Try one or the other of these links and watch it all the way through. This is a remarkable piece of television journalism in a corrupt age. pl
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/woman-in-nyt-s-trump-piece-disputes-report-686463555992
« The View From The Farm By Walrus. | Main | The Geopolitics Of the Battle of the Military Budget »
The comments to this entry are closed.
This story has been around for a couple of years -- I think in 2013 the UK's Daily Mail had an expose on Prince Andrew's involvement with respect to Epsteinian trysts (which has never been confirmed, to my knowledge) as well as Bill Clinton's flights on the venerable L_Express. Paradoxically (we, having booted the crown in the US) our press is much more deferential to power than the chattering professionals in England.
Posted by: DC | 16 May 2016 at 09:30 PM
Mica's body language says it all. Be prepared to find out that Donald Trump is not Gary Hart nor does he conduct himself like Monica Lewinsky's married boyfriend. Apparently he actually hires and promoted women and they don't all find him to be as offensive as the Borg says he is. On the Jeffrey Epstein link, why does Bill Clinton have anything to do with a sexual predator? or is that term only used to describe convicted sexual offenders who have neither money nor political connections?
Posted by: Fred | 16 May 2016 at 10:55 PM
The filed document accusing Epstein of organizing the sexual services of minors for himself, Alan Dershowitz and others is here--
http://www.scribd.com/doc/252990214/Jeffrey-Epstein-Prince-Andrew-Alan-Dershowitz-Sex-Slave-Lawsuit
The United States District Court, Southern District of Florida. The document itself is dated December 30, 2014
I am aware of this story, but haven't followed it.
Posted by: Castellio | 16 May 2016 at 11:27 PM
This could change the entire political landscape. HRC's head will explode when forced to choose between standing by a truly hideous excuse for a husband and continuing on her quest for personal power. Trump could get sucked into this same maelstrom. He also has a lot of connections with Epstein. He was named in a sexual assault suit, along with Epstein, involving a thirteen year old girl in April. Trump once said this of Epstein, "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it -- Jeffrey enjoys his social life." This is the kind of story that sells. I predict a feeding frenzy that stands a good chance of wiping out the front runners in both parties.
http://www.dailywire.com/news/5556/7-things-you-need-know-about-trump-and-sex-slave-amanda-prestigiacomo
https://news.vice.com/article/the-salacious-ammo-even-donald-trump-wont-use-in-a-fight-against-hillary-clinton-bill-clinton
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 16 May 2016 at 11:46 PM
Seems Trump was no stranger to Epstein.
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/ This article is from 2003.
"I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,'' Trump booms from a speakerphone. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it -- Jeffrey enjoys his social life."
Maybe this explains why Trump has not brought up the issue.
Posted by: wrxlly | 16 May 2016 at 11:51 PM
Sir
The Borg Queen plans to put Bill in charge of revitalizing the economy. This is rather interesting as the economy is a significant part of national policy. If I understand her correctly she is saying that she is less competent on financial matters and that we're getting a twofer if we elect her.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3593434/Bill-Clinton-Dude-Hillary-says-ll-husband-charge-revitalizing-economy.html
Are people prepared for the return of the joint tenure of the Clintons?
Posted by: Jack | 17 May 2016 at 12:16 AM
Hmm, Trump was Roy Cohn's boy for a decade. There are stories about Cohn that almost anticipate the stories about Greenberg. The chances these cans of worms see the light of day are nil unless Trump and Putin are somehow working together.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/20/roy-cohn-donald-trump-joseph-mccarthy-rosenberg-trial
Posted by: Nana2007 | 17 May 2016 at 12:58 AM
Who does Epstein work for?
Posted by: rjj | 17 May 2016 at 03:34 AM
What conversations were going on inside MSNBC which allowed that programme to go out?
Perhaps they interviewed the woman to back up the NYT story and she spilled the beans? From then on it took on its own crazy logic? Were all MSNBC's executives on holiday at once?
I can understand the Borg backing Trump against Sanders, but Trump against Hillary?
Posted by: johnf | 17 May 2016 at 08:20 AM
TTG, Sir
I can see how the tales of Epstein, his high placed pals among the elite engaging in pedophilia and then essentially getting away with a sweetheart deal with the DOJ does not get picked up more by our sensationalist media. Too many of our elites are engaged in these types of reprehensible behavior. And as is evidently clear there is the law as applied to the common folk and then the application of the law as it relates to our elites. That is why it's gonna take more than just push back from some segments of the population to defeat the Borg. We'll need another revolution. That's not gonna happen anytime soon.
Posted by: Jack | 17 May 2016 at 09:38 AM
Epstein is a billionaire Wall St bankster.
Wall St is bankrolling the Borg Queen and now Trump has hired a man from the Vampire Squid as chief of his campaign fund raising.
Posted by: Jack | 17 May 2016 at 09:44 AM
TTG: I wasn't joking in the earlier post. I do hope you write a novel or memoir. Choosing between being a Catholic missionary and a Green Beret would make a great read.
Posted by: Matthew | 17 May 2016 at 09:57 AM
johnf
It was live on the air. This morning was much more restrained. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 17 May 2016 at 09:58 AM
Must read. Absolute must read. I recommend the Wikipedia article about Cohn as background.
Trump? For me, it's all about foreign policy, and, surprise surprise, it is for the Times too. The Times is a propaganda mouthpiece for military adventure and world domination. The fact that the Times publishes hit pieces parading as news about Trump every hour, leads me to believe that they actually believe he would interfere with military adventure and world domination. That's good enough for me. Pull the lever for Trump.
In fact, I don't think there is a better endorsement possible for Trump than the unremitting propaganda tsunami against him from the Times.
Clinton was fellated by an intern in the Oval Office and then swore under oath that they didn't have sex. The part of that which is the most abhorrent is that she was an intern. He took advantage of his position to screw around with the life of a young person for gratuitous sex. Absolutely morally abhorrent. But the Times is on board. See previous paragraph.
Posted by: Bill Herschel | 17 May 2016 at 10:15 AM
johnf "I can understand the Borg backing Trump against Sanders, but Trump against Hillary?"
I find it rather curious that the Morning Joe panel did not mention any of the many well documented "social" ties between Trump and Epstein. It took me 5 min in Google to find good solid information about this and I was not looking for it specifically but for Epstein-Clinton links. The Epstein story is more potentially damning for Trump imo, because Hillary can always claim ignorance of Bill's behaviour. In any case it seems Hillary is going to sink because of her own criminal behaviour. There are clear signs from within the Democrat establishment that they are already working on a Biden bid for the nomination at the convention once Hillary collapses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVKJyre1HdY (Is Joe Biden Going to Jump Into Presidential Race Now?!)
Maybe this explains why MSNBC would air something like this.
The Sanders people should be all over this.
Posted by: wrxlly | 17 May 2016 at 10:33 AM
That's not quite what I meant.
Posted by: rjj | 17 May 2016 at 10:48 AM
The obvious pain and sense of defeat exuded by the Trump hating feminist reporter (woman in blue) is simply delicious. Her agony well exceeds the wailing and gnashing of teeth from all of her male colleagues. Well worth the watch for that alone.
Posted by: no one | 17 May 2016 at 11:42 AM
wrxlly,
A multi-page story with one throw away line from Trump and many, many references to Clinton being on the predator's plane? Trump should bring it up again and again. Every voter in America just loves money managers who make most of their wealth off currency trading and financial "management" for people with a paltry $1 billion in assets.
Posted by: Fred | 17 May 2016 at 11:43 AM
TTG,
The girl never appeared on the list of named victims and AFAIK has no lawyer supporting her. I don't think Emperor Trump (PBUH) has anything to worry about.
FWIW those links are basically HuffPo level of hysteria.
Posted by: Tyler | 17 May 2016 at 12:19 PM
Colonel,
Joe Scarborough pretended that he doesn't know about Epstein back in January also:
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mark-finkelstein/2016/01/08/scarborough-msm-wont-mention-bill-clinton-and-jeffrey-epstein
So it makes one wonders!
Posted by: The Beaver | 17 May 2016 at 12:35 PM
22 trips on the Lolita Express and Bill Clinton didn't partake of the candy?
No way.
Posted by: James Loughton | 17 May 2016 at 12:46 PM
Beaver
Scarborough plays an interesting "Senator Foghorn Leghorn" caricature character on that show in the AM. It is "arch" and filled with sarcasm and irony. Do not be deceived. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 17 May 2016 at 01:00 PM
His close associate is Robert Maxwell's daughter Ghisliane Maxwell. Now that is something to get the old conspiracy theories started once you throw in Robert Maxwell. A lot of prime blackmail material could have been collected.
The historian Paul Johnson said the two most evil people he had the misfortune to meet were Robert Maxwell and Pablo Picasso.
Posted by: LondonBob | 17 May 2016 at 01:01 PM
She'll just stick to her forte, foreign policy aka regime change, and leave the rest to Bubba.
Posted by: steve | 17 May 2016 at 01:19 PM
I saw the MSNBC segment live. I was truly astonished watching the panel actually going outside the narrow parameters of status-quo journalism.
Posted by: steve | 17 May 2016 at 01:26 PM