you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Captain goes down with ship. Hire Acosta= just as guilty

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I'm interested in the forces on Acosta at the time.

Nobody thinks, "well this guy has trafficked and raped dozens of kids, so I'll offer him a plea deal and give him home detention" without some powerful person or people letting them know that they have to do that. Or if they themselves are being blackmailed.

Someone is guilty and Acosta knows who. Or at least knows who applied pressure on him on their behalf.

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Could be just stupid and doing what he's told, he's a Hispanic let into Harvard and given jobs for diversity reasons. Probably doesn't even know how to read.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

He was almost certainly doing what he was told. The interesting question is "who told him what to do?"

[–]Jiminy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Has to be his boss trump. Or if not, that means trump wasn't really in charge, was a puppet.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

He wasn't working for Trump in 2008 when he approved the non-prosecution agreement for Epstein was he?

George W would have been his president.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

He was a C.I.A asset. Now did the C.I.A answer to George Bush, or Bush answer to the C.I.A?

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

He was a C.I.A asset.

What are you basing that on?

[–]Jiminy 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Anyone in DC is a cia asset, either due to being paid, blackmailed, or worried about being JFK'd. Likely often all three.

[–]ActuallyNot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Right. But that's highly speculative.

Whereas Acosta definitely gave Epstein a non-prosecution agreement, that was so sweet that it was actually illegal.

And that means he was absolutely being leant on or bribed: either because he or someone with influence over him was guilty of something epstein knew about. And Acosta knows which and who.

He should be compelled to give testimony about it.

[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)