• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 minutes ago

      Putin was all over those. But we went straight into a Russian Reset under Obama, regardless.

      Almost as though corruption is a feature, not a bug

    • MochiGoesMeow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 hour ago

      It’s crazy how much corruption is on full display. I guess that’s one of the only positive things about the internet lately. We can see the whole world is going through it. All the time.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 hour ago

      That journalist in Malta does.

      Or she would have, had she not been murdered with a car bomb.

  • wpb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Advocating for them (the government, whatever team they happen to be on) acting on the Epstein files is like asking a toddler nicely to punish themselves. It is not in their best interest to do so, because it hurts their main benefactor, the owning class. The only way to have a shot at this happening is if the government is no longer owned by the owning class. To get there, you’d need to get rid of a number of things:

    • the threat of capital flight (“if you do something I don’t like, I will take my gizmo factory elsewhere”)
    • the ability of the owning class to shape the opinions of the electorate through owning the media (social and legacy) they consume
    • the ability of the owning class to legally bribe politicians (“if you do this thing I like, you will get a cushy job at my gizmo factory, or I’ll pay you 500k to talk at my event for an hour”, also super PACs)

    Until you get rid of all this, no one (on any side of the aisle) will ever do anything about the epstein files, no matter how many parades/protests you do. Your collective votes do not weigh up against the three points I mentioned. See also the Panama papers.

    Oh and voting doesn’t work to fix the three points, because the three points ensure that most candidates (on either side of the aisle) do not benefit from doing anything about them, and the ones that do don’t have much of a shot at winning (see point 2).

  • tackleberry
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    15 hours ago

    You see why they rather bomb Iran than deal with the Epstein case

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I have not read any of the files yet, but I have been told they include unsubstantiated and un-investigated reports, some of which may be “trolling” and not even attempt to contain any truth.

      That said, cannibalism is, IMO, a lesser moral failing than what the victim reported (and continue to support).

    • Lantsu@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Most likely codename for drugs, “jerky” for something or other. It just takes away attention from the real crime of raping underage people. Yeah, maybe some got raped to death, but that don’t mean anyone ate them.

    • tackleberry
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Let’s just say, not everyone who went to that island made it out… alive

  • M137@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    15 hours ago

    https://youtu.be/ghUNyJzLkfE

    Here’s a video about the cannibalism part, I seriously can’t imagine it being anything else than that.

    (Graphic warning content. No fucked up images of audio, just the ideas and images you get when he’s going through everything. Don’t watch if you’re even a bit unsure if you can handle it).

    • bss03@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Yeah, maybe I’m being dense, but I don’t see any cannibalism evidence presented in that video. After watching it, I’m even less concerned something like that might have happened.

    • Lantsu@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I’m all for believing they raped underage people. Teens, preteens, kids. I can believe that. But these “jerky” things are so fucking lazy, it’s just drugs. It’s a lazy codename for drugs. And the stupid chickenleg picture is just some old art project photo from Spain or whatever country it was.

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    24 hours ago

    And they say they can’t catch criminals if end to end encryption exists. All this was over email in plaintext with their primary addresses.

    • Janx@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Exactly. It’s not random, they keep the worst, most damaging parts redacted or unreleased…

  • gnutrino@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    173
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    *in the US. Norway has charged Thorbjørn Jagland and in the UK Peter Mandelson and the Andrew formerly known as Prince were arrested, plus a number of other countries have criminal investigations ongoing. All so far for corruption rather than sex crimes but that’s probably a function of what’s easier to prove in court.

      • redsand@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        22 hours ago

        He was released quickly. He and the diplomat were only arrested for leaking state secrets. GHCQ couldn’t even pretend to give a fuck about the kids, rapes, murders, etc…

      • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        ·
        1 day ago

        On the one hand, whatever sticks. On the other, WHY can’t we somehow make child sex trafficking charges stick?

        • Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          We already knew after Jimmy Saville (a high profile celebrity, pedophile, and sexual predator who victimized hundreds - likely thousands - over a period spanning sixty years, only getting “caught” after his death when victims could speak up without fear of reprisal) that there are a large number of people in British media and government who are not only willing to turn a blind eye, but to actively assist a predator in acquiring fresh victims and crushing any investigations into them, either to avoid scandal or because someone even higher up the chain told them to. It’s not surprising that the rot reaches all the way to the top.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Rape cases are notoriously difficult to prove, even if the victim goes to the police immediately and there’s physical evidence taken.

          First of all, the supposed rapist can say “There was no rape”. At times, the physical evidence can make that seem unlikely. In particular if there’s evidence of violence and there’s semen, then it’s easy to believe that violence + sex = rape. But, if either of those is missing it’s hard to prove that a rape even occurred.

          Second, the supposed rapist can say “It wasn’t me”. Before DNA analysis it was hard to prove who was at the scene. These days, if there’s semen at the scene at least you can say that a certain man was present and involved in something sexual.

          Third, the supposed rapist can say “It was consensual”. Given that most of the time there are only 2 witnesses, it’s difficult to say which witness is lying and which is telling the truth. A jury might have a strong suspicion, but a strong suspicion isn’t “reasonable doubt”.

          In the Epstein cases, you can at least sometimes eliminate the third objection. If the victims were underage, they couldn’t consent. But, that still leaves the other two major issues. Those are the ones that really require physical evidence. And, in these cases, the evidence is long gone. So, you can’t prove that a rape occurred using physical evidence, nor can you prove that a certain man was at the scene using physical evidence. What you’re left with is two witnesses using their flawed memory to recall details of something that happened a decade ago.

          Maybe using flight logs and emails you can prove that Andrew was on the island at the same time as a victim. Maybe you can put Andrew in a photograph with the victim, showing that he had met her at some point. That’s enough to be very suspicious, but it’s not enough to get a rape conviction.

          Now, you said “child sex trafficking” not rape. But, if anything, that’s even harder to prove. Step 1 of proving sex trafficking is probably proving the “sex” part, and that’s going to be extremely difficult a decade later without any physical evidence. As for the trafficking, you’d have to prove that certain people were moved to certain places. But, that would rely on accurate documents like flight logs listing everybody on a flight. But, we’ve seen that a lot of the flight logs are incomplete, or they don’t name the girls on the flights.

          I’m sure there are powerful people trying to slow, stall or stop any attempt to prosecute anybody for what happened. But, at the same time, even if they were putting in a massive effort, it might not be possible to actually get a conviction anymore because too much time has passed and too much of the evidence is gone.

        • NottaLottaOcelot@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          1 day ago

          Because when the top people presiding over sex trafficking cases look in the mirror, they find 14 year old girls attractive too.

        • Because money and power are more important to people making decisions than doing things for the betterment of society.

          Sadly the best people to lead are usually people who don’t want positions of power like that.

          Not that anyone in the “royal” family did literally anything to get where they are…

      • PhoenixDog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Iirc, that was for sharing state secrets, not for being a pedophile rapist.

        They got Al Capone on tax evasion.

        • Aniki@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          They got Al Capone on tax evasion.

          yeah because that’s what matters to the overlords: that they get a fair share of your profits, doesn’t matter where you got them from

    • Ricky Rigatoni@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 day ago

      Andy was released after 11 hours. The british “police” keep tradesmen in jail longer for having a utility knife on them.

  • gilarelli@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    140
    ·
    1 day ago

    Don’t worry, they’ll get to it once the Panama Papers are dealt with 😎👍

    • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Wouldn’t even be a far fetch to believe one of the reasons nothing happens around the Epstein papers are the assassinations of journalists who investigated the Panama papers…

  • Eternal192@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Most of those people are currently government officials in different countries around the world and they see Americans aren’t bothered by their high ranking criminals so they don’t bother with their own.

        • bss03@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          24 minutes ago

          I think it’s weird for beef jerky to be “the only thing I eat”, but I know people that do the “carnivore diet” and that’s supposed to be meat-only.

          Maybe it is code for some illicit item that you might measure in pounds and consume, but I don’t think that’s obvious or certain.