SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Scouse]

So @caLLous - from the grauniad:

"Friday morning, Todd Blanche addressed redactions made by the justice department":

We redacted every woman depicted in any image or video, with the exception of Miss [Ghislaine] Maxwell. We did not redact images of any man unless it was impossible to redact the woman without also redacting the man

 

[Embattle]

Just another forgetful sleezy scumbag:

Lord Mandelson resigns from Labour Party over Epstein links

Lord Mandelson resigns from Labour Party over Epstein links

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Raven]

Just another forgetful sleezy scumbag:

Lord Mandelson resigns from Labour Party over Epstein links

Lord Mandelson resigns from Labour Party over Epstein links

www.bbc.co.uk

Regretful and sorry, apparently.

 

[Gwadien]

Men covertly filming women at night and profiting from footage, BBC finds

The BBC went undercover to investigate an industry where women are filmed at night without their knowledge.

www.bbc.co.uk

Another sexist BBC article

 

[Scouse]

Another sexist BBC article

¿??

 

[caLLous]

So @caLLous - from the grauniad:

"Friday morning, Todd Blanche addressed redactions made by the justice department":

Ok, it seems like they basically redacted all females as a low-risk way of making sure they weren't accidentally exposing any victims. Whatever. Seems like the least controversial explanation. Redacted != innocent and unredacted != guilty.

As for the earlier posts... They've been firing objectors and filling leadership roles at every level of the DOJ and FBI with sycophants over the last year so it's not that outrageous to think they've got a firm-enough grip on what does and doesn't get released and systems in place to prevent/track leaks.

When you have just atrocious, unqualified people like Bondi as the AG, why is it so remarkable to think that they've installed versions of her all through the system? You have better explanations for the way this mess has been handled other than to insulate Trump from the scandal that basically revolves around him? If Epstein's island was ground zero then, by a lot of accounts, Mar-a-lago was ground... one. Why would the DOJ leap to say that everything pertaining to Trump is just made up, politically-motivated rubbish?

And Mike Johnson is pathetic, as is the GOP side of House of Representatives (they all are tbh but there's only so much the minority can do). Notice it's the Republicans who are retiring soon (and randoms like MTG) who are starting to make noise about Venezuela, ICE, Epstein, etc. Amazing how they miraculously grow spines and develop consciouses when they have nothing to lose.

 

[Deebs]

I shall make it simple for everyone to understand Trump/DoJ/GOP = Comical Ali aka Baghdad Bob. Thank you.

 

[Scouse]

Ok, it seems like they basically redacted all females as a low-risk way of making sure they weren't accidentally exposing any victims. Whatever. Seems like the least controversial explanation. Redacted != innocent and unredacted != guilty.

But published unredacted = gets your (males-only) face plastered across front-page newspapers globally and mental association of your possibly completely innocent face with paedophilia with millions.

Was out this weekend and Branson was spoken about in the same breath.

Your logic above is fine intellectually, but it's still fucking bullshit.

By "protecting victims" they could very well be protecting female paedos, whilst harming innocent men.

A completely unrrdacted immediate release would probably have been, on balance, the better action IMO.

 

[caLLous]

But published unredacted = gets your (males-only) face plastered across front-page newspapers globally and mental association of your possibly completely innocent face with paedophilia with millions.

Was out this weekend and Branson was spoken about in the same breath.

Your logic above is fine intellectually, but it's still fucking bullshit.

By "protecting victims" they could very well be protecting female paedos, whilst harming innocent men.

A completely unrrdacted immediate release would probably have been, on balance, the better action IMO.

You won't like it but we could be circling back to protecting the Nectarine Nonce. The more images of Epstein with other publicly recognised men they can put out there, the more it deflects away from or dilutes Trump's involvement (they hope). He's already said this new release completely absolves him.

 

[Scouse]

You won't like it but we could be circling back to protecting the Nectarine Nonce. The more images of Epstein with other publicly recognised men they can put out there, the more it deflects away from or dilutes Trump's involvement (they hope). He's already said this new release completely absolves him.

I don't give a shit about focussing on Trump. That's your particular mind-worm.

I'd prefer everyone involved was exposed, as justice would demand.

 

[caLLous]

I don't give a shit about focussing on Trump. That's your particular mind-worm.

I'd prefer everyone involved was exposed, as justice would demand.

Yet again, as has been said multiple times, I don't give a shit about it either, I'm explaining to you what is very obviously happening. Fucking hell.

 

[Scouse]

Yet again, as has been said multiple times, I don't give a shit about it either, I'm explaining to you what is very obviously happening. Fucking hell.

Again calling bullshit. Maybe the "nectarine nonce" was heavily involved or maybe he just attended perfectly legal fuck-parties. I don't know.

But you're really focussed on Trump and stating some assertions that may or may not be true like they were hardened facts.

For me - if a wholesale unredacted release "diluted Trumps involvement" then, for me, I'm completely neutral on that as it would mean a lot of people were implicated.

Right now, this is all politics and zero justice. I dislike it all intensely.

I'm willing to accept that maybe we're talking at crossed purposes tho