this claim please;

Fruityfact said:
It's pretty clear he was bribed.
Click to expand...
 
Casca XV said:
Epstein has donated $150 million to Democrats and just over $18 thousand to the GOP.

Local Law Enforcement (controlled by Democrats) either sabotaged or screwed up the case. They handed it off to Acosta who did the best he could with it.
Click to expand...

The Democrats forced Acosta to give Epstein a sweetheart deal?

I love when you post nonsense.
 
truthatallcost said:
Your replies do make a lot more sense than most people on this thread, but consider this; why would Epstein, who by all accounts was a very intelligent, worldly character, be so stupid as to videotape hundreds of hours of damning evidence that could be seized by law enforcement at any time, and used to send him to prison? Unless he was videotaping and storing the sex tapes because he was under the impression that he was immune from justice, due to some arrangement with intelligence that would protect him and his trove of child porn.
Click to expand...

Hubris (the guy positively oozes it)? Because he stashed it in a place that he thought they wouldn't find it? Because he figured he was above the law? Especially with this footage in his possession?

I mean keep in mind that if he was with intelligence, he probably shouldn't have hundreds of hours of damning evidence on his property (and child porn in his vault) that could be easily seized by (counter)intelligence of Russian, Chinese or other varieties.
 
Casca XV said:
Epstein has donated $150 million to Democrats and just over $18 thousand to the GOP.

Local Law Enforcement (controlled by Democrats) either sabotaged or screwed up the case. They handed it off to Acosta who did the best he could with it.
Click to expand...

tres borrachos said:
The Democrats forced Acosta to give Epstein a sweetheart deal?

I love when you post nonsense.
Click to expand...

Actually, Acosta was the 2nd prosecutor to be given the case. The first refused to press charges altogether:

It’s certainly been easy for the media to forget! In The New York Times’ version of events -- and that of every other news outlet -- the Palm Beach police discovered Epstein was paying minor girls from West Palm Beach for sex ... and then took the case straight to the FBI!

That seems odd: Why wouldn’t police bring their case to the local prosecutor, who was overseeing the investigation and issuing subpoenas?

Because they did.

Unfortunately, the local prosecutor in this case was a sleazebag, activist Democrat named Barry Krischer.

Ann Coulter - Official Home Page
Click to expand...

If people wish to play their childish Gotcha games here, then here you go. Play your hearts out.

PS Tres - don't bellyache about the source, unless you can prove her wrong :)
 
Surrealistik said:
Hubris (the guy positively oozes it)? Because he stashed it in a place that he thought they wouldn't find it? Because he figured he was above the law? Especially with this footage in his possession?

I mean keep in mind that if he was with intelligence, he probably shouldn't have hundreds of hours of damning evidence on his property (and child porn in his vault) that could be easily seized by (counter)intelligence of Russian, Chinese or other varieties.
Click to expand...

Good points surrealistik, but I hope you're willing to indulge me for a brief detour-

I've been reading the 2002 article from nymag that everyone is narrow mindedly obsessing on, because of the Trump quote ('Jeff's a fun guy who loves young women'). I'm positively convinced that Epstein was a fraud of epic proportions, including his so-called 'brilliant mind' for business. The guy never even graduated college, was a school teacher for a few years, then somehow shoots right to the top of the money management world, where he starts his own firm, and tells people to drop dead if they have less than $1 billion to invest with him. Even Bernie Maddof's resume wasn't this absurd.

So Epstein spends the 80's & 90's as an unparalleled 'genius' investor of wealthy clients money, and has no shortage of billionaires lining up to trust him with their fortunes:

Epstein employs around 150 people, in a purely administrative capacity. When it comes to putting these billions to work in the markets, it is Epstein himself making all the investment calls – there are no analysts or portfolio managers, just twenty accountants to keep the wheels greased and a bevy of assistants – many of them conspicuously attractive young women – to organize his hectic life.
Click to expand...

Ah, the genius needs 150 hot young women to tend to his needs, but no financial advisors? No analytics department? I've never heard of a hedge fund operation that manages many billions of dollars being so secretive as to not hire any actual employees from the financial services market.

The story says that one of Epstein's major clients was Leslie Wexner, who along with ex-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, we're both regular visitors to Epstein's house. Benjamin Netanyahu has been lambasting Barak all day today, because Wexner gave Barak $2.5 million for 'research', which seems somehow tied into Epstein's activities.

The whole story reeks of fraudulence Surrealistik. Where's Julian Assange when we need him? :lol:

In spite of the author doting over slimeball Epstein, this is worth a read, as it gives insights into how many people suspected Epstein of being a phony before the sex scandal transpired.

Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery - Nymag
 
Last edited:
truthatallcost said:
Actually, Acosta was the 2nd prosecutor to be given the case. The first refused to press charges altogether:



If people wish to play their childish Gotcha games here, then here you go. Play your hearts out.

PS Tres - don't bellyache about the source, unless you can prove her wrong :)
Click to expand...

Exactly, Acosta was the Federal prosecutor, and he received this screwed up case from the state prosecutors.

Epstein got away with so much for so long because he was bribing the Dems not the GOP.

If busting Epstein now is another attempt to get Trump. It's another thing that will backfire on them.
 
truthatallcost said:
Good points surrealistik, but I hope you're willing to indulge me for a brief detour-

I've been reading the 2002 article from nymag that everyone is narrow mindedly obsessing on, because of the Trump quote ('Jeff's a fun guy who loves young women'). I'm positively convinced that Epstein was a fraud of epic proportions, including his so-called 'brilliant mind' for business. The guy never even graduated college, was a school teacher for a few years, then somehow shoots right to the top of the money management world, where he starts his own firm, and tells people to drop dead if they have less than $1 billion to invest with him. Even Bernie Maddof's resume wasn't this absurd.

So Epstein spends the 80's & 90's as an unparalleled 'genius' investor of wealthy clients money, and has no shortage of billionaires lining up to trust him with their fortunes:



Ah, the genius needs 150 hot young women to tend to his needs, but no financial advisors? No analytics department? I've never heard of a hedge fund operation that manages many billions of dollars being so secretive as to not hire any actual employees from the financial services market.

The story says that one of Epstein's major clients was Leslie Wexner, who along with ex-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, we're both regular visitors to Epstein's house. Benjamin Netanyahu has been lambasting Barak all day today, because Wexner gave Barak $2.5 million for 'research', which seems somehow tied into Epstein's activities.

The whole story reeks of fraudulence Surrealistik. Where's Julian Assange when we need him? :lol:

In spite of the author doting over slimeball Epstein, this is worth a read, as it gives insights into how many people suspected Epstein of being a phony before the sex scandal transpired.

Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery - Nymag
Click to expand...

I think this is all suspect, curious stuff, but what is basically a hearsay account of his operations is probably not the most accurate way to assess who he actually employs.

Overall I don't think there's much in the way of compelling evidence for an intel attachment but I'm willing to be surprised by further information in support of Acosta's claim that strikes me as, at present, blatant, desperate self-preservation and avoidance of accountability.
 
Interesting post. It appears that Bill Clinton's taste for young women runs much deeper than Monica. He takes several trips with Epstein and even ditches his security detail. Don't that seem odd? He and Harvey Weinstein were pretty good buds too, weren't they? Like people always hang together. don't they?

It is also evident that Epstein was buying influence from the Democratic machine. People like this don't give 150 million without getting something in return.

I will wait and see what else comes out before I give Acosta a pass. However, I do find it strange that he was the secondary prosecutor yet none of the Democrats are calling for the head of the main prosecutor. Pretty typical, all's good while the money is rolling in, but when the S hits the fan, it is time to find a Republican and start pointing fingers.

It appears the only politician with any ethics was Trump. Trump was a Democrat at the time but he flipped off all the other Democrats and said, I don't want this sleaze ball in my place. I can see why all the Democrats have their panties in a wad.
 
Casca XV said:
Exactly, Acosta was the Federal prosecutor, and he received this screwed up case from the state prosecutors.

Epstein got away with so much for so long because he was bribing the Dems not the GOP.

If busting Epstein now is another attempt to get Trump. It's another thing that will backfire on them.
Click to expand...

Thanks Casca. If one reviews Acosta's history, they find no instance of a wildly unfair injustice on his behalf, up until he's handed the Epstein disaster-

Then, he became Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division on August 22, 2003, where he was known for increasing federal prosecutions against human trafficking. Acosta authorized federal intervention in an Oklahoma religious liberties case to help assure the right to wear hijab in public school, and worked with Mississippi authorities to reopen the investigation of the 1955 death of Emmett Till, a 14-year-old black youth whose abduction and killing helped spark the civil rights movement. He was the first Hispanic to serve as Assistant Attorney General.

Alexander Acosta - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Something motivated Acosta to act contrary to his past work performance, and I doubt that it was money, or doing a favor for the political party in which he didn't belong.
 
BahamaBob said:
Interesting post. It appears that Bill Clinton's taste for young women runs much deeper than Monica. He takes several trips with Epstein and even ditches his security detail. Don't that seem odd? He and Harvey Weinstein were pretty good buds too, weren't they? Like people always hang together. don't they?

It is also evident that Epstein was buying influence from the Democratic machine. People like this don't give 150 million without getting something in return.

I will wait and see what else comes out before I give Acosta a pass. However, I do find it strange that he was the secondary prosecutor yet none of the Democrats are calling for the head of the main prosecutor. Pretty typical, all's good while the money is rolling in, but when the S hits the fan, it is time to find a Republican and start pointing fingers.

It appears the only politician with any ethics was Trump. Trump was a Democrat at the time but he flipped off all the other Democrats and said, I don't want this sleaze ball in my place. I can see why all the Democrats have their panties in a wad.
Click to expand...

Right, and it's as if Democrats wish to disown Bill Clinton now, after years of characterizing his impeachment as 'a vast right wing conspiracy'. Maybe Ken Starr was onto something, but lacked the needed evidence, which we surely no longer lack. Bill Clinton is a sexual predator. His wife knew that he is a sexual predator. They both need to be investigated, and possibly imprisoned.
 
antiquity said:
Didn't the democratic AG of the Southern state of New York request a lenient sentence for Epstein and the Judge laughed at him...
Click to expand...

Did they? If so, that would be a form of corruption too.

Not interested in a Dem/GOP pi$$ng contest on this issue: if an individual is corrupt, I'm happy to say so. I don't believe the rich and powerful should be let of just because they are rich, 'left' or 'right'.

But this requires a link at least or a quote - after all that should be a matter of public record. So go grab the citation and I will happily post it with a quote underneath stating "this is also corrupt behavior".

Or go pee on another leg.
 
Last edited:
truthatallcost said:
Actually, Acosta was the 2nd prosecutor to be given the case. The first refused to press charges altogether:



If people wish to play their childish Gotcha games here, then here you go. Play your hearts out.

PS Tres - don't bellyache about the source, unless you can prove her wrong :)
Click to expand...


Acosta asserted that because the State of Florida botched the case, he had only limited resources for making federal charges. This may or may not be the truth, I don't know the legalities involved. Still, he claimed that even getting Epstein labeled a sex offender was more of an accomplishment than Florida had been able to manage.
 
antiquity said:
Didn't the democratic AG of the Southern state of New York request a lenient sentence for Epstein and the Judge laughed at him...
Click to expand...

Who is the AG of the Southern State of NY?

I think you are confusing the STATE OF NY who has an AG, and the Southern DISTRICT of NY, which is the Feds.

Anyway neither is true. It was a Manhattan prosecutor who asked for leniency for the lowest possible sex offender status(not a sentence, he wasn't sentenced in NY) for Epstein, but the Judge said no..
 
Last edited:
Rogue Valley said:
He did try and exculpate himself.....

Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta has no good answer for cushy Jeffrey Epstein plea deal

Alex Acosta is still a pervert's best friend and a victim's worst enemy.....

Trump labor secretary who cut Epstein deal plans to slash funds for sex trafficking victims
Click to expand...

I'm not impressed with Acosta's press conference, which was aired after I posted this thread. Standing by his decision to fluff Epstein is the worst thing he could do at this point. It makes him look cold and indifferent to the victims. Not sure how this is going to play out, but if this is how he wants to address the miscarriage of justice, then he loses my support.

I'm still convinced that Epstein may have been part of an intelligence operation, as his entire public image is crumbling, and he likely never even operated a hedge fund company.
 
Ouroboros said:
Acosta asserted that because the State of Florida botched the case, he had only limited resources for making federal charges. This may or may not be the truth, I don't know the legalities involved. Still, he claimed that even getting Epstein labeled a sex offender was more of an accomplishment than Florida had been able to manage.
Click to expand...

That's because the prosecutor for West Palm Beach declined to file charges. It's really not looking good for Acosta at this point, and unless he can pull a rabbit out of his hat by dropping the name of an intelligence official who told him to back off (career jeopardizing move) then he's going to go down in history as a bad prosecutor who broke federal laws by keeping Epstein's victims in the dark about the plea arrangement.
 
bomberfox said:
Oh so a spooky tin foil hat thing.
Click to expand...

Kind of, bomberfox. It is typically used as a form of scapegoating to place the blame of inefficiency and poor responsiveness in government on unelected mandarins within a given bureaucracy stymying the government's enacting of beneficial policies for the purposes of furthering a hidden agenda or guarding vested interests. In its most broad and brief definition, the so-called "deep state" is when government agencies and bureaucracies have little to no governmental oversight by elected politicians and can act to undo or undermine policies of the elected government, or can act freely without oversight to pursue their own agendas, benevolent or malevolent.

In my opinion the most notable example of this in modern times were governmental intelligence agencies such as the NSA creating the PRISM program, and when former director of intelligence James Clapper either lied to Congress about it or simply did not know about the extent of the government's unwarranted data collection program against American citizens. Now, of course, large-scale intelligence-gathering operations do not arise from mistakes and bureaucratic oversights. They have to be planned and coordinated on a massive scale. Now, however much you choose to believe him, when the Director of National Intelligence claims to not even know the extent of the massive coordinated spy campaigns going on under his watch, that is when one can reasonably argue that we have something of a "Deep State."
 
Last edited:
Felis Leo said:
Kind of, bomberfox. It is typically used as a form of scapegoating to place the blame of inefficiency and poor responsiveness in government on unelected mandarins within a given bureaucracy stymying the government's enacting of beneficial policies for the purposes of furthering a hidden agenda or guarding vested interests. In its most broad and brief definition, the so-called "deep state" is when government agencies and bureaucracies have little to no governmental oversight by elected politicians and can act to undo or undermine policies of the elected government, or can act freely without oversight to pursue their own agendas, benevolent or malevolent.

In my opinion the most notable example of this in modern times were governmental intelligence agencies such as the NSA creating the PRISM program, and when former director of intelligence James Clapper either lied to Congress about it or simply did not know about the extent of the government's unwarranted data collection program against American citizens. Now, of course, large-scale intelligence-gathering operations do not arise from mistakes and bureaucratic oversights. They have to be planned and coordinated on a massive scale. Now, however much you choose to believe him, when the Director of National Intelligence claims to not even know the extent of the massive coordinated spy campaigns going on under his watch, that is when one can reasonably argue that we have something of a "Deep State."
Click to expand...
Man you really do get me to think. Much respect.
 
227523_600.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom