« The sky will be full of internet satellites | Main | Boeing - Sleazy Deal Confirms Downfall By Walrus. »

16 July 2019


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I had hoped we would learn from today's hearings more regarding Epstein's source of wealth - and exactly how much it was.

Plus more info on his doctored passport.

More about the money trail between him and various Florida officials.

Anyone new calling the tip line - especially from during his time as a teacher at that prep school in NY?

And more about the Dershowitz and Starr involvement back 12 years ago.

Unfortunately the food fight between Trump and the four frosh sucked all the air out of the media.


Why nobody is above the law! Not even a President! Oh! Wait! 23 flights! And a scion of the house of Windsor allegedly involved as well?

Is it going to be possible to clean the stable? If it isn’t, you have lost your Republic.


Came across this site with the court documents .The FBI travelled to Australia in 2011 and interviewed ms Roberts at the american consulate in Sydney.9 years ago then in 2015 she sued Epstein and maxwell.Only now in 2019 did Epstein fly back from Paris knowing he was going to be arrested.
Some of those girls were collecting info for him and getting paid.The whole thing stinks time to call in the plumbers.

John Minehan

I saw this in a couple of places (https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/i-was-told-epstein-belonged-to-intelligence-and-to-leave-it-alone; https://www.dailywire.com/news/49355/acosta-was-told-epstein-belonged-intelligence-ryan-saavedra; https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2019/07/10/alex-acosta-mean-allegedly-said-epstein-belonged-intelligence/) and I'm not sure if it the report is accurate. (It's not showing up in the NY Times or The economist. But it doesn't seem impossible.

Many things are disposed of by plea Bargaining. With high profile crimes, it is always difficult to know if you did the right thing. Here, it is fairly obvious it wasn't. Acosta is a Harvard College/HLS, a very able and connected guy and his error here has damaged his life.


The part that I haven't seen being reported or discussed:

"The federal non-prosecution agreement Epstein's legal team negotiated with the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida immunized all named and unnamed "potential co-conspirators" in Epstein's child trafficking network, which includes those who allegedly procured minors for Epstein and also any powerbrokers who may have molested them."

Who gets a plea deal in which "all named and unnamed potential co-conspirators" get immunity?


Barbara Ann

Department of what now?

Thanks for the link to the NPA I didn't realize it was in the public domain, it is an astonishing read. I'm not familiar with NPA's (having never been party to one!) so forgive me if the following questions are uninformed:

To what extent are NPA's legally binding upon the USG, are there circumstances where a court can set one aside for reasons other than breach of contract?

The NPA appears to try and indemnify Epstein and both known and unknown co-conspirators (Ghislaine Maxwell?) in both the offenses prosecuted and any other offenses subject to the joint USAO/FBI investigation. In fact on page 5 the indemnity given uses the wording "the [US] also agrees it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein included but not limited to.." (my emphasis) i.e. scope here appears to be unlimited. This cannot be legally enforceable surely?

I thought NPA's were used to go after people further up the food chain. This one seems to have given carte blanche immunity to all involved at every level. I'm astonished Acosta had the authority, merely with "consultation" within DOJ to do this. This is a travesty and is starting to make FISA abuse look like chicken feed.


Was Acosta making an “error”? Looks to me he was a fully paid up member of the Swamp, doing what swampians do and he will no doubt settle back into a Swamp law firm or Professorship somewhere. Weep not for him.


What a fantastic piece! Excellent work and I cannot poke a hole in the reasoning.


As previously observed, Epstein is going to be killed. Arkancide. The poor schmuck that does it won’t realise that he is next.



yes. I con't see him living much longer. On Morning joe today, Joe and his imbecile consort went on at length about a party in 1992 at Mar A Lago for a bunch of NFL cheerleaders. Trump, Epstein and other me stood around ogling the ladies. So what! Not a wird was said about the absent Bill Clinton.


Doubt if Bubba Bill was involved in any of Epstein's sexual shenanigans after being burnt by Lewinsky. Clinton always had the proverbial ability to "talk a dog off a gut wagon" and could most likely find an agreeable partner elsewhere. Might be wrong but doubt it.


If I understand correctly, Epstein broke the agreement. Would it follow that the WTF!? immunity deal is now nixed?

What a rotten underbelly oozes out. This foul beast needs to be wrestled into the light. Where is the people's champion? There must be some good people in there somewhere.

John Minnerath

Crossing the Clinton cabal in any manner is seriously dangerous.
The list of those who have and died mysteriously is very long.



Thanks for your excellent write-up.

The sweetheart deal that Epstein received from Acosta and the DOJ seems rather unusual for the felony that is such a social taboo as you note. Not only did he get off extremely lightly but his co-conspirators were completely let off the hook. The way the children who were raped were also treated by the courts was also shameful.

This case epitomizes the travesty of the current state of the rule of law. Sexual predators of children are typically thrown the book and quickly taken off the streets to serve a long sentence. Not only did that not happen but even worse he was allowed to continue his despicable behavior out in the open even when he was supposed to be serving his sentence. Clearly he had some powerful friends in the Bush administration, but even with these connections when such execrable behavior is shown repeatedly there were none with a conscience. A sad testament to the state of our justice system.

Do you think the current case will also just be another white wash or do you think the DOJ will pursue the investigation with vigor to get to the bottom of his finances and all the other sexual predators of children in his orbit?

The Twisted Genius

Ogling NFL cheerleaders, big deal. That seemed pretty normal to me. I'm waiting for more to come out about the 1992 private party at Mar a Lago with Trump, Epstein and 28 calendar girls. I get the feeling Trump is going tweet crazy right now primarily to change the subject. With Trump, Clinton, the DOJ enablers who protected Epstein and probably a host of others, Epstein is bound to be whacked as you and walrus said.

Marc b.

Arkancide? Epstein is linked with E Barak, and Nicole Junkermann, per flight logs. Presumably that is the intelligence link Acosta was babbling about.


Mark Logan


Epstein's NPA was limited to the Florida district of federal courts, hence another branch of the federal courts, the Southern District of New York, was free to re-open the issue..and did.

Acosta says he acted in accordance with his superior's wishes at the DOJ. Plausible, but lets see some corroborating evidence. If he agreed to negotiate this NPA without getting his boss's orders in writing he is a remarkable fool.


Yes, the MSM are predictably silent about Bill Clinton and other leftists who are/were buddies with Epstein. I guess with all of his money, he could murder someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and...

"imbecile consort". THANK you, you made my day!

robt willmann

Barbara Ann,

You are perceptive about the Epstein plea bargain / non-prosecution agreement (NPA). The one for Epstein is the complete opposite of what happens in federal criminal cases. Yes, agreements between the Justice Department and defendants are often used "to go after people further up the food chain". There will be a plea bargain with a cooperation section in it. If cooperation is not part of the arrangement, that section is left out.

They have a standard form they use for plea bargains, and some sections may be in or out of it depending on the situation. Classic examples are those that were used by "special counsel" Robert Mueller when he went around putting the squeeze on people. Here is the agreement between the Mueller group and Richard Gates, who was around Paul Manafort during the Trump campaign--


The usual plea agrement requires the defendant to plead guilty to some federal criminal offense. The Epstein agreement did not require him to plead to a federal crime. It also did not require him to debrief or provide them with information. To the contrary, it required that the federal government do nothing to him or to other people who helped him or conspired with him to commit federal crimes!

John Minehan

I'm not a Trump supporter, but you have to say this for Trump: he banned Jeffery Epstein from his properties and made him PNG when Trump had complaints about the man's conduct on site.

Barbara Ann

Many thanks for your kind response Robert. The agreement reads as the product of Epstein's attorneys saying "jump" and the DOJ responding with "how high?".



"who protected Epstein"... Donald Trump was not president nor was he directing the DOJ when this plea deal was made. NBC news showed some video from 1992, more than 25 years ago, which was also broadcast on multiple networks. Just like the Access Hollywood tape it is a distraction but I believe it is an effort to distract away from the owner of the Lolita Express and one of the "founders" of the Clinton Foundation, Mr. Epstein, and certainly his connection with those having a long term association with him. A lot of other nations' governments funneled money into the Clinton Foundation and its "global initiative".

A whole lot of prominent Democrats were involved with that including people like Cheryl Mills, Hilary's legal council and Chief of Staff at State. I believe there was a special deal cut for her too as part of the email investigation and now the DOJ inspector general is conducting an investigation in which Christopher Wray and deleted emails figure prominently. By all means Trump was with little girls and photos of a newly divorced boor standing around looking at half drunk adult women is all the evidence we need. We definitely don't need to look into the connections between a member of the Board of Directors of the Clinton Foundation and things like what Cheryl Mills knew, when she new it, and just what Christopher Wray was trying to cover up.


the interpretation of banning Epstein that you offer may indeed be a clear decision based on the insight that Epstein was behaving in an unacceptable way that should be sanctioned.

That's IMO a rather optimistic view since it assumes clear decisions and insights from Mr. Trump.

Here's a different and a bit more pessimistic view:

With Mr. Trump it also may be a simple business calculation assumption - that the nasty, misbehaving Epstein was bad for business.

Thus making him a PNG (persona non grata) was made for one because Epstein was bad for quarter numbers and then that the customers retained were more profitable than he anyway and that misbehaviour was just the more open uttered reason.

Looks about the same but there's that tiny nuance between what he did and why he did it.


The difference between horseplay, fun and flirting and sexual assault of a minor can be difficult to spot. I was once invited to a party with a lot of booze, pool and spas in use and everyone was having a good time.........Then my schoolteacher partner noticed something I missed - our hostess dancing and laughing with the fourteen year old son of one of the other guests. My partner suddenly dragged me out of that party so fast my feet didn’t touch the floor. I was really annoyed, folk were just having fun.

A week later she explained what I had missed - the boy was getting aroused and the hostess knew it. The is that fact that mere attendance when something like that is going on makes you an accessory.

blue peacock

If the DOJ wants to get to the bottom of this child sex trafficking ring they can. They have the authority, the resources and the means. The question of course is will they?

The Acosta deal as Robert points out was highly unusual. Essentially the government agreed to handcuff itself while allowing Epstein and his associates to continue their child rape fetish.

Isn't it lovely that we lecture the world on human rights and rule of law?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad