Epstein Files Include 1996 Child Porn Complaint That F.B.I. Ignored
Newly released files show how Maria Farmer, who worked for Mr. Epstein in the 1990s, had urged the F.B.I. to investigate him. The case went nowhere for years.
You're viewing a single thread.
1996? When Bubba was potus? I wonder why the FBI ignored it
Funny thing is that no FBI director has been appointed by a Democrat. Not even Clinton had that kind of control of the FBI.
Edit: looks like I was wrong about appointments; Clinton did appoint an FBI director who had previously been appointed by Bush to another position. He still didn't have the kind of power over the FBI that would have let him quash an investigation like this
The 5th Director of the FBI, Louis Freeh, who was director at the time of the complaint, was literally appointed by Bill Clinton. Furthermore, the 3rd director, William Webster, was appointed by Jimmy Carter, and the 7th director, James Comey, was appointed by Barack Obama.
I believe you're counting the directors wrong. Freeh was the 15th, Webster was 11th, and Comey was 18th. https://www.fbi.gov/history/directors.
Youre right. He was also previously appointed by Bush. Not exactly a partisan, and the FBI still would gladly have gotten Clinton for this if they'd been aware of his involvement
OP is misremembering. The real key is that no Democrat has ever been appointed to run the FBI. Democrats always appoint Republicans to run the FBI.
Shh. This is lemmy, where we make excuses for democrats no matter what they do.
This is not reddit and when you make these kinds of insinuations you only ever wind up sounding like a conspiracist or a dolt (perhaps both).
You'll find a large majority of Lemmy instances are pretty critical of the US Democrattic party and rightly so.
You’ll find a large majority of Lemmy instances are pretty critical of the US Democrattic party and rightly so.
I have not found that to be the case. Say anything less than worshipful of the genocide wing that runs the party and you'll get pushback. Try it for the very first time.
What the actual fuck are you talking about?
By which I mean your sweeping, obviously inaccurate claims about the userbase, not the genocide, which is definitely happening, happened under the previous administration too, and is extremely fucked up, and likely contributed to the fascists getting elected given how abysmally the DNC handled the entire situation?
You have a lot more issue with my saying that lemmy makes excuses for democrats than you do about the straight up lie that no democrat has ever appointed an FBI chair. Because that lie is there to excuse bad behavior of democrats.
not the genocide, which is definitely happening, happened under the previous administration too, and is extremely fucked up, and likely contributed to the fascists getting elected given how abysmally the DNC handled the entire situation?
The prevailing consensus on lemmy is that the democrats did nothing wrong at all and the mean old voters denied them the election.
You're literally in a thread full of people criticized ng Democrats and claiming it never happens. Why do you like to delude yourself?
I'm saying that lemmy has a lot of people who make excuses for democrats no matter what they do, as a response to some preposterous bullshit about democrats never appointing an FBI chair. Misinformation that no one seems to have much of a problem with and that has like 80 upvotes despite being an outright lie.
Sounds like you may have been banned from communities that are expressing more nuanced opinions. Perhaps because of your fairly obviously dogmatic stance (not on genocide, but on how people are reacting to it)
Sounds like you may have been banned from communities that are expressing more nuanced opinions.
Sounds like you're gloating about pro-genocide echo chambers.
Try it for the very first time.
This line just proves that you're not interested in a serious conversation. You'll find in life that if you listen before you talk you'll often learn quite a lot of useful things.
Take care.
If you really believe this, then you have serious reading comprehension skills and/or only interpret everything in a way the reinforces your existing biases . From my experience, a majority of people here, myself included, would happily see both parties burn to the ground and replaced with a system that empowers We The People to choose real representatives.
Saying shit like "the Democratic party revolves around genocide" is what gets you push back. Try saying something realistic and people will agree.
Saying shit like “the Democratic party revolves around genocide” is what gets you push back.
From people who know it's true, love it, and never want it to change except for the worse. When their actions indicate that they support another policy with greater persistence and enthusiasm, I'll believe the party actually has other policies.
No, you just have a weird fixation with associating the Democratic Party with genocide by the looks of your last series of comments. I wouldn't be surprised if your entire comment history is peppered with shit-talking on only one side. It doesn't seem to phase commenters like you that the Trump administration is just as friendly with Israel. How come you're silent about that?
It doesn’t seem to phase commenters like you that the Trump administration is just as friendly with Israel. How come you’re silent about that?
No one argues with me when I say that trump is pro-genocide, for one. But I'll admit that I'm intensely bitter about democrats' support for genocide. No political party in the US should ever support genocide, and yet even the "good" party does. I'm livid at all the procedural bullshit they applied toward making sure they didn't keep their campaign promises, while breaking actual law to support genocide.
Just because I fucking hate democrats for what they did, that doesn't mean I don't hate the republicans they keep trying to be for showing them what policies to espouse.
That said, the insinuation that anyone who has a problem with literal genocide must be a republican is a centrist go-to, and it's the least surprising comment in the whole thread.
Huh, if only you'd invest that much of your anger towards the administration that's actively trying to engage in genocide right now. Idk if you saw, but that link was from 4 hours ago. Where's the outrage? Or is it that much more important to get your fix by picking a fight on Lemmy about an administration that's not even in power right now?
the insinuation that anyone who has a problem with literal genocide must be a republican is a centrist go-to.
The insinuation that anyone who complains about you endlessly complaining about genocide must be a centrist is also quite something.
I would have made some kind of sarcastic joking "welcome to lemmy" comment, but your profile says it was created two and a half years ago in the era of the great third party app reddit exodus.
The biggest Democrat "support" I generally see here, and which I have contributed to myself, is the suggestion that it may be a good idea to vote for a severely flawed Democrat in order to avoid everything we're seeing right now and have waiting for us in the next 3+ years.
The biggest Democrat “support” I generally see here, and which I have contributed to myself, is the suggestion that it may be a good idea to vote for a severely flawed Democrat in order to avoid everything we’re seeing right now and have waiting for us in the next 3+ years.
Three comments up is someone lying and saying no democrat has ever appointed an FBI chair because a Clinton appointee was head of the agency when the allegations were ignored. It's heavily upvoted.
They're misremembering. What they're trying to remember is the fact that no Democrat has ever been appointed to run the FBI. Democratic presidents appoint Republicans to run the FBI.
You're making excuses for excuses.
Put away the pillory. You're obsessed.
keep excusing behavior you know is wrong.
This is not the gotcha you think it is.
First, the comment you chose is replying to another comment you don't choose that DID blame it on Clinton and got far more upvotes. And if you care so much about votes then this post of yours seems to have been rejected by the collective so far.
But more importantly, I responded to your broad generalized statement with one of my own. I don't know why you think a single counter example (even a good one and not just somebody being wrong) is going to shatter my statement as if it's a scientific theory.
First, the comment you chose is replying to another comment you don’t choose that DID blame it on Clinton and got far more upvotes.
The one blaming it on clinton wasn't telling an obvious lie. Since this is lemmy, the lie was welcome because it absolved the centrist wing of the party.
I don’t know why you think a single counter example (even a good one and not just somebody being wrong) is going to shatter my statement as if it’s a scientific theory.
Do you really want me to list all the times people on lemmy have lied and made excuses for the centrist wing of the democratic party? Will you immediately dismiss them and make excuses for them like your "being wrong" garbage?
You are a master craftsman of the finest excuses and obviously very flexible in regards to mental gymnastics.
I am having a blast reading this all.
They do exist, but in my experience they are somewhat rare here.
In my experience they aren't, but I'm often the one they're making excuses at.
You getting downvoted for this is just proof they hate you calling it out. If they weren't offended by the truth they'd stop downvoting you.
Edit: and it still happens when directly called on it too, no irony or shame from them
What mental fuckery is this? He got downvoted for being wrong, not as "proof he called it out". You must be a magat, because sane people can't twist like that.
"If you don't the party that didn't stop the Republicans you must be a Republican" good logic.
I was just thinking this. The FBI was completely in dependent back then. Still interesting to note.
Nice try
Not really trying anything. Just that whatever kept the FBI from pursuing Epstein, it was something other than a desire to protect Clinton. They had it in for Clinton and would have gone after this if they thought it would take him down.
They had it in for Clinton and would have gone after this if they thought it would take him down.
Except pay attention to credible accusations.