A Corrierino Awareness Thread

Discuss anything you want.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jinnistan
Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:47 pm

Re: A Corrierino Awareness Thread

Post by Jinnistan » Sun Jul 07, 2019 3:45 pm

Oxnard Montalvo wrote:
Sun Jul 07, 2019 7:39 am
also: lol Epstein
I hope the NY DA don't fuck it up like they've been doing with the Weinstein case.
User avatar
Jinnistan
Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:47 pm

Re: A Corrierino Awareness Thread

Post by Jinnistan » Sat Jul 13, 2019 10:33 pm

Oxnard Montalvo wrote:
Sun Jul 07, 2019 7:39 am
also: lol Epstein
Ah, yes. Ice cold justice in this blistering summer heat. Sure, I suppose I could rant and rave at how Trump rolled out the red carpet for neo-nazi and alt-right trolls, literally fake news content creators and influencers. Yadda yadda, legitimacy this, normalcy that.

But nothing hits that sweetspot in the cynical cardio-callus more than a tall pitcher of Epsteinmania, his smug-sucking smirk being the pitch-perfect visage of recalcitrant felony.

But even after several years of telling this story to various people asking "Who?", I'm not only pleased at the sudden tenacity of the public imagination, but haven't been less than thrilled at the continuing stream of curious insights derived from his diaboloical dingle. Like, for example, how wonderful it is to see that, after 35 years, no one in Manhattan who partied with this wanna-be travolta ever had the curiosity as to where his money came from. Oh, I'm happy to see that those questions are now being asked, I just think it's hilarious that in the stampede of avaricious envy, that negligible detail of the source of his success was never breached. Now I know that I'm just a humble country lawyer who don't know a bidet from an adieu, but for some wishful reason, I kinda assumed that Wall Street had better instincts when it came to vetting amongst their own. It's a similar giggle I get whenever I see the latest talented imposters confiding their way into the circles, and checkbooks, of allegedly educated aristocracy.

For those who don't read links, it comes down to a couple of possibilities, ranging from a possible Madoff-style Ponzi scheme to straight up extortion. His "give me a billion dollars and power of attorney" fiscal skills certainly suggest the former; a CD in a safe marked "Young *name* + *name*" strongly implicates the latter. Hey, why not both? When you're rolling like Jeffrey! How can a man "own" the largest residency on the island of Manhattan, and no one bats a lash over how he paid for it? The fact that he's known to have hidden cameras in intimate parts of his house is not surprising to those who've been paying attention. The blackmail aspect of the story makes enough sense as to be quickly become a given. The only question is who and how deep.

Another promising avenue for certain brands of enlightened paranoiacs is what Acosta, that slippery mudskipper, had allegedly told the Trump transistion team concerning Epstein:
Vicky Ward wrote:He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta.


Well, that takes it up a notch. Nobody craves extortion quite like intelligence agencies. Almost as much as anonymity. It doesn't require a couple minutes of brainstorm to wonder why this would be, but again the crucial question of "who and how deep" bobs to the surface.

Maybe we could look at whatever earlier statements we can get from Acosta, like in 2011 when he described the use by Epstein's lawyers of private investigators, saying it amounted to a "year-long assault on the prosecution and prosecutors", specifying "I use the word assault intentionally, as the defense in this case was more aggressive than any which I, or the prosecutors in my office, had previously encountered." Well, good thing that didn't influence the speedy secret sleazeball plea deal he would eagerly dole out in response to this unprecedented aggression. But how do we really know what he means by "aggressive"? Can we maybe find indications in the available eyewitness evidence from various victims and family members - "They sat in black SUVs outside the homes of accusers, questioned their current and former boyfriends, and chased one parent's car off the road"..."often made telephone contact with accusers either just before or after a police investigator spoke with them"...."photographing family and chasing visitors who come to the house"..."warning about cooperating for compensation or facing consequences"...."obtain the medical records of his accusers".... and informing victims in no uncertain terms that "those who hurt him will be dealt with". Now maybe these are just thugs for hire, sure. But maybe I can't help but be reminded of Harvey Weinstein's similar discovered use of ex-Mossad to surveil and intimidate his victims. Now, for some of you, dropping Mossad is a tactless faux pas. I probably wouldn't have mentioned it, except for the thing about Epstein's primary girl-groomer, Ghislaine Maxwell, whose family history makes the connection slightly more compelling.

Image
"I dont! Hammer!"

Oh, Lady Ghislaine. One of the handful of top co-conspirators who just lost their non-prosecution immunity deal. She's adamantly denied everything. Unfortunately though, she's probably not super psyched about the recent ruling to unseal a couple thouandd court documents, many of which pertain to the civil suit brought by one of Epstein's victims, accusing Maxwell of soliciting and grooming the sex traffick, and a suit for which Maxwell paid millions of dollars to settle and seal.

We're about to see those documents for the first time. I hope Ghislaine is handling it well. Oh, earlier today she abruptly closed down her charity organization. Probably a coincidence.
User avatar
Oxnard Montalvo
Posts: 1478
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 4:27 am
Location: parents' basement

Re: A Corrierino Awareness Thread

Post by Oxnard Montalvo » Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:30 pm

interesting....

also, I had seen this article which has a quote where he defends himself by clarifying that he only had sex with tweens and teens. see, not a pedophile!
User avatar
Oxnard Montalvo
Posts: 1478
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 4:27 am
Location: parents' basement

Re: A Corrierino Awareness Thread

Post by Oxnard Montalvo » Tue Jul 16, 2019 3:56 pm

I’m not sure if this worth posting, but what the hell.

as always, I’m never sure how much to weigh Trump’s words when compared to Trump’s actions. like, Trump did use bigoted language against those four Congresswomen but I’m never sure whether that is trivial in the face of something like the migrant concentration camps. it’s not like a lot of us are surprised that Trump would say something like that even if we are disgusted. and it’s probably better to be disgusted than to shrug it off. of course, for any non-white American who has ever been made to feel like a foreigner, I don’t doubt those words hit a painful nerve. I’m just still never sure when Trump has brought The Discourse to a new low.

mostly this feeds that awful feeling in the pit of my stomach that as the election grows closer, Trump will likely say more stuff to turn up the country’s temperature. and then what happens if he loses? less about what Trump will do and more what his supporters will do. like, where will this guy be in a post-Trump America?
Image
not that I consider his priorities more important than the ones of those that have suffered through Trump's policies. but it's still on my mind.
User avatar
Jinnistan
Posts: 2624
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:47 pm

Re: A Corrierino Awareness Thread

Post by Jinnistan » Wed Jul 17, 2019 2:12 am

One of the alt-right bloggers invited to the white house last week, to commiserate on the fact that people have the power to react to things people say. once said that Obama looked like a "skinny ghetto crackhead". It's about the best baseline for 'you might be a racist' that I can imagine. Say what you will about Obama, if you look at him and think he looks like a crackhead, I have to assume that this is a black thing.

Similarly, when I hear Tucker Swanson Jr. talk about Ilhan Omar as "dangerous", I tend to assume that it's also likely a color issue.

It's nice of Trump to spell it out as clearly as a racist can, but it also needs to be addressed how this affects those Trump supporters who may be dumb enough to actually see these women as existential threats to America, or as creatures undeserving of having a democratic say in how we run the ship. In that sense, it is very dangerous indeed, for entirely different and distinct reasons. Trump feels entitled to be able to constantly complain about America, even though his mother was an immigrant, putting him on a par (and less in Pressley's case) with these women that he would be most reluctant to acknowledge. We see what he's doing. Everyone sees what he's doing. And when people begin lying to themselves about what they know to be the truth is when the fake news habit, and its resulting ethical dissoluton, really metastisizes. It is perfectly clear to the dumbest child and the smartest dog what people support when they support Trump.
Post Reply