Dershowitz

[TexasTiger 12,961]

13 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

https://www.insider.com/alan-dershowitz-epstein-documents-virginia-giuffre-memoir-prove-innocence-2019-8

His defense is he only received a massage from a 13 year old while in his underwear. Even if he’s telling the truth, you really can’t see what’s wrong with that? 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

His defense is he only received a massage from a 13 year old while in his underwear. Even if he’s telling the truth, you really can’t see what’s wrong with that? 

You sure it was a 13 year old?

My wife and I have frequented Four Seasons Resort and Spa. Massages with underwear on are commonplace. What are you suggesting?

[TitanTiger 20,499]

8 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

You sure it was a 13 year old?

My wife and I have frequented Four Seasons Resort and Spa. Massages with underwear on are commonplace. What are you suggesting?

Well he's not suggesting that there's something wrong with getting a massage while being in your underwear.

But getting a massage from a 13-year old girl in your underwear is.

Do you have something to show that her stated age when the alleged incident occurred is incorrect?

[AUFAN78 3,911]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Well he's not suggesting that there's something wrong with getting a massage while being in your underwear.

But getting a massage from a 13-year old girl in your underwear is.

Do you have something to show that her stated age when the alleged incident occurred is incorrect?

Do you have something that proves it was from a 13 year old girl. If I'm being honest, I haven't studied this. Just asking for real substantiated evidence.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

9 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Do you have something that proves it was from a 13 year old girl. If I'm being honest, I haven't studied this. Just asking for real substantiated evidence.

The girl in question was known to have been part of Epstein underage girl sex ring and her age in the timeframe checks out.  It's known that Dershowitz was present at one of Epstein's houses where this was going on.  He doesn't even dispute this.  But his claim is he didn't have sex with anyone, just got a massage.  And the massage was given by this "old, old Russian woman."  And he kept his panties on.  And besides he doesn't even like massages that much.

All these pretty young girls around doing God knows what with older men all over the place and Dersh doesn't leave.  He doesn't report it to the cops.  Nah, he sticks around and opts for the massage with the old Russian woman.

Does this sound like a credible defense to you?

[AUFAN78 3,911]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

The girl in question was known to have been part of Epstein underage girl sex ring and her age in the timeframe checks out.  It's known that Dershowitz was present at one of Epstein's houses where this was going on.  He doesn't even dispute this.  But his claim is he didn't have sex with anyone, just got a massage.  And the massage was giving by this "old, old Russian woman."  And he kept his panties on.  And besides he doesn't even like massages that much.

All these pretty young girls around doing God knows what with older men all over the place and Dersh opts for the massage with the old Russian woman.

Does this sound like a credible defense to you?

Sounds sketchy for sure, but if we're honest it doesn't sound like proof a 13 year old provided the massage. I'm sure you agree.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

2 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Sounds sketchy for sure, but if we're honest it doesn't sound like proof a 13 year old provided the massage. I'm sure you agree.

Well to be clear, she isn't claiming she just gave him a massage, she's claiming he had sex with her on six occasions.  Outside of DNA from a rape kit and hidden camera footage, there really couldn't be any proof of that.

But his defense amounts to admitting that he was a good friend of Epstein's and that he went over to the same house where many of these sexual assaults of underage girls took place, but that he just "got a massage."  He doesn't claim she wasn't 13-years old at the time. He just tries to make us believe that he opted for an old Russian woman to give him a massage that he doesn't even particular enjoy getting in the first place.

If Dersh isn't disputing her age, why would you bother?

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Correction on one point:  Dersh claims that he wasn't aware of any underage girls there when he was present on the property.  But Epstein's butler testified under oath that Dersh was present at Epstein's residences at the same time underage girls were there.  

That said, I find it, again, hard to believe that he was simply unaware that this stuff was going on.  And that being the case, I find it exceedingly absurd that instead of sex, he chose to get a massage - that he claims he doesn't even particularly like - from an elderly Russian woman instead of one of the pretty girls around.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

8 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Well to be clear, she isn't claiming she just gave him a massage, she's claiming he had sex with her on six occasions.  Outside of DNA from a rape kit and hidden camera footage, there really couldn't be any proof of that.

But his defense amounts to admitting that he was a good friend of Epstein's and that he went over to the same house where many of these sexual assaults of underage girls took place, but that he just "got a massage."  He doesn't claim she wasn't 13-years old at the time. He just tries to make us believe that he opted for an old Russian woman to give him a massage that he doesn't even particular enjoy getting in the first place.

If Dersh isn't disputing her age, why would you bother?

I'm leery of David Boies and his real motives. Wreaks of Kavanaugh motives. My best guess is this ends similarly.

Let me add if proven that he committed crimes I hope they punish him to the fullest extent possible.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

1 minute ago, AUFAN78 said:

I'm leery of David Boies and his real motives. Wreaks of Kavanaugh motives. My best guess is this ends similarly.

I hardly see how one could look at Boies and Dershowitz and come away going - yeah, definitely trust Dershowitz over that Boies fellow.

At best it's a draw.  Dersh's story smells like bull****.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

4 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I hardly see how one could look at Boies and Dershowitz and come away going - yeah, definitely trust Dershowitz over that Boies fellow.

At best it's a draw.  Dersh's story smells like bull****.

Dershowitz blamed it all on attorney David Boies, saying that the allegations are his doing because Boies “is furious at me because I filed Bar charges, unethical Bar charges against him.” Dershowitz claimed that Boies “threatened me, that unless I withdrew the Bar charges he would find somebody else to accuse me.”

[TitanTiger 20,499]

2 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Dershowitz blamed it all on attorney David Boies, saying that the allegations are his doing because Boies “is furious at me because I filed Bar charges, unethical Bar charges against him.” Dershowitz claimed that Boies “threatened me, that unless I withdrew the Bar charges he would find somebody else to accuse me.”

Given the fanciful account he gives of how he somehow managed to go to Epstein's properties, didn't see hide nor hair of an underage girl having sex with Epstein and dozens/hundreds of other men, and only opted for a massage that he doesn't particularly like from an "old old Russian woman," why would I find his explanation as to why he's being accused any more credible?

[AUFAN78 3,911]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Given the fanciful account he gives of how he somehow managed to go to Epstein's properties, didn't see hide nor hair of an underage girl having sex with Epstein and dozens/hundreds of other men, and only opted for a massage that he doesn't particularly like from an "old old Russian woman," why would I find his explanation as to why he's being accused any more credible?

I think that is for the courts to decide. I wouldn't get worked up over it. Truth will prevail.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, AUFAN78 said:

I think that is for the courts to decide. I wouldn't get worked up over it. Truth will prevail.

I don't think anyone was arguing that he be tried here on AUF and was fretting over getting it right.  It's a discussion board.  We talk about things.  No one's worked up, we're just calling a spade a spade.

Sometimes you offer the weirdest takes.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

I don't think anyone was arguing that he be tried here on AUF and was fretting over getting it right.  It's a discussion board.  We talk about things.  No one's worked up, we're just calling a spade a spade.

Sometimes you offer the weirdest takes.

Ha! If I'm honest, It certainly sounds like you side with Boies. I believe in Justice. Not sure what's weird about that?

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, AUFAN78 said:

Ha! If I'm honest, It certainly sounds like you side with Boies. I believe in Justice. Not sure what's weird about that?

Boies is immaterial to me.  You could be representing the girl for all I care.  I don't find Dershowitz explanations credible at all and that's what we're discussing.  No one is suggesting justice isn't important.

 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

9 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Boies is immaterial to me.  You could be representing the girl for all I care.  I don't find Dershowitz explanations credible at all and that's what we're discussing.  No one is suggesting justice isn't important.

 

As I previously stated, if proven that he committed crimes I hope they punish him to the fullest extent possible. Not sure what you are looking for? I'm neither the judge nor jury.

[homersapien 11,393]

Samantha Bee Dunks on Trump’s Defense Team: ‘A Virtual Dream Team of Rape Culture’

Early in her weekly show Wednesday night, Samantha Bee played a clip of Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) telling Fox News that he thinks not calling witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial is the “right thing to do.” 

“And if anyone’s an expert on witnesses not talking about the crimes they saw, it’s Jim Jordan,” the Full Frontal host said, putting up a headline about how the congressman allegedly knew about sexual abuse at Ohio State and said nothing. 

That was a preview of what was to come later in the opening segment when Bee took a closer look at President Trump’s defense team “Continuing his tradition of appointing only the best, Trump’s defenders include Ken Starr, Alan Dershowitz and Jim Jordan,” she said. “It’s a virtual dream team of rape culture.” 

Bee ran through their troubling resumes, including Starr’s tenure as president of the Christian Baylor University. “Just to be clear, when Jesus said to ‘turn the other cheek,’ he didn’t mean away from people getting assaulted,” she said. 

And there’s Dershowitz who once called statutory rape an “outdated concept.” Bee added, “In Dershowitz’s defense, it’s not like he was close friends with notorious pedophile and didn’t-kill-himself-er Jeffrey Epstein. Oh no, I’m sorry, he totally was.” 

“It is infuriating that these three men are allowed to show their faces in polite society, much less defend the captain of the rape culture all-star team,” she said. “Look, the impeachment case isn’t about sexual assault. But for women and survivors it is horrifying to see these men congeal together to protect each other.” 

The host ended the segment by predicting that when this is all over, Jordan, Starr and Deshowitz might just start their own rapist-defending law firm: “The only law firm whose phone number is 911.” 

 

 

 

[AUFAN78 3,911]

29 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Samantha Bee Dunks on Trump’s Defense Team: ‘A Virtual Dream Team of Rape Culture’

Early in her weekly show Wednesday night, Samantha Bee played a clip of Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) telling Fox News that he thinks not calling witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial is the “right thing to do.” 

“And if anyone’s an expert on witnesses not talking about the crimes they saw, it’s Jim Jordan,” the Full Frontal host said, putting up a headline about how the congressman allegedly knew about sexual abuse at Ohio State and said nothing. 

That was a preview of what was to come later in the opening segment when Bee took a closer look at President Trump’s defense team “Continuing his tradition of appointing only the best, Trump’s defenders include Ken Starr, Alan Dershowitz and Jim Jordan,” she said. “It’s a virtual dream team of rape culture.” 

Bee ran through their troubling resumes, including Starr’s tenure as president of the Christian Baylor University. “Just to be clear, when Jesus said to ‘turn the other cheek,’ he didn’t mean away from people getting assaulted,” she said. 

And there’s Dershowitz who once called statutory rape an “outdated concept.” Bee added, “In Dershowitz’s defense, it’s not like he was close friends with notorious pedophile and didn’t-kill-himself-er Jeffrey Epstein. Oh no, I’m sorry, he totally was.” 

“It is infuriating that these three men are allowed to show their faces in polite society, much less defend the captain of the rape culture all-star team,” she said. “Look, the impeachment case isn’t about sexual assault. But for women and survivors it is horrifying to see these men congeal together to protect each other.” 

The host ended the segment by predicting that when this is all over, Jordan, Starr and Deshowitz might just start their own rapist-defending law firm: “The only law firm whose phone number is 911.” 

 

 

 

That you would even quote a vile woman who called Ivanka Trump a "feckless ****" is telling. What an insult to women. Simply pathetic homes. This vile woman is no patriot. Know that.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

56 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

That you would even quote a vile woman who called Ivanka Trump a "feckless ****" is telling. What an insult to women. Simply pathetic homes. This vile woman is no patriot. Know that.

I have no love for Samantha Bee, but "shoot the messenger" isn't a defense.  She's making a point about the lawyers Trump is using in this impeachment trial, using their own sordid pasts.  Either point out where she's factually wrong or don't, but "she's a horrible person" is irrelevant to what she said.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

17 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I have no love for Samantha Bee, but "shoot the messenger" isn't a defense.  She's making a point about the lawyers Trump is using in this impeachment trial, using their own sordid pasts.  Either point out where she's factually wrong or don't, but "she's a horrible person" is irrelevant to what she said.

No need for defense really, just a statement of fact. But if you insist, were the three people she mentioned indicted on charges referenced? If not that's her mere opinion right? 

[TitanTiger 20,499]

1 minute ago, AUFAN78 said:

No need for defense really, just a statement of fact. But if you insist, were the three people she mentioned indicted on charges referenced? If not that's her mere opinion right? 

Is "not indicted" enough for you?  Would that line of thought apply to Hillary Clinton then?  Since she wasn't indicted, no one should say mean things about her emails and such anymore, should they?

[AUFAN78 3,911]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

Is "not indicted" enough for you?  Would that line of thought apply to Hillary Clinton then?  Since she wasn't indicted, no one should say mean things about her emails and such anymore, should they?

Convince me with evidence they did something wrong. Mere opinion doesn't fly. 

Ah, whataboutism. Nice!

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Just now, AUFAN78 said:

Convince me with evidence they did something wrong. Mere opinion doesn't fly. 

I don't have to convince you.  All I said was "she's a big meanie" isn't an argument. 

 

Just now, AUFAN78 said:

Ah, whataboutism. Nice!

One of these days you dolts are going to learn what whataboutism is.  Hint:  It's not questioning your logic using a counterexample.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I don't have to convince you.  All I said was "she's a big meanie" isn't an argument. 

 

One of these days you dolts are going to learn what whataboutism is.  Hint:  It's not questioning your logic using a counterexample.

I didn't present an argument, but rather a statement.

This thread isn't about the hildabeast. Anyone other than a dolt would know that.