The age of consent was seen as nothing more than a technicality until relatively recently. I’d be shocked if the list didn’t include a large number of prominent democrats as well as the usual suspects from the republican party. Also most wealthy donors to both parties. The Epstein files are going to be full of rich people, because the rich think they’re untouchable and always embrace their worst impulses if given the opportunity. Political affiliation is irrelevant.
Even if they were 18+, I thought the thing was that they were trafficked/raped? Even if an “Epstein girl” was 21, that doesn’t necessarily absolve the people that had relations/raped/abused/etc. her. I haven’t kept up with the case so don’t know the details. Plus after the whole pizza gate and save the children fiasco it can be difficult to really sort out which parts are legitimate and which parts are conspiracy, so I haven’t dug much.
I’m only really responding to the “age of consent is a technicality” thing. Not that statutory rape shouldn’t be viewed as rape, but I don’t think these were scenarios of older people and minors having otherwise “consensual” sex.
Oh I am in no way excusing statutory rape. Dirty little fuckers need some jail time for what they did. All I’m saying is that rich people in the 80s and 90s where waaaaay more likely to get away with it because the people enforcing didn’t really care. So they were more likely to actually do it.
I’ve no doubt that’s the case (e.g. Clinton’s likely in there, for example), although I expect it’s a ratio much like then FBI director Wray during Trump’s first term testified regarding propensity towards politically-inspired violence: more than twice as likely to be conservatives doing it.
The age of consent was seen as nothing more than a technicality until relatively recently. I’d be shocked if the list didn’t include a large number of prominent democrats as well as the usual suspects from the republican party. Also most wealthy donors to both parties. The Epstein files are going to be full of rich people, because the rich think they’re untouchable and always embrace their worst impulses if given the opportunity. Political affiliation is irrelevant.
Even if they were 18+, I thought the thing was that they were trafficked/raped? Even if an “Epstein girl” was 21, that doesn’t necessarily absolve the people that had relations/raped/abused/etc. her. I haven’t kept up with the case so don’t know the details. Plus after the whole pizza gate and save the children fiasco it can be difficult to really sort out which parts are legitimate and which parts are conspiracy, so I haven’t dug much.
I’m only really responding to the “age of consent is a technicality” thing. Not that statutory rape shouldn’t be viewed as rape, but I don’t think these were scenarios of older people and minors having otherwise “consensual” sex.
Oh I am in no way excusing statutory rape. Dirty little fuckers need some jail time for what they did. All I’m saying is that rich people in the 80s and 90s where waaaaay more likely to get away with it because the people enforcing didn’t really care. So they were more likely to actually do it.
I’ve no doubt that’s the case (e.g. Clinton’s likely in there, for example), although I expect it’s a ratio much like then FBI director Wray during Trump’s first term testified regarding propensity towards politically-inspired violence: more than twice as likely to be conservatives doing it.
And there’s the reason biden didn’t release them. Everyone saw what the party does to people who run afoul of the clinton machine.