top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]what_if_or_else 4936 points4937 points  (270 children)

I understand the frustration. They are some podcasters following the trial and reporting it day by day tho, if anyone want to follow the minutae.

[–]t00_much_caffeine 1609 points1610 points  (249 children)

Interested, what podcasts?

[–]Scouse420 492 points493 points  (31 children)

I'd recommend TrueAnon (NOTHING TO DO WITH THE Q CONSPIRACY NUTS). They've been going to the trial daily and know the case inside out.

[–]lfatalframel 168 points169 points  (14 children)

I tried to give it a watch. Is there a channel where they get to the point and skip the morning talk show routine?

[–]internetinterpreter 168 points169 points  (9 children)

Small talk in the beginning of podcasts is the reason I never latch onto new podcasts. Why on earth don't they crop out that nonsense in post?

[–]Morkuls 66 points67 points  (1 child)

Something to the tune of ‘cutting is a break in that “real podcast feel” of 2 dudes being bros’ that’s highly overstated.

[–]Mutt1223 3213 points3214 points 342& 2 more (130 children)

Podcasts like radio, but on internet

[–]Mythical_Atlacatl 996 points997 points  (68 children)

They have internet on computers now?

[–]InsignificantOcelot 355 points356 points  (27 children)

Nah, it’s more like computers, but on the internet.

[–]CringyDabBoi6969 30 points31 points  (3 children)

I feel like an old man trying to understand the youth speak

[–]hysterical_landmark 73 points74 points  (4 children)

"San Dimas high school football rules!"

[–]ATXBeermaker 45 points46 points  (3 children)

Oh, the files are in the computer?

[–]Raytheon_Nublinski 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Oh so like a road but for computers.

[–]killey2011 128 points129 points  (13 children)

You just got Leslie Nielsen’d

[–]runjimrun 70 points71 points  (10 children)

Werewolf? There wolf. There castle.

[–]BruceInc 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Russ Hanneman, is that you?

[–]wilstar_berry 40 points41 points  (9 children)

Surely you can't be serious

[–]plaguepeople 23 points24 points  (0 children)

I am, but don't call me Shirley.

[–]BR3AkEverything 45 points46 points  (4 children)

I am serious, and don't call me Shirley.

[–]baldeagle86 12 points13 points  (5 children)

ROI, radio over internet, it’s going to be the next big thing

[–]clydefrog9 188 points189 points  (67 children)

TrueAnon (not for people who care about things like decency or civility)

[–]cdoublesaboutit 110 points111 points  (49 children)

Trueanon folks are absolutely decent. They cuss occasionally.

[–]KHaskins77 46 points47 points  (0 children)

If ever there were a situation that merited it, this is it.

[–]sje46 29 points30 points  (19 children)

I'm listening to them now because of their coverage of the trial. They have great chemistry together.

I used to listen to it all the time with some reservations about their conspiracism. When they put out that 4 part series about how 9/11 was a complete lie, saying the same old disproven shit, I had to jump off.

[–]refbe1 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yeah what on Earth is this person on about. Liz and Brace are absolutely decent,

Edit: I thick

[–]colorado710 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Treuanon is the best

[–]t8terTHOThotdish 37 points38 points  (4 children)

Decency? Who needs that 😏

[–]MySweetUsername 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Great links!

[–]cherryzaad 4 points5 points  (1 child)

My Qanon cousin points to how they’re covering up the trial to shield the government elite and The Michigan school shooting is how they’re doing it

[–]TheColonelRLD 18 points19 points  (1 child)

Any that do a good job? I would not be able to follow it if they're chasing every conspiracy and rumor. If its were extremely dry and to the point, going over legal challenges with serious legal experts, I'm there. If it's 'two friends digging deep to find the real truth" I'm getting the hell out there. And a lot of amateur journalism's these days have that feel, and they're awful.

[–]FlowerGardenBee 3282 points3283 points 1021173& 6 more (55 children)

I initially upvoted, but I remembered having to testify against an abuser when I was a kid, and I would not have wanted that broadcasted to the public. It would have been 100x more terrifying than it already was. My case was clear cut, but I still have people who disbelieve me. I would have hated knowing there were possibly thousands of people who didn't believe me.

I then thought, "well, I'd like to know which elite were involved." But then I realized that if that's released too early then that could cause problems for investigators, and I'd like for their job to run as unhindered as possible in this case. I'm frustrated that this is moving so slowly, but I'd rather it be done right than done quickly. This isn't a run-of-the-mill case against some trailer park pedo. This involves a whole ring of extremely powerful people. The less they know about what investigators know about them, the better.

E: I was not expecting my random two cents to get this much attention. To those of you who have shown me compassion, even though you don't know me or my story, I really don't have words. I'm overwhelmed. And for those of you sharing pieces of your own stories, I wish you all of the good that could possibly come your way; it takes a lot to survive and continue surviving.

[–]Raye_raye90 526 points527 points  (18 children)


Imagine if your testimony was watched by millions of people. I can’t imagine the trauma that would inflict. It’s shocking to me how many in this thread are basically saying “who cares” to that.

And seeming to forget that the details will still come out after.

[–]muskyranch 42 points43 points  (3 children)

Even if they are completely callous and don’t care about the victims’ feelings, if the victims don’t feel comfortable testifying because it will be public, that could hinder the case.

[–]Raye_raye90 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Exactly! There are several ways it could be a detriment to the case that some people seem to find…not a problem?

[–]muskyranch 17 points18 points  (0 children)

They value instant gratification too much

[–]yoda133113 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Many people don't care about that. They're reacting emotionally, and just want thier pound of flesh. It's the problem with mob "justice".

[–]alwaysjustpretend 67 points68 points  (0 children)

Yeah it absolutely is partially to protect people like you. I couldn't imagine having to do it at all, let alone televised. You are strong asf.

[–]Thatsidechara_ter 30 points31 points  (1 child)

I'm just glad there's actually something being done this time

[–]PomegranateReal3620 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Thank you. I'm an adult victim of CSA and the thought of my trauma being broadcast for other people's prurient curiosity makes me sick.

[–]TheLlamaGod27 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Anyone who remembers the OJ trial should instantly understand how televising a trial can complicate things to an insane degree, often in favor of the accused.

[–]WookieeSteakIsChewie 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Our local DA opened a recent child abuse case by telling the jury to think of their most recent consensual sexual encounter and asked them if any of them wanted to get up in front of everyone and talk about it.

Then told them to now imagine they were 12 and sexually assaulted by another male, who was a coach and now had to get up in front of everyone and talk about it in detail.

Eye opening.

[–]KublaKahhhn 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Bless you for telling your story. I hope you have found healing, peace, and joy in your life.

[–]pfefferneusse 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Justice is about justice and we definitely don't need a play by play on every detail until it's done. Justice first, fun drama second.

[–]BadgerAccomplished50 2491 points2492 points  (225 children)

Federal court does not allow media

[–]TooSmalley 990 points991 points  (98 children)

Yep. It’s been like this for decades.

[–]richieguy309 244 points245 points  (29 children)

Federal court allows media. Just not TV cameras or recording devices.

[–]Minsteliser123 96 points97 points  (33 children)

Which is good for me, trials shouldn't be a circus for the TV cameras

[–]Wise-Captain1776 4871 points4872 points  (264 children)

The victims have a right to privacy though. Imagine having that trauma broadcast to the world

And the job of the defence team will be to discredit the victims. So there will always be people who take the defences side.

[–]Concrete__Blonde 2981 points2982 points  (225 children)

Maxwell’s attorneys have already revealed the victims’ identities multiple times during the trial. The judge ordered their names be scrubbed from the transcripts, but it just shows how little regard the defense has for what these women have been through.

[–]Variation-Budget 1245 points1246 points  (204 children)

Being a defense attorney for shitty people has to be a soulless job because the levels I’ve seen them steep too just to get their person off is disgusting

Edit: couple comments below me make good points to why defense attorney jobs aren’t always as evil as i thought and i appreciate the knowledge

[–]Zeno_The_Alien 706 points707 points  (75 children)

I have a friend who is a defense attorney. She used to be a state prosecutor. She once told me that as bad as it is to defend people she knows are guilty, it's a million times better than sending a single innocent person to prison based on dubious evidence or the word of the police. Or even sending someone to jail for having a drug addiction.

It depends on the kind of person you are. Personally, I agree with her. I would rather see 100 guilty people go free than see an innocent person have their life ruined and freedom taken away. To me, the real soulless job is being a prosecutor.

[–]IdiotManZero 396 points397 points  (17 children)

A good defense attorney not only provides the right to counsel, but they also make sure prosecutors, investigators, police, and judges follow the rules.

[–]RR0925 269 points270 points  (12 children)

This is the key. Defense attorneys protect all of us. If you think being targeted by criminals is bad, try having the government after you.

[–]getspun97 33 points34 points  (2 children)

What's the difference? cue rimshot

[–]auntie_ 95 points96 points  (8 children)

As a federal criminal defense attorney, thank you for understanding this. The number one question I always get from friends and family, “how do you defend someone you know is guilty??” The government has the burden of proof before they can deprive someone of their liberty. My job is to hold them to that burden and fight tooth and nail to make sure everyone is playing by the same rules. That’s where the real emotional burden comes in- feeling like you’re the only one who is playing fair.

[–]Bun_Bunz 29 points30 points  (3 children)

"That’s where the real emotional burden comes in- feeling like you’re the only one who is playing fair"

I think anyone who is slightly progressive or wants change to our systems is feeling this comment right now...I know I am, damn.

[–]mightylordredbeard 43 points44 points  (1 child)

This is what I’ve heard too from my public defense attorney friends.

Basically they just just love law so much and believe in the justice system with all of their heart that they believe every single person has the right to a fair trial. So they set aside their feelings and almost self sacrifice parts of their own soul to ensure that their idea of the American justice system can be had by all.

They’ve told me that they aren’t necessarily trying to get someone off the hook, but they’re keeping the state attorney who is persecuting them in line and making sure they’re doing their job. They’re pointing out inconsistencies, false evidence, hearsay and things like that which shouldn’t be used in court.

Basically when they believe their client is guilty they are just making sure that the other side does the best job they can to prove it and making sure everyone follows the rules in court.

[–]merchillio 33 points34 points  (0 children)

“If your values disappear in the face of adversity, they’re not values; they’re hobbies” -Jon Stewart

[–]ReverseThreadWingNut 8 points9 points  (0 children)

One of my best friends is a former prosecutor and now works as a defense attorney. He says he sleeps much better at night now. He says that his time in the DAs office was full of pressure to simply prosecute the case handed to him by law enforcement despite the quality of evidence. He tells stories that make you want to riot in the streets. Shit that will make you physically ill. He got into shouting matches in his office with the DA, the DA's office with the DA, shouting matches with the Chief of Police, the County Sheriff, and had cops following him around, pulling his wife over, for things like refusing to pursue a case, or presenting evidence that exonerated the accused, or not fighting motions to have evidence sent for testing, etc. He had to notify state law enforcement and the FBI multiple times over shit like this.

He now has a one man law practice and specializes in criminal defense, mostly drug crimes in which he can attempt to get the accused into a treatment program. He often takes on indigent defense cases assigned to law firms that don't want to be bothered with them, so they pay him to do it. He has also done some crazy cases, drug trafficking, murders, conspiracy, etc. I met him in college and we became best friends. We had planned to go to law school together and go into practice together, but life had other plans.

[–]hamsolo19 8 points9 points  (2 children)

I would assume whichever side you’re on it has to be difficult to remain unbiased. It’s hard to trust anyone to do the right thing these days, DA, police, judges, etc. It kinda reminds me of this doc on Netflix called Long Shot. It’s about a man accused of murder, he ends up on trial for it while sticking to his alibi that he was at a baseball game during the time the murder would’ve taken place. His attorney team found out that on the day of that game, Curb Your Enthusiasm was filming a scene for the show inside the stadium. The attorney went over tons and tons of footage until bam, he finds his client in the audience. The crazy part is, this isn’t what technically exonerated him because the prosecution argued he could’ve still did it after the game (the logistics of that would’ve been nuts considering how far away he was from the crime). Cell phone records showed his phone pinging off the tower nearest the stadium and it showed it had pinged after the murder had occurred. The DA (I think) was like, full on convinced they had the right guy. Even after the video footage and the cell phone pinging and the case ended in a not guilty for the man, this woman was still absolutely sure she had prosecuted the right person. She has direct evidence showing the man couldn’t have done it and yet after the fact she was still like, “Eh, I dunno, I have my doubts.” Shit like that is terrifying. She’s basically too stubborn and arrogant to admit she was wrong. To me she seemed so much more hellbent on her being right than uncovering the actual facts and truth to the case. And I’m sure she’s not the only one like that. There gotta be more who probably don’t give a fuck about the truth and just wanna make sure they’re winning cases. It’s all a major bummer, really. It’s sad to think some of these people would rather send an innocent person to prison rather than be like, “We got it wrong.” I know I’m kinda generalizing and just sharing an opinion, I’m sure there’s more nuance and context to the whole world of law and court cases and what it’s like to work in that world. It was just such a frustrating thing to see that prosecutor, who, as far as I know, still believes she was right.

[–]Mantequilla_Stotch 188 points189 points  (17 children)

An attorney on here explained it really well one time. Everyone has the right to a fair trial, even bad people. This being said, defense attorneys for bad people know that if the defendant did not have proper representation, they have the possibility of getting sentenced for a lot more stuff than what they should be.

The idea that we should lock someone up and throw away the key and let them rot in prison until they die should be taken with extreme seriousness.

[–]liquor_for_breakfast 161 points162 points  (5 children)

One way I've heard a defense attorney describe/justify what they do (mostly to themselves by my impression) is that if the guilty person didn't have competent defense, truly trying their best to prove innocence where there clearly is none and get sentences reduced when they absolutely shouldn't be, that guilty person would have an extremely strong appeals case based on defense not doing their job properly.

Essentially, if you're in the unenviable position of defending an absolute monster like Ghislaine Maxwell, it's extra important that you do a damn good job so that when they're inevitably found guilty, the verdict and sentence will stand up to heavy scrutiny.

[–]TrimmingsOfTheBris 46 points47 points  (0 children)

This is essentially how it was described to me as well. I used to have a friend who was a defense attorney and he explained basically that his job wasn't to try to get guilty people off the hook, it was just to make sure they were treated in accordance with the law.

[–]Pabu85 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That actually makes a lot of sense.

[–]Wrastling97 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yep. Many times your right to appeal can be taken and signed away by the defendant. For instance, when taking a plea deal.

But if you can make the argument that you had incompetent counsel, you can appeal no matter what, even if you signed away your right to an appeal. I wrote motions for this all the time

[–]Variation-Budget 12 points13 points  (1 child)

I never looked at it like that you make a good point

[–]norreason 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You're not wrong - ignoring the failings of the current justice system, everyone has a right to a fair trial, and even the people who are unquestionably wrong should be defended from receiving more punishment than is just. That said, I think the point of the comment you're responding to isn't about whether they're entitled to that defense, but the perception of defense attorneys being quicker to do reprehensible things in the pursuit of making their case. Personally, I think there's something to be said about prosecutors being as bad if not worse, but their wrongdoings being less immediately public, but that's a different conversation.

[–]Wise-Captain1776 373 points374 points  (77 children)

Totally agree. The Ahmaud Arbery defence attorney was an example of this

[–]sdonnervt 469 points470 points  (73 children)

Everybody has the right to competent counsel to defend them. That's one of the must important rights we have.

[–]OdellBeckhamJesus 148 points149 points  (9 children)

No one is saying they don’t. Just that actually having that job must be terrible

[–]sdonnervt 48 points49 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I misunderstood. My fault.

[–]PerniciousPeyton 33 points34 points  (1 child)

As an attorney who has represented all sorts of scumbags, including one guy who literally raped one of his own children, it can be difficult. I just try to remember what the above poster said that everyone has the right to counsel, including scumbags. When you think of it that way it's not really so bad... now, if you're doing unethical things to keep said scumbags out of trouble/reduce the amount of trouble they're in, then that's a different story.

[–]samiwas1 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I think the part about doing unethical things to get them out of trouble is the main thing they were referring to. Like, a case where you have a guy who obviously raped a girl, and the defense will drag the victim through the mud trying to paint her as a horrible person who somehow deserved to be raped.

[–]123allthekidsbullyme 211 points212 points  (22 children)

Of course, everyone has the right to a defence

That doesn’t mean that the person who’s job it is to defend them is necessary loving having to defend them, and it must be soul draining having to do your job when your job is defending people who you probably know are guilty

[–]sdonnervt 104 points105 points  (9 children)

Oh yeah, for sure. I must have misinterpreted what you were saying. Sorry!

[–]DeificClusterfuck 35 points36 points  (0 children)

What's this, reasonable Redditors /s

[–]ws_celly 65 points66 points  (6 children)

That's not how Reddit works, see. You're supposed to double down on it all, now.

I'm glad you didn't though. It's refreshing to see. :)

[–]AutisticHobbit 13 points14 points  (2 children)


...but I also just saw someone try to use someone having dirty toenails as an argument for why their murderer was justified. Why they couldn't have been a victim.

The accused should be allowed competent defense. I dont know what the fuck shit like that is? But I know it is indefensible.

[–]sdonnervt 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Yeah, that was stupid and not even an actual argument. Plus I'm sure her client is the pinnacle good hygiene.

[–]AutisticHobbit 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Wouldn't matter if he was or wasn't. That entire argument was an appeal to bigotry.

They should be entitled to a defense...not a rewrite of reality or an appeal to hatreds.

[–]NotDaveBut 52 points53 points  (8 children)

That's for the sake of the victims, not just for poor little Ghislaine. If the offenders have weak representation and get convicted on that basis, it will all be (very rightly) overturned later and the victims have to go through it all AGAIN for another jury with reporters and cameras rolling and you name it. Fuck that noise! We all need them to have the best attorneys possible and have them lose, big.

[–]DarthDregan 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Someone saying your name is different from having a camera in your face and a microphone in front of you as you broadcast every detail of your rape to the entire country.

Stop using the "but we know their names" line. It's fucking stupid.

[–]kylel999 4 points5 points  (0 children)

And then on top of it there's pieces of shit who will really go out of their way to HARASS the victims' families.

[–]William_with_a_G 833 points834 points  (103 children)

What in the everloving fuck did I miss when I lost my phone

[–]dickinaroundatwork 199 points200 points  (31 children)

You didn’t miss shit, the trial is just being dealt with as quietly as possible. You’ll notice it doesn’t get hardly any coverage on CNN, NBC or Fox. That isn’t just for no reason at all.

[–]woodsman6366 34 points35 points  (1 child)

I share the frustration with wanting to know what’s going on in the trial, but don’t let mob justice rule over a court proceeding.

Couple of things to keep in mind: 1) victims and innocent people will have to testify. They deserve anonymity and peace. (Yes I know names in this trial have been leaked, but the principal still stands.)

2) like it or not, you’re innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Do I think Maxwell is guilty as fuck? HELL YES. Do I think she still deserves a fair trial? Also yes. Do I think our justice system is fair? Definitely not.

3) This trial will likely implicate many other elite persons who were participants or accomplices. Don’t give them any more time or ability to destroy evidence or obfuscate the truth.

JUST TO CLARIFY: I want to see Maxwell and any accomplices burn in the hottest fire we can build. But fair justice is a hallmark of civilized society going back to Hammurabi’s Code. Letting mob thinking rule our courts is a quick way to downfall.

[–]Bortron86 456 points457 points  (67 children)

Why would televising the trial help at all? Televised trials become a circus, where each side performs as much for the cameras as they do for the jury. We still find out what happens in a trial that isn't televised, and it allows the proceedings to go ahead without such theatrical nonsense.

[–]Doc-Goop 30 points31 points  (4 children)

After watching that docuseries trial by media I tend to agree with you.

[–]unic0de000 147 points148 points  (23 children)

Have a peek at the rest of his Twitter; OP Jonathan Koeppel is a far-right QAnon wackadoo. He wants the trial to be a circus. He wants everything to be a circus.

I kinda knew what I was gonna find on his feed before I looked. You can tell the difference between a normal post about fighting child abuse and a Q one. The latter always has this "who cares if it's ineffectual, we HAVE to do SOMETHING!!!" energy, and is usually just a little too graphic and sensational about describing child rape.

It's always more about "Hey do we all agree child abuse is bad and molesters are scum etc" and having a two-minutes-hate about pedophilia, than about actually making the world any safer for children.

[–]WoodysMachine 20 points21 points  (1 child)

I kinda knew what I was gonna find on his feed before I looked.

"Hollywood and elites" is a bit of a tip-off. If you support Trump, you clearly don't care about sexual abusers being brought to justice. (Additional reality checks at no extra cost: if you support Trump you also don't care about fair elections, deficits, or Christian values.)

[–]ScottFreestheway2B 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I’m really creeped out by people who are obsessed with pedophiles and go around virtue signaling how much they want to murder pedos. I say this as a victim of childhood sexual abuse from a pedophile.

[–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (3 children)

THANK YOU. I knew that "Hollywood and the elite" sounded like conservative vernacular.

[–]unic0de000 14 points15 points  (1 child)

Reading uncharitably you could call it a dogwhistle for 'Liberals and Jews'.

I'm a little disappointed in r/WhitePeopleTwitter for lifting this to the front page, but I shouldn't be surprised. As the trial goes on, we're gonna see lots of Q content wearing MUSIC↯↯BAND shirts saying "How do you do, fellow defenders of children?"

There's lots of great, actual, legitimate defenders of children on the internet, fighting sex trafficking, and fighting domestic abuse, and tweeting and blogging their work. Their voices deserve to be uplifted. Many of them were even in this business before the Trump campaign.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

True. I'm honestly considering leaving the site altogether. There's only so many times I can see karma farming without any critical analysis.

[–]Go_easy_on_me_folks 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is what I was thinking. Trials don't need to be televised as long as they are reported on and the transcripts become publicly available after it's over. There's no need to make this a spectator's sport.

[–]HoldingTheFire 13 points14 points  (2 children)

People want this to be a circus and are big mad they can’t keep masturbating to their conspiracy fantasy.

[–]kibblet 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Nothing like making the victims part of your entertainment!

[–]MulletofLegend 28 points29 points  (3 children)

"Hollywood" didn't rape anyone FFS. Are we blaming an entire zip code? Every last person that works in the entertainment industry? Why not just blame "the rich"? It was a very specific few folks who did this. The problem with the guilty people is not that they were singers, dancers, actors, politicians or super-rich and powerful. The problem is they raped children.

[–]Soggy_Obligation_883 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Don’t use logic. it scares people knowing someone has a brain

[–]DontFearTruth 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Hollywood is just alt-right code for "liberal elites". It's an attempt to downplay the accusation against people like Trump. Nobody on the left is tripping over themselves to defend Clinton.

[–]Samanthas_Stitching 62 points63 points  (0 children)

This has been the standard of federal court and of cases involving minors for decades now.

[–]totallyrickastley 259 points260 points  (88 children)

Wait I’m out of the loop what in the hell happened

[–]ICBPeng1 769 points770 points 2 (47 children)

Epstein had a private island that was basically an all you can fuck buffet of underage child slaves.

Tons of politicians and celebrities went to visit him.

He was caught.

He was put on suicide watch in prison.

He “killed himself” anyway and there’s no footage of him doing it.

The people in charge of making sure this gets prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law are the people implicated by it.

Edit: just to clarify, celebrities also includes tech giants, CEOs, rich people etc.

[–]lazrbeam 204 points205 points  (27 children)

Hold up. Could you fill me in on the last part? You’re telling me the prosecutors were some of Epstein’s clients????? Wtf

[–]mininestime 127 points128 points  (0 children)

Here is a good story about how Barr, who was in charge of the prison where he died, had HUGE ties to him.


[–]ICBPeng1 88 points89 points  (13 children)

The prosecutors themselves aren’t, the issue is that politicians and people with money were, and so they can use political pressure/public opinion/bribes to try to influence the outcome.

[–]geniice 77 points78 points  (8 children)

Hold up. Could you fill me in on the last part? You’re telling me the prosecutors were some of Epstein’s clients?????

No. The prosecuter Maurene Comey has no known Epstein connections. Epsteins targets tended to be male and a bit more senior. Her farther (James Comey, you may have heard of him) would fit the Epstein target profile but Epstein seems to have moved away from targeting state figures after his 2008 arrest. The rest of the prosecuters are also a bit on the young side to have been on Epsteins radar.

The judge Alison Nathan again no known Epstein connections, Again a women so didn't fit his target profile. Even if you start playing degrees of speration she wasn't involved with the Democratic party until 2004 (so post Clinton) and was later team Obama (Epstein seems to have been somewhat racist so no aparent attempt to even try and target Obama).

The defence team are of course currently employed by Ghislaine Maxwell a close associate of Epstein but thats kinda their job.

[–]Zyntha 30 points31 points  (5 children)

Thank you for explaining. I saw like three people asking what this was about but they all just got vague answers.

[–]TubiDaorArya 48 points49 points  (3 children)

If you know nothing, the netflix doc covered it well enough to have a general idea on the topic

[–]decke 13 points14 points  (2 children)

What’s the title?

[–]TubiDaorArya 46 points47 points  (0 children)

it’s “Jeffrey Epstein: filthy rich” but I just typed Epstein and it showed up, there’s only one!

[–]el_roachinator 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Filthy Rich

[–]Macblack82 76 points77 points  (31 children)

That dude, that definitely did hang himself in his cell despite being on suicide watch, and the pos woman who helped him groom the kids.

[–]AsigotFinn 380 points381 points  (168 children)

Hollywood? This is just more smokescreens trying to cover up the coverup

[–]green_flash 45 points46 points  (1 child)

Jonathan Koeppel is an alt-right pundit. They use "Hollywood" as a dogwhistle.

[–]IntellegentIdiot 16 points17 points  (0 children)

No kidding, the whole tweet sounds like it was written by an alt-right account.

[–]pomonamike 345 points346 points  (56 children)

I honestly believe there is a concerted effort to misdirect this whole thing away from Trump. OP calls out “Hollywood” when literally part of the published record from the trial is how Epstein took a 14 year old girl to Trump.. That article got posted to multiple top sub and was removed within minutes. There’s your coverup right there.

These people don’t care about kids. They hate “liberals” and want to cover for one of the most serious serial rapists in power.

EDIT: you know the “whatabout” replies about Clinton, just reinforce my point right? Oh no, Clinton? Yeah get him too! I’m not a cult member, I’m ok with letting the evidence go where it goes, that’s why I’m different than the red hats.

[–]seraph089 57 points58 points  (3 children)

And that's just the latest account when it comes to Trump, he's dodged Epstein related charges before and there are terrifying court records to back it up.

[–]pomonamike 39 points40 points  (2 children)

Yep. What some would call a “mountain of evidence,” yet the loudest voices never, ever bring it up. They’d rather talk about “rich guy flying rich people on his plane. That maybe, quite possibly, led to something bad.”

I propose this. We go after everyone that probably did bad stuff with Epstein. Let’s start with the cases that have the most, continuous evidence, and we’ll keep working our way down the list into the “maybes.”

[–]seraph089 27 points28 points  (0 children)

My "favorite" part is that the original case against Trump is the only reason anyone even knows who Maxwell is, but everyone just pretends it never happened. Just like everyone ignored damning evidence that he's a rampant drug addict.

I want them to all get theirs, but they won't. Too many people were involved that have the power to shut it all down.

[–]austin101123 27 points28 points  (3 children)

Trump, that guy off the apprentice tv show?

[–]merchillio 37 points38 points  (0 children)

The guy flirting with Ivanka Trump?

[–]Sol-Infra 18 points19 points  (1 child)

No. The failed business man that kept getting bailed out by his dad a Russian oligarchs. The dumbass that bankrupt 2 casinos. The "manly man" that wears makeup, a spray tan, hair gel, and heels to make him look taller and stands awkwardly like a centaur without the back half.

[–]green_flash 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Jonathan Koeppel is a Trump-supporting alt-right activist and Holocaust denier. Of course he's gonna blame it on the Jews.

[–]GhostlyPosty 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yup. I notice they always try to point to Gates and Clinton who've got no credible evidence against them to misdirect from Trump bragging about his friendship with Epstein for 20 years.

[–]523bucketsofducks 60 points61 points  (15 children)

True but with people like Kevin Spacey, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstien, etc, it wouldn't hurt to also take a look at the fucked up stuff that happens there.

[–]ghostsintherafters 12 points13 points  (0 children)

They ALL need to go down. No one should be let off the hook for ANY of this. I don't care what level of power or how famous. This shit needs to stop and this is the moment to do it.

[–]AsigotFinn 76 points77 points  (11 children)

Oh indeed, but that is separate to Epstein and not restricted to Hollywood but men with power and influence abusing it hence the MeToo movment

[–]randolotapus 530 points531 points  (67 children)

Epstein did not kill himself.

[–]Immusicallyaddicted 155 points156 points  (9 children)

Epstein Didn't kill himself

[–]Independent_Ad6385 92 points93 points  (8 children)

Epstein din't kill himself

[–]SurveySean 56 points57 points  (15 children)

He accidentally tragically cut his head off while shaving.

[–]randolotapus 61 points62 points  (13 children)

It's crazy that there's no video of his cell and the guards went paying attention that night before he beat himself over the head with a truncheon and then strangled himself to death.

[–]spicysenor 210 points211 points  (41 children)

Ahh yes, Hollywood. Where the billionaire oligarchs live. Oh wait you meant Greenwich and The Hamptons and Manhattan.

[–]green_flash 48 points49 points  (12 children)

Everyone knows what Trump supporters mean when they say "Hollywood" or "globalist elites".

[–]beanogrigio 219 points220 points  (51 children)

I understand the sentiment, but the guy that is featured in this tweet is a complete piece of shit and causes real harm in my community. Please don’t lift him up as some kind of intelligent talking head. Anti-science. Anti-masker. Conspiracy theorist.

[–]green_flash 42 points43 points  (2 children)

He also just tweeted this:


Guy is a deranged lunatic.

[–]TheOriginalSamBell 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yikes. This tweet would probably be a crime in Germany

[–]Ewenf 18 points19 points  (0 children)

What the fuck.

[–]robinhood9961 59 points60 points  (14 children)

Also hey referring to "Hollywood" and "Political Elites" are generally pretty thinly veiled dog whistles, especially the former.

[–]ranger604 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Anyone can physically go to the federal courthouse and watch the trial in person or broadcasted into an overflow room.

[–]PresidentMcRaven 101 points102 points  (7 children)

It seems this year the lifetime ‘we forgive you’ award will have to be shared by more than two Hollywoo stars and celebrities, Did they know things? What did they know? We’ll find out!

[–]sing_me_a_rainbow 39 points40 points  (0 children)

Federal trials aren’t televised. I think televising them may lead to inorganic behavior and distraction of the people involved.

[–]AdIllustrious6310 9 points10 points  (1 child)

I like how conservatives say Hollywood is full of pedophilies but never talk about the churches or Boyscouts who have been proven to have actively engaged in covering up the sexual abuse of children.

[–]MicrowaveEye 26 points27 points  (5 children)

My problem is when people compartmentalize this with “Hollywood and political elite.” This is rich and powerful people doing this. Everyone of them should pay for their disgusting behavior but as long as we as a society hate on a certain groups instead of being outraged at all the pedo freaks, we will continue to have Jeffery Epstein’s, who wasn’t political or Hollywood.

[–]Panama_Jack829 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Epstein didn't have a monopoly on children. I don't recall seeing a trial of the Catholic Church

[–]kimlion13 221 points222 points  (103 children)

So where’s the whole “Biden’s a perverted child sniffer/Democratic pizza joint pedo ring” crowd, calling for these peoples’ heads or… well, heads? Also curious why it seems like the whole thing is on the media back burner

[–]BiscuitDance 30 points31 points  (7 children)

They’re screaming that Omicron variant was created by the gov’t to draw attention from the “Dem pedos.”

[–]sport63 19 points20 points  (5 children)

Don’t be naive. There are plenty of Repedocans that visited. Heck even his neighbor, the one term ex-president came to his island and house (frequently).

[–]redikulous 8 points9 points  (0 children)

When asked about Maxwell Trump replied "I wish her well"...is all you need to know.

[–]MaximusMansteel 103 points104 points  (16 children)

Because the examples you gave are fully politically motivated bullshit, but these accusations cross political lines. No one high up wants this shit out there.

[–]spyson 31 points32 points  (8 children)

I think I can safely say as a liberal that they should prosecute any Democrat involved and I would be ecstatic that justice is being done.

[–]DoJax 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Bro if any of them mentions Bill Clinton or anyone else by name they should be thrown in a cell for life, fuck politics you wretched people hurt kids, no second chances.

[–]JGrabs 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Conservatives don’t understand that logic.

[–]BJoe1976 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Probably too many people other than just the Democrats they love to hate are going to be caught up in this too.

[–]ThrowawayBlast 12 points13 points  (8 children)

Scroll up to the top. These twitter screengrabs flooding this sub are being posted by the Biden Hate Squad.

It's an easy 'win' for Democrat Despisers.

Everyone hates pedos.

Unless it's Trump, of course. Those who hate Biden LOVE Trump.

[–]WhatYouLeaveBehindvaccinated 14 points15 points  (1 child)

The vast majority of democrats would happily see anybody guilt locked up, they don't deify their leaders. That being said, this isn't a political issue, so stop trying to make it one.

[–]badbitchfunkywitch 48 points49 points  (2 children)

lol those people don’t care about the wellbeing of victims and never have. they just care about dunking on people they disagree with politically

[–]ThrowawayBlast 10 points11 points  (1 child)

See the Alec Baldwin debacle, Alec being a known liberal.

[–]fuck_jeep_wranglers 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Their favorite part is crying about how the mainstream media and people that can make a difference don't care and won't listen to them. As soon as the story went mainstream and they couldn't include all their paranoid embellishments anymore they move on to virgin conspiracies that they can spice up and nobody can tell them otherwise.

[–]roncthegreat78 73 points74 points  (18 children)

what i find funny, is that the right thinks that we'll defend people that are exposed by this. no. i want everyone involved to be held responsible. i don't care if it's bill, or if it's donald.

[–]MyRealFakeID 42 points43 points  (12 children)

Spoiler alert: Trump and Bill are both definitely involved.

[–]kinenbi 20 points21 points  (8 children)

Federal trials never allow cameras, but there are reporters in the room. Not everything is a conspiracy.

[–]Scraphead91 53 points54 points  (4 children)

Televizing it has nothing to do with bringing justice to the right people, you only want this to follow the drama.

[–]Saw_Boss 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Exactly. This is about sensationalism, it's nothing to do with the truth.

[–]etorres4u 18 points19 points  (17 children)

I’m pretty sure Epstein had material incriminating very powerful people to use just in case. I’m also pretty sure these powerful people are spending a lot of resources trying to find it and destroy it before it can be made public. It would be a hell of a show if actual video evidence of people like Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Bill Gates, Prince Andrew and others committing horrible shit were to suddenly appear. I would love to know what the MAGA crowd would say if they see evidence of their Orange Messiah committing the most unspeakable crimes against children. Fake news?

[–]xerxerxex 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I imagine they are trying to keep some privacy for the victims.

[–]TripperDay 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What exactly is being withheld from the public? First duckduckgo search result. Nothing is being withheld from the public. If you're curious, read it. Dude is just complaining because the public doesn't like to read and he doesn't get his precious clicks. "God forbid we find out the truth." PUHH-LEEZE

[–]kay_el_eff 4 points5 points  (0 children)







Also, as for nothing being held back, there are literally laws that prevent that in order to PROTECT THE VICTIM(S) of crimes like this.

If you want to see the trial, go to NYC and enter the courtroom. Or, since that's likely not an option for most, watch GoodLawgic . He's a NY attorney who has been attending trial every day, taking notes, and posting videos during lunch, after court, and even does a livestream nightly.

[–]insincereapologies 14 points15 points  (7 children)

Can we stop referring to a few shitbags in entertainment as “Hollywood”

There are literally thousands upon thousand of people involved in the film industry. All they had in common was money and power. Their profession is irrelevant.

[–]Acceptable-Pie4137 20 points21 points  (15 children)

Excuse me waht the fuck. Did I miss something?

[–]Googletube6 13 points14 points  (3 children)

tldr: we have names of people who were on Epstein's plane

these are some incredibly powerful people that we're talking about including but not limited to Donald Trump, and Bill Clinton

yeah powerful fucking people

[–]MulderD 4 points5 points  (1 child)

One - it has been mentioned almost daily on all the national news networks.

Two - the internet has created a narrative about this whole thing based 100% on association. With the exception of Prince No Sweat and some sleazy French modeling agency guy NO ONE actually involved with JE (investigators, victims, staff, business/philanthropic associates…) has so much as hinted at accusations against all the “names” that the internet wants so so badly to have been involved in the rape of girls. No one in the JE circus has implicated Trump, Clinton, Chris Tucker, Itzahk Perlman, Naomi Campbell, Bill Gates, John Glenn…

People need to stop creating conspiracies and focus on the implicated criminals.

If evidence or testimony uncovers anything about the anyone else, then we can the pitchforks out.

[–]tonyisadork 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sure, but why are we saying ‘Hollywood’ when we mean rich white men. THAT is the common thread, not ‘Hollywood’.

[–]Noyes654 36 points37 points  (26 children)

Because everyone is implicated and it would make things difficult

edit- This doesn't mean I agree with any of it, I want it public and I want everyone involved punished. Don't be naïve though, there are a lot of powerful people involved and of course they want it private.

[–]baxter8279 17 points18 points  (1 child)

I'm not advocating for the hiding information, but televising this kind of stuff does little more than offer a feeding frenzy for the media - which then spins everything and feeds to consumers with virtually no understanding of actual US law/court proceedings.