Wed, 08:30: The reasoning behind closing off the Epstein thread [at 10 a.m. coming up] and opening this one is administrative:
1. Something was raised in reply to Toodles which needs strongly addressing in itself and it’s not about Epstein and Trump per se, it’s about sources, as the heading indicates – also check tag used.
2. I need to annotate in addressing it and I do not wish to enter someone’s email afa[humanly]p, the first comment by Chy was unabridged and so is this, nothing added nor removed. But it needs line by line addressing. There’ve been many times in the past that I have simply lifted the non-ad-hominem bits and used them because they were germane to the topic but with these two – no, they are complete, with links.
3. There’s a purely administrative constraint on me in that there are RL issues here involving our house, waste disposal, coordinating departments, inc. gas and electricity, the council, plus the boat and I shan’t go into those but they all consume time and my limited energy post-2017 – that’s before blogging, tweeting and visiting other sites and when will I get out and build? Plus that novella I’m starting?
4. There is also the little matter of banned lists for ad hominem and/or highly selective sourcing and that is old history which I shall not argue for the umpteenth time.
So let’s look at this second comment:
Okay. How about the actual affidavit then? Filed 6/1/2016.
That is in the same basket as all the other DNC and TUA guff we saw in the Kavanaugh trial [yes, I choose that word ‘trial’ carefully, ‘kangaroo court’ is another good expression] in which Horizontal Harris disgraced herself and simply defamed the innocent. The DNC also dragged up the other ‘cry rapers’ and as the world knows, it got about as far as the Russian collusion.
But I’m not surprised you didn’t know of it – Trump-supporting press is pretty good about hiding these things.
To untangle this touches on the whole methodology at this site and in my posts at another, plus my tweeting.
It’s pure Harris to take the diametric opposite of the truth and present it as an assumed truth. I very much know of Trump’s history, including the derogatory, and Toodles, to whom it is addressed, will have right of reply.
But it’s the selective truths which is so wrong. for example, there was nothing in the Chry comment about this:
Lawyer For Epstein Victim Says Trump “Only” High Powered Person Who Helped Him
FL attorney Bradley Edwards, who represented one of Epstein’s accusers, said Trump was only important person to go out of his way to help Edwards with his investigation in 2009.
Plus the Mar-a-lago banning and lastly – this:
Can we now speak of a sustained, three year programme of constant, almost weekly vilification on the most dubious sources?
Can we now speak of the vast scope for defamation action by DJT, Kavanaugh and others accused?
And can we now remind women that for every cry rape the establishment left organise and fund, the lower the chances for genuine victims of finding justice and redress? How on earth is TDS helping the genuine cause of women?
Right of reply
For reasons directly linked to blogging 2007-10, the policy at this site is to avoid cracks at specific bloggers [an utter waste of time, see policy page] but if a comment does appear from a reader addressing another one, then of course there is the right to reply – one reply.
Were it not limited to that, it would drag on and on and swamp what is the purpose of the post itself and become a personal war – that is trolling, hijacking and stymying, a complete waste of time, and I’ll not have that as we have so many other topics to address. Plus in my case – health considerations.
One reply only then.
Broadening this, it’s precisely what the whole Remoaner thing is about over here – there was a war going on, Cameron responded to the war with a referendum, both sides put their cases but Remoan had the benefit of public moneys and much private money coming in, swamping that of the Leave side – Guianan court cases with a stacked judiciary etc.
Plus the establishment had fragmented Leave by creating a Tory version and surprise surprise – guess which one got the nod when there was no need whatever to have had a head-to-head like that in the first place? Same as this ‘deal’ guff.
TUA-controlled EC decided to try their shenanigans by investigating highly selective targets, always the same targets, just as Trump is suffering in the States. Clinton’s Benghazi and emails get a free pass.
We’ve been through all that in posts passim, ad nauseam.
The rest are quotes from press years ago or actual video – that doesn’t concern you, what he said about Epstein and girls “On the younger side” in 2002?
See the question mark at the end? That’s the sort of clever slur which completely ignores the context of the whole debate. This blog is set up around multi-sourcing, it by no means relies on one source. I myself certainly won’t bother wading through the Guardian and the entire establishment press over there from Mad Cow down to the lowly NYT – lowly because it is so far slanted that it truly is fake news and is quite rightly taken as such.
The reason for concluding that, by-the-by, is the hundreds of thousands of political social media outlets – we went through all that with the ‘cry rape’ Kavanaugh trial, it’s all archived. And cry rapers should be in prison – but they’re not, they are protected by the very enemy we’re fighting.
So this humble blog must do a balancing act – sure, I myself could not be bothered with the fake media such as Snopes but many others are concerned and do address it, linking to the fake press itself, which I do speed read, in order to find any useful snippets.
There is only so much time in the day, given the output level this blog has.
Sorry, “Toodles” – yes, it’s still creepy and inappropriate for grown men to say they want to date you when you grow up.
That’s a fair general point.
But then you say you’re from the South, yes? 😉
That is a deliberately provocative internecine jibe intended, not so much to attack Toodles but her roots [this is Yankee v the South stuff, it’s a deliberate hayseed jibe, quite out of place, intended to provoke the lady], plus tie this blog up in an escalating war.
And that is something which will not be put up with, as it detracts from our prime directive. Chry had her say in her first comment, Toodles can have her say after this second one now. There’s no further recourse after that, for all the reasons above.
Creepier, was Trump looking at his daughter’s chest and grabbing her by the hips at the RNC (on video).
I put up a post on those things way back, with pictures of Trump and daughter, and readers were left to decide for themselves.
Regardless, my point is, you don’t have any more proof of Clinton’s guilt than Trump, and you know it – they are all power of suggestion and circumstantial evidence;)
See the slide there and that’s why this person is banned. Suddenly, Clinton is brought in and the lack of any substance to the three years of Trump bashing is somehow conflated with Clinton where there very much is strong evidence, as set out by the ferreters and which will form the basis of the Clinton trial if it ever gets to it, but also very powerful protection of her and her ‘husband’.
However, it wouldn’t surprise me if both men were.
That one was stated as opinion upfront and so passes muster.
We burned Hillary at the stake based on less proof (Pizzagate, no proof whatsoever) …
Ho ho ho, go for it, DR.
Bollox that there’s no strong evidence, utter tosh and readers have their own reading to fall back on – you might start at the sidebar.
One additional, essential difference is that Trump’s were all formally investigated – every accusation out of the air has been investigated by TUA/DNC with a view to possible damage to him/impeachment over nothing, whereas Teflon Clinton gets away with probable cause based on firm evidence to this point – that debate with Trump was an utter disgrace.
Once again, though I myself will not bother with the fake media, thousands of others do, they spend hours and days and then post, I bowl in and take whatever they’ve substantiated and post it – that’s how social media should work – to send something viral and then it either stands up in the following days … or does not. Benghazi has stood up, Seth Richards, Vince Foster, the whole sleazy history of the Clintons, despite the tech giants’ best efforts..
Against that is the Starr Report which has already been dismantled for its over-reaching so yes, such things do appear on these pages and to allege ‘single-sources’ is both a direct barb at me and also an attempt to discredit, which is highly offensive, given that we do not operate the leftist way here, the Harris way.
But these two chronic philanderers and partiers-with pedophiles became president.
Quite ignoring Trump barring Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, that crucial point skipped over. Rank dishonesty.
God bless America.
Rapinoe-like mocking of America, parodying patriotism but also targetting the Christianity of Toodles. Quite offensive. There are further comments I could make but that would, by our rules here, necessitate escalating all this and I simply have neither the time nor the energy.
But you can see how carefully placed attack-words can blow the whole thing up, reducing it to personal slanging matches – it takes far too much self-control for me, more used to letting rip. I suspect same for you too.
Oh, by the way – The Shadow Cabaret Strip Club is holding a golf tournament for charity at the Trump Doral Golf Resort – you get to pick your own caddy girl!
Those reading this post can explore that at their leisure. If anything substantial comes out of it, I’ll post it – but from our own sleuths here, not from TUA’s.
A political blog is a balancing act involving time, energy, resources, sources and catchment. At all times one must jealousy guard its twofold purpose of both addressing with as much time and energy as each point deserves, but also never forgetting to move forward, not getting bogged down in the mire of bundled-in falsehoods including snippets of truth or probable cause.
As I say, it’s a fine balancing act and can be brutal. There is never a final, comprehensive verdict – there is too much trolling, too many anomalies, the evidence is never cut and dried, it is fragmented and requires slow piecing together – it certainly though becomes cumulative.
The attitude of the right or rather the Deplorable forces [meaning non-TUA] has always been to eat its own – we were discussing that on Sunday and how we non-automatons don’t have a PC Narrative handed down, to which we all chant, ‘Yes, great moloch, as you say.’
It’s understandable that the left does not want Trump to become a Deplorable moloch and he certainly starts to look that way at the rallies. But that is a leftist mindset – to follow the handed-down Narrative, the indoctrination from schooldays.
The very nature of Deplorability is to make up one’s own mind afap, hence the splinter groups – Anne-Marie party, UKIP NEC v UKIP members, TR, BP and so on. It’s been said many times about our side of politics that it’s like herding cats, whereas Senator Jenner in 1954 nailed the communists – an elite corp and the organisation was the whole thing. The ideology – utter bollox, easily dismantled but few do – and dissidence is suppressed, a la Seth Rich.
The cover-ups and destroying of evidence, plus all the voter fraud – well we’ve been through all that.
Time, health and energy
Just look at what this took to address – how much a post like this takes out of a person – that is why I refuse to do this with certain people, except occasionally. We have so many other things we need to pursue, we cannot neglect them, that is our purpose, our prime directive.
Many of us think Trump still a quite useful figure for our purposes just now, that might change, it might not. But we are not Narrative driven at this place, N.O., in the sense we do not accept handed down wisdom from the Adepts – we bloody well find out for ourselves – that is the mindset of our politics. Some of us quote verses from scripture … but the other side does that too.
We battle on and we choose our battles in which to engage.