Finally, the first Epstein charge has come in.
(twitter.com)
Comments (37)
sorted by:
Note that he is being charged for threatening to kill people on the Epstein List, as well as three government officials. But this is supposed to be a 'true threat'.
Suppose I say that I vow to kill everyone on an empty list. Is that a true threat? What if I believe that the list is not empty?
It's weird all around.
The bar that SCOTUS has previously set for protected vs unprotected speech is that your threat must be realistically actionable in order for it to qualify as a genuine death threat, just as incitement to violence is only criminal if there is a realistic possibility that someone might actually act on your words.
Threatening to kill hypothetical individuals on a hypothetical list that official sources all insist is not real does not seem to meet that criterion, but we'll see if the courts try to walk it back.
It's going to massively depend on the quality of his lawyer. If he ends up with a public defender he's fucked because they're overworked and they advise everyone to plea bargain to get the case off their plates ASAP. A lawyer with the time and talent could easily get this tossed, but those cost a pretty penny.
The list doesn't need to exist for this statement to be a threat. All that has to happen is someone needs to furnish him a list of their enemies and convince him it's The Epstein List™️. And I doubt that would be terribly difficult given the guy is clearly an absolute retard if he's willing to announce his murder spree ahead of time.
Man, way too many retards here downvoting you who can't recognize obvious truths that contradict their feelings.
We're not going to win anything by behaving like abject retards, so if you are an abject retard, please try and engage appropriately. Everyone else needs to pay attention to that shit, so you don't unconsciously internalize it yourselves just because someone typed a few words that trigger you like "Epstein List". It is not at all an exaggeration to say that a healthy portion of the need for secrecy, is to account for the existence of abject retards.
A huge portion of the right has basically made The List their entire personality even though the existence of such a thing makes no sense. Apparently it's simply a given that Epstein wrote down all his crimes in a handy dandy notebook. Because that's something criminal masterminds do.
Now they all have TDS because he made fun of them for it, so they're gonna own drumpf by not voting in the midterms and letting progressive extremists commit genocide. That'll teach him!
Interesting take.
Yea, people who are obsessed with a list of clients, obtained from the collection of evidence through various sources, are missing the forest for the trees. The solution, however, is not voting. The solution is actually learning, growing and becoming a better person, who can meaningfully challenge corruption. Expecting someone else to do it all for you is exactly why we're in this mess.
Russia keeps being useful.
That said, everyone should keep talking about Epstein until all the files are released.
Russia gate being proven true as a hoax made by Obama is a bit of a surprise. The Coldplay couple has been somewhat funny. I mean, that picture is on Tony Hawk Skateboards now. The rest is fluff.
Would publicly talking about it help?
Lots of people have made things obvious, those who hold power still killed them.
To quote Neil Gaiman,
So exposing is nice and welcome, but does it actually solve the problem, or does it just let it be known?
I mean, what is there to keep saying? Repeat the same talking points again and again until people get tired of being outraged and start to stop caring themselves?
I'm sure decades of saying "THE JEWS THE JEWS" will finally work this time to get people to successfully overthrow them.
There was nothing left to say. Either you think Trump fucked up, and this was your breaking point where you go full accelerationist, or you said your piece and moved to the multitude of other issues that still exist. Repeating the same things over and over just makes people care less about anything, and its the reason why the Left is losing multiple fronts.
If bots were capable of nuance, they would be better utilized than this little backwoods forum.
But I guess when all you have is emotional pleas and no concrete plans to accomplish your goals, you can just default back to NPC level responses.
Well yes, its a nice place for me to talk. Its why I as a person come here. That's a far cry from somebody paying to deploy a bot to accomplish convincing like 40 dudes who mostly all agree on Jews being evil to begin with of the opposite. Especially a bot capable of nuance, which would be a pretty top quality machine.
I know words are hard for a NPC to read, but try to actually do so and you might actually accomplish something in life about the issues you are passionate about.
It has nothing to do with the list, it's generally "bad form" to threaten mass murder or serial killing, eh?
In the US, it needs to be a realistic threat. Even threats against real people, which are certainly bad form, may get a pass depending on mens rea (see the last Supreme Court ruling on the matter).
So what is this about? Certainly, the threats against government officials may count as true threats, but how can you include threats against people on a list that you claim does not exist?
Like everything else these days, this depends on the town and judge. There's a sheriff in Florida, Mike Chitwood, that has made a hobby of extraditing people from other states for "threats" against his life. For example, this is one such threat posted online:
You might say that's neither actionable nor a direct threat, but the guy who posted it was extradited to Florida from New Jersey and sentenced to a year in prison.
Fucking insane and that faggot sheriff deserves to hang along with his entire traitor family for not having done the job themselves already.
Wasn't Trump's recent shift from "no list" to "Obama/Biden tampered with it making it useless information and a hoax?"
In that regard this could simply be "threatening to kill the people Obama obviously put on this list, like Trump and his cohorts" with extra steps.
Still retarded, but could still be argued in court with wide definitions.
He is not threatening "the list" which does not exist, he's threatening real people who he THINKS are on a list.
He could threaten Martian Invaders, who clearly do not exist, but if he says "the Martians are at the local Walmart, I'm going to kill them all!" then the threat to innocent bystanders is very real.
Real people are being threatened, not a list of people. The "real list" need not exist, HOW would he know who is on it if it were real? Yet he's still threatening them: the people he thinks may be on it ok?
He didn't say who was on the list though.
He doesn't need to say who, the specific targets will come out through investigation & interrogation. He just has to threaten them as a group. He also did name several people, iirc?
Making global (broad, unspecified) threats of mass murder or serial killings is a problem worthy of investigation, yes? Threatening harm is not covered by the 1st.
But there is no Epstein List, they say.
Right, as I said, but none who were on the Epstein List. That seemed like a true threat to me. But they also cited the 'threat' against the Epstein List.
I'd say yes, but it's not clear to me that this isn't covered when the Supreme Court allowed for specified threats to murder from a man against his ex-wife.
Define "list"? A "Black Book"? A hotel sign-in ledger? A paper listing of blackmail video contents?
There undoubtedly is data regarding who did what & when, we've seen some already! Just what form should that data take to qualify as "a list"? Cellphone use data? Someone tracked some of that already, it's a who's who of Democrats & their supporters. Did people need to present passports when returning from Paedophile Island? There ought to be records of that as well.
So if a man threatens to murder his ex- and her new boyfriend, but there is NO boyfriend at all? He won't get charged? Because "it doesn't exist"? Don't be pedantic. You may have lots of practice at it? But it still looks stupid.
I mean, if I threatened to kill Santa clause and all his elves I can't imagine I'd be arrested. Or, to use a list example, if I threatened to kill everyone on Santa's naughty list. If the list doesn't exist, what crime was committed?
He thinks there's a real 'naughty list' and thus that there's real people ON that list. He's threatening the real people be believes to be on the list, even if the list isn't actually real.
Threatening to kill Santa and his elves might get you an in-person visit from cops :/ depending on how vitriolic you are about it.
So the Epstein list does exist.
Somewhere there's a record of who visited Paedo Island. It may not be a formal list "of clients", but there has to be documentation of visitors. Did they all stay for free? Was everything free there? Even the girls? The rides? The drugs and booze?
Hard to imagine there's zero paperwork recording anything. Who booked rooms, for when? Even that would be a goldmine of names.
Department of Injustice.