Is Epstein's arrest and indictment part of Barr's counter-offensive?

IMO AG Barr is conducting a general counter-offensive against "the resistance."  He has his bulldog Durham organizing indictments for the former underground in DoJ and the FBI.  He has DoJ IG Horowitz' report on malfeasance coming out soon.  He has that fellow out in Utah who must have done something in all this elapsed time.  He has various cats and dogs in DoJ running down a variety of blood trails looking for dead men walking.

And then there is Jeffrey Epstein (the man who loved childwomen).  The timing is interesting as a part of the putative Barr counter-offensive.  Is Trump vulnerable?  Probably not unless he was so self-indulgent as to let Epstein ("a great guy") loan him one of these girls in days of yore.  On the positive side Trump did ban Epstein from Mar a Lago a while back for an assault on a young woman.  No.  the vulnerables would seem to be mostly on the other side, especially the Clintons.  Bill is a prospective figure of interest no matter what his spokesman said of his innocence and her majesty is toast if it can be shown that she was knowledgeable of adventures in Epsteinland.  She doesn't have to have participated in the Epstein child care program.  She merely has to have been contemporaneously knowledgeable.

Epstein flew back into the US aboard his private 727 (aka The Lolita Express).  He must have thought he had the situation "wired."  Apparently the AG did not accept the terms of the old Florida deal.   IMO Barr is following his own program in this.  Trump is merely a pleased spectator.  pl

Comments

[Jack]

Sir

What do you make of media reports of Bill Barr's father having hired Epstein as a school teacher? Why do you think they're going after him now considering his "protected" status and do you believe that they'll also go after the other high profile potential child rapists who took advantage of the Lolita Express?

https://www.lawandcrime.com/high-profile/william-barr-reveals-has-recused-himself-from-jeffrey-esptein-case-heres-the-reason-he-gave

[PRC90]

Timing is (just about) everything, including within the art of public swamp draining.
I'm not familiar with the pace of legal proceedings of this nature through the US Court system, however Trump will be in an advantageous position if Barr's processes are timed to result in convictions and penalties being handed out to various well known DNC and IC luminaries immediately before the 2020 election date.
The mistake would be to rely on any convictions of the 2016 players to discredit the DNC candidate of 2020. The Clintons, et al, are current era irrelevancies or indeed parodies, and they and proof of long gone conspiracies would be seen as separate issues to whatever the Democrat candidate, eg., Elizabeth Warren, can credibly promise for 2020-24.
Trump will still have to fight 2020, not re run 2016.

I think the answer to the above question is 'yes' within the context that ever action the WH takes from now on in, be it relating to Epsteins or Iranians, will be with the 2020 outcome as the prime determinant.

[Bill H]

This action is being brought by the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, which is/are also bring charges against Trump parallel to the federal charges which fizzled. It looks to me like that is another attempt to bring down an elected president. From Vox News:

"Trump, meanwhile, reportedly attended Epstein-hosted events in New York and Florida, as Epstein patronized the Mar-a-Lago Club. In 2002, Trump even gave a remarkable on-the-record comment about Epstein to a New York magazine journalist, calling him 'terrific' and adding that he 'likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.'”

And, "During the 2016 campaign, Trump was sued by an anonymous woman who claimed he raped her at an Epstein party when she was 13 years old."

I don't regard Vox as a reliable source, but am citing them here as representative of what the "story line" will be.

[casey]

I wonder whether domestic Israeli politics is also involved here, too, in the form of Barak being fingered, so to speak, for his Epstein connections, via Wexner, in order to smear him as election time approaches.

[eakens]

I think this may be Barr putting Mueller on notice in advance of congressional testimony, given that is very likely that Mueller is implicated in this whole Epstein affair.

I also think Les Wexner needs to be stripped of his fortune. I believe he was in cahoots with Epstein in this entrapment operation that was run.

[Harry]

Utterly fascinating. Watching the US "nomenclatura" fight it out, gloves off. Us mere mortals never usually get to gawp on their goings on.

[R]

The argument for Barr's counteroffensive is strengthened by his recusal reversal. Doubt still remains though as to what is really going on. If the court filings at the below are accurate--graphic reading in some instances--POTUS was enmeshed in the Epstein-Maxwell op:

https://thememoryhole2.org/blog/doe-v-trump

[Paco]

¿City on a hill?
Caligula an Nero look good compared to that tribe.

[Bill Wade]

Bloomberg today is reporting that AG Barr is not recusing himself from this case, rumors were yesterday that he was going to do that.

Interesting video if you have 30+ minutes to spare:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=Vc-uysS6Tlw

[Barbara Ann]

Timing is indeed everything. Russiagate set the precedent for lawfare to become a normal part of the political process and I'd fully expect Trump to maximize it to his own advantage in the run up to 2020.

Lolitagate may be targeting the Clintons and you are probably right that the Clintons need not drag down someone like Warren simply because of party association. However, I'd bet Barr can be relied upon to do plenty of damage to the Dems which will affect voters next year. It depends how high up the Russiagate blowback goes. I'd not expect any Dem candidate to beat Trump if the guts of the coup plot spill out in public, especially if St. Obama is implicated - that would be a dagger to the heart.

This is why I found it interesting to see the Strzok-Page texts info the Favored Fox News Channel had, referred to in Larry's last post. I'd expect more of the same building to a crescendo at the most opportune time. Trump is a ruthless SOB and I expect his revenge will be sweet.

[ambrit (ex Britam)]

Sir;
Which "...her majesty..." do you refer to? There is HRH HRC, ie. Hillary, the Dowager of the White House and there is Elizabeth Rex, the real Queen of England. Both are associated with potential 'co-defendants' of Epstein.
As to the relevance of the Clintons in this election cycle, well, the Clinton Foundation still wields considerable power in internal Democrat Party affairs. Any real damage done to Bill Clinton will be a body blow to the now old guard Democrat 'Nomenklatura.'
It will be interesting to see how fast and how vehement the 'denunciations,' or lack thereof, of Bill Clinton will be. The Democrat insiders might spin this one as a 'litmus test' of Party loyalty.
The organized sexual exploitation of children has absolutely no excuse. Epstein has skated away on thin ice concerning this so far. His 'plea deal' from earlier was an abomination. It included a blanket immunity for anyone who aided and abetted him in the the sexual exploitation of these girls.
I don't care what Barr's motivations are. Here's to his continuing success in the vital democratic process of showing Justice to be carried out.

[Lars]

All the conspiracies withstanding, the Miami Herald was going public with the details and thus forcing the prosecutors to act. There seems to be a "public corruption" angle to this, which will also be revealed in the future. It would appear that Epstein has deserved all the attention.

[Cortes]

Agreed.

It seems like the Bona Dea scandal with Century XXI media and makes me fearful.

Lots of potential for unleashed mayhem.

Been wrong many times before and hope I’m overreacting.

The essays of James Kunstler are persuasive to me.

Kunstler.com

[Mark Logan]

If it is an offensive they've thrown one of their own under the bus to conduct it.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/452202-trump-defends-acosta-amid-epstein-scrutiny

Acosta appears to be first up for the whipping post. Even if he blames it on someone else what will be on his resume afterwards would likely prove disqualifying at a Hong Kong rubber dog-poop factory.

[turcopolier]

Acosta is a nobody. He fits nicely under the bus. How much do you think he made on the plea bargain?

[Patrick Armstrong]

Hah Hah! If you guys hadn't revolted against your Lawful King 200+whatnot years ago, your only concerns today would be about socks.
https://footwearnews.com/2018/fashion/celebrity-style/justin-trudeau-sock-sales-impact-stance-halal-517799/

[ted richard]

there is a larger issue going on.

for a not insignificant percentage of americans the fairness and integrity of the us justice system is now viewed with deep skepticism all the way to out right contempt.

if this nation has any chance of surviving intact and in a manner that engenders respect and belief we have arrived at that moment when heads must roll for all the vile things done and never punished by so called untouchables (political, financial, popular celebrity).

epsteins arrest had better be merely point of the lance or you can start the count down clock on our political dissolution.

[Patrick Armstrong]

Bona Dea scandal!! Holy Cow!! That's an arcane reference. Who is Caesar's wife in this one? Who is Clodius?

[Johnb]

Yes my first and ongoing question is ‘Who’s being targeted’ given that 2020 is underway. Given the Steele dossier is there any link to the leaking of the Ambassador cables just prior to this announcement. I’m way to far removed to comment further at this stage.

[The Twisted Genius]

I think AG Barr will be looking for ways to quash the Epstein affair. That’s why he refused to recuse. Trump has more exposure to this than you think. Trump was already accused of sexual assault of a young girl in the company of Epstein a while back. The girl dropped her complaint out of fear. Perhaps we’ll hear from her again now the SDNY is on the case or her photo is contained in the files seized from Epstein’s mansion. Trump was also seen frequenting Epstein’s NY house by witnesses. I doubt it was for poetry readings. In addition to infamously singing Epstein’s praises back in 2002, Trump also admitted during an on air interview with Howard Stern that he was a sexual predator.

I am surprised Trump didn’t throw Acosta under the bus already. To the contrary, he’s standing by him and claiming Acosta’s a great guy. At least he’s now claiming he’s no longer a fan of Epstein. I’m sure he prudently dropped Epstein like a hot potato once he was first indicted. I’m waiting for Trump to deny ever meeting him or claiming he was just a coffee boy any day now.

On another front, Trump’s allies are not happy with the DOJIG interview with Steele. After 16 hours of questioning, the IG investigators found Steele’s testimony credible and even surprising. The IG probed Steele’s extensive work on Russian interference efforts outside his dossier, his intelligence-collection methods and his findings about Carter Page and came away believing him.

[robt willmann]

The timing of the arrest of Epstein is indeed fascinating. The indictment which was of course unsealed yesterday, 8 July, shows a filing date of 2 July 2019, which was last week Tuesday. The search warrant on his residence was executed shortly after he was arrested on 6 July. That search warrant had to be supported by an affidavit containing recent information showing that evidence relating to a particular crime should be found there. An affidavit cannot have "stale" or out-of-date information in it; if it does, the warrant is no good and the evidence gathered can be excluded from a trial. So, the search warrant affidavit should be interesting in itself.

As an outside observer, the only explanations that make sense about the absurd plea bargain agreement from 2007-2008 are that it was the result of either bribery, or an order that came down from someone above Alex Acosta in the heirarchy at the Department of Justice, and he followed orders. Or maybe both. The excuse that the federal Justice Department cowed down just because there were some experienced lawyers representing the defendant is not credible.

Another observation is that Jeffrey Epstein has been and is a front man for an organization or organizations, that could be governmental, private, or both.

[Mark Logan]

Whatever it was it was a fool's wages.

[Fred]

Bill,

You are right about the storyline/narrative in the making. Christine Beasley Ford, the sequal. There are other reports out in the press that Trump had Epstein banned from Mar-a-Lago after his conduct there. Sounds like Walrus' comments on a prior thread about the truly rich having their own folks investigate people before they get involved socially are accurate regarding Trump. He's be active in NYC, charity and entertainment circles for decades. I'm sure he's seen this kind of stuff destroy people many times.

[Bill Wade]

I couldn't agree more, with the presiding judge being a Clinton appointee and one of the prosecutors being Comey's daughter, it's the US Justice Department on trial as much as it is Epstein.

[Eric Newhill]

Fred,
This article paints a little bit different picture. If the article is accurate, New York high society is apparently more degenerate than the movers and shakers that Walrus apparently knows.

"Why was Epstein so easily rehabilitated? He was smart. Attractive. Rich. And that is a potent combination. As David Patrick Columbia, editor of New York Social Diary, explained it for the Times: “A jail sentence doesn't matter anymore. The only thing that gets you shunned in New York society is poverty.”

https://www.salon.com/2019/07/09/i-was-a-friend-of-jeffrey-epstein-heres-what-i-know/