‘Whatever happened to suicide watch?’ Suspicion reigns as Epstein’s secrets die with him

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 11.01.55 AM

The death by apparent suicide of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein shocked few pundits. Given his previous attempt on his own life and powerful connections, how could Epstein have been left alone to kill himself?

Epstein was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell on Saturday morning, with law enforcement sources telling multiple media outlets his death was a suicide. The 66-year-old millionaire had been held in custody since his arrest last month on charges of child sex trafficking and conspiracy.

Puzzlingly, Epstein had supposedly been placed on suicide watch since he was found “injured and in a fetal position”in the cell two weeks ago, after a suspected hanging attempt. “Logistically speaking how does a person hang himself in solitary confinement under suicide watch?”asked conservative commentator Matt Walsh.

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 11.04.30 AM

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 11.05.09 AM

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 11.06.03 AM

Adding to the conspiracy, one of Epstein’s alleged victims claimed to have been trafficked by the financier to a ‘who’s who’ of the world’s rich and powerful, including British Prince Andrew, billionaire investor Glenn Dublin, “another prince,” a “foreign president,” a “well-known prime minister,” and the owner of a French “large hotel chain.” The alleged victim’s testimony was unsealed on Friday, hours before Epstein’s suicide.

Even mainstream media talking heads and their followers saw conspiracy. Within an hour of the news breaking, “Clintons” and “#ClintonBodyCount” – referencing a decades-old conspiracy theory that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for a string of suspicious suicides – were also trending on Twitter behind “Epstein.”

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 11.09.05 AM

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 11.09.46 AM

Predictably, there were a few die-hard #resistance members who managed to involve Russia, somehow.

Screen Shot 2019-08-10 at 11.10.54 AM

For now, the case against Epstein goes with him to the grave. Epstein was the only defendant indicted, and would have faced 45 years in prison if found guilty.

Unsealed Documents: Former Top Clinton Official Allegedly Abused an Underage Girl

Virginia Giuffre accused former President Bill Clinton’s energy secretary of abusing her when she was underage.

By Shane Trejo

Documents are being released that are related to convicted sex predator and prominent Democratic Party donor Jeffrey Epstein’s illicit activities, and the initial revelations are already explosive.

Virginia Giuffre, a woman who claims she was kept captive and forced into sex slavery by Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell when she was a child, implicated former New Mexico Governor and Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson as one of the powerful men who victimized her.

Other men who she alleges abused her include former U.S. senator George Mitchell who once served as Bill Clinton’s Special Envoy for Northern Ireland, Prince Andrew of Great Britain, the late MIT scientist Marvin Minsky, influential financier Glenn Dubin, and modeling agency founder Jean-Luc Brunel. She also listed “another prince,” a “foreign president,” a “well-known prime minister,” and the French owner of a “large hotel chain” as unnamed men who preyed upon her.

In a series of depositions, Giuffre claimed that Maxwell sent her to Europe to give “massages” to powerful men.

“I was instructed by Ghislaine to go and give him an erotic massage,” Giuffre testified.

“She used the words erotic massage?” Maxwell’s lawyer Laura Menninger asked.

“No, that’s my word,” Giuffre replied. “The word ‘massage’ is what they would use. That’s their code word.”

She told Menninger about how she was sent as apart of Epstein’s child sex trafficking operation to Richardson, who served in the Clinton administration as energy secretary and U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

“They instructed me to go to George Mitchell, Jean Luc Brunel, Bill Richardson, another prince that I don’t know his name. A guy that owns a hotel, a really large hotel chain, I can’t remember which hotel it was. Marvin Minksy,” she said.

Giuffre claims she was victimized by so many men that she could not possibly remember who they all were.

Menninger asked Giuffre: “Other than Glenn Dubin…Prince Andrew, Jean-Luc Brunel, Bill Richardson, another prince, the large hotel chain owner, and Marvin Minsky, is there anyone else that Ghislaine Maxwell directed you to go have sex with?”

“I am definitely sure there is,” Giuffre replied. “But can I remember everybody’s name? No…look I’ve given you what I know right now. I’m sorry. This is very hard for me and very frustrating to have to go over this. I don’t—I don’t recall all of the people. There was a large amount of people that I was sent to.”

Richardson was forced to return $50,000 in campaign donations from Epstein after he was convicted of sex crimes in 2007. Richardson has also been accused of illegally giving a woman $250,000 to keep quiet after being accused of sexual harassment, although a federal investigation ultimately found no wrongdoing.

He denies any culpability regarding Guiffre’s allegations of abuse.

“These allegations and inferences are completely false. Governor Richardson has never even been contacted by any party regarding this lawsuit. To be clear, in Governor Richardson’s limited interactions with Mr. Epstein, he never saw him in the presence of young or underage girls. Governor Richardson has never been to Mr. Epstein’s residence in the Virgin Islands. Governor Richardson has never met Ms. Giuffre,” said Richardson’s spokeswoman Madeleine Mahony.

The unsealed opinion issued by Judge Robert W. Sweet in 2017 can be viewed in full here.

Democrat Jerry Nadler Anounces He Has Started Formal Impeachment Proceeding Against President Trump – (THIS IS WHY THEY WANT OUR GUNS AMERICA!)

By Jim Hoft

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) announces on Thursday night he has started formal impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Democrats want to remove Trump because they don’t like him.

Russiagate queen reigns no more: Rachel Maddow ratings tank after collusion narrative implodes

Screen Shot 2019-08-01 at 11.19.04 AM

Once a shining beacon of hope for Russiagate true believers, it looks like Rachel Maddow has left her best days behind her; MSNBC’s conspiracy queen has seen her show plummet to fifth place in cable news ratings. What happened?

You rise fast and fall hard in the fickle world of television. Just last April, Maddow overtook Fox News’ Sean Hannity to claim the title of most-watched host across cable news. She had become a reliable source for Russigate aficionados to get their daily dose of crazy.

Sadly for Maddow, the latest data released by Nielsen shows her show in fifth place with a total audience of 2.4877 million viewers for July – behind Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Laura Ingraham and The Five (all Fox News shows).

Screen Shot 2019-08-01 at 11.22.04 AM

Top 5 Russia-conspiracy fails of Rachel ‘highest-ratings-ever’ Maddow

For context, in January this year, Maddow still boasted an audience of nearly 3.3 million, which means she shed around 800,000 viewers in just six months. Maddow was also in fifth place among viewers in the 25-54 age range – the group most-favored by advertisers.

Ouch.

Once dubbed “the smartest person on TV” by Forbes (really), this is certainly not the big payoff Maddow was expecting, having dedicated three years of her career to breathlessly covering every twist and turn in the anticlimactic Trump-Russia “collusion” drama.

There’s no question that Maddow lost a major component of what had made her show so popular when former special counsel Robert Mueller showed up in March having found no evidence of conspiracy or collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.

Screen Shot 2019-08-01 at 11.25.16 AM

As former MSNBC host Krystal Ball noted last week in candid criticism of her former network colleague, Maddow had “built segment after segment, show after show, on building anticipation for a big reveal” that never materialized. Indeed, Maddow became something of an expert at promising her audience bombshells that never amounted to anything.

Recall the dramatic teaser tweet she sent out in March 2017 one hour before her show, claiming: “We’ve got Trump tax returns. (Seriously).” When the story turned out to be a big nothingburger (all she had was one boring form which revealed nothing particularly interesting), Maddow lashed out at her own viewers, saying people had “leapt” to conclusions.

Ball also accused Maddow of doing damage to the left, having become “swept up in the ratings bubble” that was being sustained by “feverish Russian conspiracy theories.”

It’s true. Seemingly convinced that the Russiagate story would end with Donald Trump being dragged from the White House in a dressing gown with shackles around his feet, Maddow had abandoned major issues that are important to the American left and trafficked in mental conspiracies and outright fear-mongering instead.

How about that time she suggested that Russia might kill the power in Fargo during a polar vortex and let everyone freeze to death? Or the time she spent three whole minutes dramatically building up to ‘reveal’ that Russia and North Korea share a border – followed by 15 more minutes trying to prove that Vladimir Putin had orchestrated and secretly controlled the Singapore summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un.

A study of her coverage by the Intercept last year showed that 53 percent of Maddow’s segments focused only on Russia over a six-week period between February and March.

Of course, there were no slaps on the wrist for Maddow at MSNBC HQ for getting stories drastically wrong or failing to deliver on her promises of Trump-destroying bombshells. In fact, it seemed the more dramatic and off-the-wall her coverage became, the more she was celebrated for it. This staggering fall from ratings grace can be her comeuppance.

Boo hoo, Rachel. If you need to cry, you could always use the piles of money you made from lies as tissues.

Danielle Ryan

Danielle Ryan is an Irish freelance writer based in Dublin. Her work has appeared in Salon, The Nation, Rethinking Russia, teleSUR, RBTH, The Calvert Journal and others.

 

Video: On Eve of Debates, People in Detroit Struggle to Name Democrat Presidential Candidates

By Kristinn Taylor

Man-and-woman on the street interviews in Detroit done on the eve of this week’s two-night Democratic Party presidential debates show that even the front running candidates are not very well known among voters.

The interviews were conducted by Spectrum News reporter Lindsay Oliver and posted by Spectrum to Twitter. The debates, hosted by CNN, are airing Tuesday and Wednesday night with ten candidates each night.

In the video, Oliver holds up official photos of the candidates for people to identify. It does not go well for the candidates. However, it is not a total disaster for the Democrats as some voters do recognize more than one candidate and some know what the candidate they support looks like–even if they don’t know the candidate’s name.

Spectrum is providing all-day coverage of the debates.
Screen Shot 2019-07-30 at 11.14.17 AM
Screen Shot 2019-07-30 at 11.14.58 AM

Even leading candidate Joe Biden, former two-term vice president who served in the Senate for decades, goes unrecognized by a Democrat voter.

Russia Hoax 4eva Almost Half of House Democrats Support Trump Impeachment

Screen Shot 2019-07-29 at 11.16.14 AM

By Joshua Caplan

Nearly half of House Democrats now support launching impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump after four more lawmakers expressed support for an inquiry over the weekend, according to a count conducted by Politico.

On Sunday, Washington state Democrat Reps. Denny Heck, Kim Schrier, Suzan DelBene and Derek Kilmer came out in favor of the measure. The group’s announcement comes after over 10 Democrats voiced support for impeachment. The handful of lawmakers included Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA), who serves of the Vice Chair of the House Democrat Caucus, citing former special counsel Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony on Wednesday.

The number of Democrats backing impeachment stands at 107, just 11 lawmakers away from the majority of the House Democrat caucus.

The latest tally House Democrats backing impeachment comes after the chamber’s judiciary panel announced the launch of its so-called “impeachment investigation.” On Friday, the committee asked a judge to allow access to secret grand jury material underlying the Mueller report.

The House Judiciary Committee is also expected to go to court this week to try to enforce a subpoena against former White House counsel Donald McGahn, a key Mueller witness. That suit is expected to challenge the White House’s claim that former White House employees have “absolute immunity” from testifying before Congress.

Appearing Sunday on ABC’s This Week, Judiciary Committee chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) explained his committee is “investigating whether to approve articles of Impeachment before the committee.”

“We have impeachment resolutions before the committee. We are conducting investigations to determine whether we should report those impeachment resolutions to the House or whether we should draft our own and report them to the House,” said the New York Democrat.

“We’re considering those resolutions. we’ll make a determination after we get more evidence as to the president’s crimes that we had from the Mueller report and also from other things, violations of the emoluments clause, his failure to defend the constitution against repeated Russian attacks,” he added. “We’re investigating whether to approve articles of Impeachment before the Committee.”

Despite fresh support to launch impeachment hearings, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) appears unmoved by the efforts.

“No, I’m not trying to run out the clock,” Pelosi told reporters last week.“We will proceed when we have what we need to proceed — not one day sooner.”

“Everybody has the liberty and the luxury to espouse their own position and to criticize me for trying to go down the path in the most determined, positive way,” she added. “Again, their advocacy for impeachment only gives me leverage.”

Moreover, some political observers believe Mueller’s testimony likely took the wind of the of sails regarding impeachment.

“I think the candidates on the stump are being politically realistic; the people back in Washington aren’t. Nancy Pelosi, who is a wintry eyed realist, is having none of it: she thinks impeachment is a fools’ errand and I have to say I agree with her,” said William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

“Mueller’s lackluster testimony likely gave Speaker Pelosi the ammunition to withstand calls for impeachment inquiries, or hearings, from the left flank of her party,” said Brown University political science professor Wendy Schiller. “She has always maintained it is a losing political proposition even if the House voted to impeach Trump because the Senate will not vote to convict Trump and remove him from office.”

Earlier this month, the House voted 332-95 to table a resolution launching an impeachment inquiry introduced by Rep. Al Green. (D-TX).

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

DELUSIONAL NADLER: MUELLER TESTIMONY ‘BROKE THE LIE’ ON COLLUSION & OBSTRUCTION

Delusional Nadler: Mueller Testimony 'Broke the Lie' On Collusion & Obstruction

In reality, Mueller said he could not determine whether Trump committed ANY crimes

The Hill – JULY 28, 2019

House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Sunday that former special counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony last week “broke the lie” that Mueller’s report cleared President Trump of collusion or obstruction of justice.

“I think it was very important that he testified … he broke the lie that the president and the attorney general have been saying to the American people,” Nadler said on ABC’s “This Week” when asked by George Stephanopoulos if the testimony, during which Mueller repeatedly referred back to information already contained in his report, was worth the trouble.

“Since his report was issued, the president and the attorney general misrepresented that report, lied to the American people about it, said that the report found no collusion, no obstruction and totally exonerated the president,” Nadler told Stephanopoulos.

“All those three statements are lies [and] it was very important for Mueller to get up there and say just that,” he added. “It’s very important that that information get out to the American people and we can now build on that.”

Read more

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑