• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Jeffrey Epstein Commits Suicide at Manhattan Jail

Page 49 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
K1052 said:
Oh now the DAG is gonna talk to Maxwell to see if she knows anything. Nothing to see here but the DAG acting as Trump's personal lawyer to get her to issue a statement that Trump wasn't involved likely in return for a pardon or commutation.
Click to expand...
Clearly the solution to this conflict of interest is to appoint Matt Gaetz as special counsel.
 
esquared said:
TIL, what tunnelbuddies means.

I am pretty sure that's the "big secret", that him and Epstein are sharing , based on the birthday letter that the syphilitic orange menace sent to epstein on his 50th.
Click to expand...

My guess is he had a Devil’s Triangle with a 14 year old
 
K1052 said:
Oh now the DAG is gonna talk to Maxwell to see if she knows anything. Nothing to see here but the DAG acting as Trump's personal lawyer to get her to issue a statement that Trump wasn't involved likely in return for a pardon or commutation.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure how effective that would be as anyone who is even remotely persuadable about Epstein isn’t going to believe something she says in exchange for a pardon. (And the people who aren’t don’t matter anyway)

The only thing I can think of that might work would be if the deal is for a pardon in like 2029 or something but I’m not sure that deal could be kept secret and if it got out that’s even worse.
 
fskimospy said:
I’m not sure how effective that would be as anyone who is even remotely persuadable about Epstein isn’t going to believe something she says in exchange for a pardon. (And the people who aren’t don’t matter anyway)

The only thing I can think of that might work would be if the deal is for a pardon in like 2029 or something but I’m not sure that deal could be kept secret and if it got out that’s even worse.
Click to expand...

Oh I think it is stupid and likely to backfire but he's so sweatily desperate to nip this thing that he's liable to do it anyway.
 
fskimospy said:
I’m not sure how effective that would be as anyone who is even remotely persuadable about Epstein isn’t going to believe something she says in exchange for a pardon. (And the people who aren’t don’t matter anyway)
Click to expand...
On the pardon front, wouldn't Maxwell still be open to civil liability, thus opening the door for more claimants that may not yet have come forward to sue?
 
K1052 said:
Oh now the DAG is gonna talk to Maxwell to see if she knows anything. Nothing to see here but the DAG acting as Trump's personal lawyer to get her to issue a statement that Trump wasn't involved likely in return for a pardon or commutation.
Click to expand...

"There were recordings of this conversation but we lost those too"
 
Fenixgoon said:
I believe so as accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt. A commutation, on the other hand....
Click to expand...
Not even the admission of guilt part. If she names names and whatnot, those people would then have additional evidence to advance their private, civil claims.

If I recall, pardons and commutations only deal with punishments and whatnot from the government.
 
Fenixgoon said:
I believe so as accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt. A commutation, on the other hand....
Click to expand...


While accepting a pardon may imply an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, it is not a formal admission of guilt and does not automatically erase the conviction. The Supreme Court case Burdick v. United States (1915) suggests a pardon carries an "imputation of guilt," but the context of that case was whether a pardon could be refused, according to MSNBC News. A pardon removes certain legal consequences of a conviction, but it doesn't change the historical fact of the conviction or necessarily erase the stigma associated with it.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
  • Pardon's Effect:
    A pardon is an exercise of executive clemency, typically by the President, that provides forgiveness and removes certain legal penalties associated with a conviction. It can restore rights like voting or holding office.

    • Burdick v. United States (1915):
      This Supreme Court case established that accepting a pardon implies an acknowledgement of guilt, as it suggests the person wouldn't need a pardon if they weren't guilty. However, this was dicta – language not essential to the ruling – and not the holding of the case, says MSNBC News.
    • Not a Confession:
      A pardon is not a confession of guilt. It's a legal act that acknowledges the conviction but removes some of the penalties. The recipient doesn't have to formally admit guilt to accept a pardon.
    • Practical Considerations:
      While not a formal admission of guilt, accepting a pardon can be seen as an acknowledgement of wrongdoing, particularly in the eyes of the public. The Office of the Pardon Attorney considers acceptance of responsibility when recommending pardons.
    • Other Implications:
      A pardon doesn't erase the conviction as a historical fact or justify the fiction that the individual didn't engage in the conduct. It also doesn't prevent the pardoned individual from facing consequences in other forums, such as professional licensing boards, according to Politico.
 
Brainonska511 said:
On the pardon front, wouldn't Maxwell still be open to civil liability, thus opening the door for more claimants that may not yet have come forward to sue?
Click to expand...
Sure, although I think after 2029 Trump wouldn’t care as he is either dead, has larger legal problems, or is dictator so it doesn’t matter.
 
Just a reminder

www.nbcnews.com

FBI personnel were told to flag Epstein files mentioning Trump, Senate Democrat says

Sen. Dick Durbin questioned DOJ leadership over their handling of the Epstein files, including reports that FBI personnel were told to "flag" any mentions of Trump.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

www.beltway.news

Whistleblower: DOJ has spreadsheet of every Trump mention in Epstein Files

The purpose of the FBI's two-week, 100,000-record review in March was to catalog every mention of Trump in the sex trafficking investigation into a spreadsheet.
www.beltway.news www.beltway.news
 
esquared said:
TIL, what tunnelbuddies means.

I am pretty sure that's the "big secret", that him and Epstein are sharing , based on the birthday letter that the syphilitic orange menace sent to epstein on his 50th.
Click to expand...

That is a term for two guys who have had sex with the same woman.

Think of it as a less racist version of 'eskimo brothers.'
 
Going to put on my conspiracy hat not that this doesn't have lots of low hanging fruit. Alan Dershowitz has been a lawyer for Donald Trump and Jeffery Epstein. In this interview AD is telling Trump to commute her sentence and giver her use immunity and she will tell all. She will also tell who has been falsely accused? That is where the big lie will be spun.

This smells of a setup they are trying to organize. They want her to lie under oath and get out of prison for it. DOJ will or has already met with Maxwell. They will try to create that ruse.

www.tmz.com

Alan Dershowitz Says Feds Should Cut Deal With Ghislaine Maxwell For Epstein Info

Alan Dershowitz is calling on the feds to cut a deal with Ghislaine Maxwell and release her from prison ... in exchange for spilling secrets on the dealings of Jeffrey Epstein.
www.tmz.com www.tmz.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top