ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Jeffrey Epstein , sex offenders , sex trafficking

Reply
Old 8th November 2019, 06:41 AM   #721
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
What investigation? There was no investigation.
What are you talking about? Was it a psychic revelation that put Epstein in jail? None of the people pursuing lawsuits against him bothered to investigate him?
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 06:43 AM   #722
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
What are you talking about? Was it a psychic revelation that put Epstein in jail? None of the people pursuing lawsuits against him bothered to investigate him?
Not in 2016.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 06:48 AM   #723
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Not in 2016.
Explain how the lawsuits against him proceeded without any kind of investigation.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 07:04 AM   #724
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,085
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Robach certainly thought it was plenty, and more than just pictures.

Yes, but I donít think you appreciate how badly they dropped the ball there. The alleged perpetrator wasnít innocent, the alleged perpetrator didnít even exist. Again, not comparable.
And do you also believe her allegations about Dershowitz?

Because her accusations involved more than Epstein, they involved Alan Dershowitz, Prince Andrew. Even if they could corroborate the Epstein stuff, or felt like they were on solid ground there, the interview might also have involved accusations against others that they couldn't corroborate.

https://nypost.com/2019/11/07/alan-d...out-for-money/
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 07:17 AM   #725
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,169
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
So protecting your own ass over exposing child abuse is now ethical. Got it.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 07:42 AM   #726
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Explain how the lawsuits against him proceeded without any kind of investigation.
Explain how the lawsuits against him proceed without him knowing about them. Because that's the allegation here: that running the story would tip him off to an investigation. And while the police routinely run investigations without the subject knowing about it, and rely upon that lack of knowledge in order to get information (such as tapping their phone), private investigations can't use those tools.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 07:55 AM   #727
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Explain how the lawsuits against him proceed without him knowing about them. Because that's the allegation here: that running the story would tip him off to an investigation.
No, that is only part of the claim and not even my primary claim. My primary claim is that we don't know that Robach had anything that wasn't already known to someone else or that could have help bring this guy to justice sooner.

My secondary claim is that she might have tipped him off about an investigation he didn't know about.

So with those things in mind we can't jump to a conclusion that withholding the story hindered bringing this guy to justice.

And your statement that there was no investigation is simply wrong.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Last edited by RecoveringYuppy; 8th November 2019 at 07:58 AM.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 08:15 AM   #728
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 361
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
What did she think the story was in 2016?
Max_mang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 08:19 AM   #729
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
No, that is only part of the claim and not even my primary claim. My primary claim is that we don't know that Robach had anything that wasn't already known to someone else or that could have help bring this guy to justice sooner.
News isn't news because nobody knows it. News is news because not everybody knows it. And that absolutely applies to Epstein.

Quote:
My secondary claim is that she might have tipped him off about an investigation he didn't know about.
And I'm saying there was no law enforcement investigation for him to not know about, he already knew about private lawsuits, and any ones he didn't know about wouldn't have been compromised by him knowing.

Furthermore, chances are higher that public scrutiny would have prompted law enforcement to take a closer look, which is in fact what ended up happening. Only it happened years later than it could have.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 08:38 AM   #730
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And I'm saying there was no law enforcement investigation for him to not know about,
Prove it.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 09:01 AM   #731
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Prove it.
Let's suppose there was a secret law enforcement investigation back in 2016. What came of it? Nothing. So even if it existed (and there's no evidence it did, even now when there would be no reason to keep it a secret), it's functionally no different from not existing.

Let's recall what actually led to his 2019 arrest. It didn't have anything to do with any secret invetigation. It was because of the Florida court ruling that Epstein's victims should have been consulted about his 2007 plea deal. And because that plea deal was overseen by Acosta, Trump's labor secretary, the press jumped all over it as a way to go after Trump. That renewed scrutiny is what led Federal prosecutors to start going after Epstein again. And in fact, what he was charged with was for stuff that happened between 2002 and 2005. In other words, it was stuff that the federal government already knew about, but decided not to pursue as part of the original 2007 plea.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 10:39 AM   #732
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Let's suppose there was a secret law enforcement investigation back in 2016. What came of it? Nothing. So even if it existed (and there's no evidence it did, even now when there would be no reason to keep it a secret), it's functionally no different from not existing.
You're pretty far out on the silly tree here. So, an investigation that, in the future, isn't going to lead to anything doesn't exist? This reporter is a successful psychic in your world?

Can we inject some reality here? Robach herself describes the material she had as already in the possession of attorneys and rejects the claim that it was unethical to withhold the story. Her wording suggests she even agreed that at least her first version of the story wasn't well corroborated.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Last edited by RecoveringYuppy; 8th November 2019 at 10:47 AM.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 10:39 AM   #733
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
The media protects its own. Now CBS has fired Ashley Bianco, because Bianco accessed the tapes of Robach when Bianco was working at ABC. First, why is CBS trying to protect ABC's management? Second, it's important to realize that Bianco isn't being fired for leaking the tapes. Neither CBS nor ABC knows who leaked the tapes. They only know Bianco accessed the tapes while she was still working at ABC, and that's enough for CBS to fire her.

The Babylon Bee is supposed to be parody, but for some reason it keeps reporting actual news.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 10:45 AM   #734
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
You're pretty far out on the silly tree here. So, an investigation that, in the future, isn't going to lead to anything doesn't exist? This reporter is a successful psychic in your world?


Can we inject some reality here?
You want reporters to not report on something newsworthy because of the hypothetical possibility of interfering with a hypothetical investigation that they know nothing about and which they have no reason to believe even exists. And you're asking me to inject reality?

Yeah, no. You aren't dealing with reality at all.

Quote:
Robach herself describes the material she had as already in the possession of attorneys
So what? Why does that make it any less newsworthy?

Quote:
and rejects the claim that it was unethical to withhold the story.
She's saying that now. But she's got an obvious incentive to publicly say whatever paints her employer in the best light possible. What she said when she thought it was private is far more likely to be what she actually thinks.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 10:54 AM   #735
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You want reporters to not report on something newsworthy because of the hypothetical possibility of interfering with a hypothetical investigation that they know nothing about and which they have no reason to believe even exists. And you're asking me to inject reality?
For god ******* sakes I was pointing on one of many possible things we might not know.
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
So what? Why does that make it any less newsworthy?
No, it makes it already known to the victims attorneys which is the freaking point.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 11:03 AM   #736
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
For god ******* sakes I was pointing on one of many possible things we might not know.
And using that as a justification for not running a story when that justification makes no sense.

ABC certainly didn't know anything about any criminal investigation that their reporting could have interfered with. If they had, they would be talking about that right now. They aren't. It didn't factor into their decision. You're making excuses for them that are so weak they aren't even trying to make those excuses themselves. It's quite peculiar.

Quote:
No, it makes it already known to the victims attorneys which is the freaking point.
So what? That isn't a reason to not report the story.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 11:09 AM   #737
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You're making excuses for them that are so weak they aren't even trying to make those excuses themselves. It's quite peculiar.
FFS. I hadn't even seen ABC's response when this tangent started.


Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
So what? That isn't a reason to not report the story.
I have not said one word about whether they should have reported the story.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 11:32 AM   #738
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
I have not said one word about whether they should have reported the story.
Then why are you even posting? The entire issue was about whether or not they should have reported the story. If you have no opinion, then none of this has any relevance.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 11:42 AM   #739
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,309
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Then why are you even posting? The entire issue was about whether or not they should have reported the story. If you have no opinion, then none of this has any relevance.
Read the thread.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 11:42 AM   #740
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,169
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
What did she think the story was in 2016?
...what?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 12:31 PM   #741
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 361
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
...what?
What did you mean by "hindsight is 20/20" then?
Max_mang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 02:01 PM   #742
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Babylon Bee just keeps hitting it out of the park.
ABC Asks Viewers To Send In Evidence On Epstein So They Can Destroy It And Then Murder You
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 04:11 PM   #743
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,085
Ziggurat: why are you ignoring my question about Alan Dershowitz?
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 04:55 PM   #744
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Ziggurat: why are you ignoring my question about Alan Dershowitz?
I donít know enough about the specifics regarding Dershowitz to have much opinion. But I donít see that as much of an obstacle to the story. They could stick to the Epstein only stuff, they could hilight which claims were unsubstantiated, etc. Nor is ABC now claiming that her accusations against Dershowitz (which came out anyways) were the sticking point.

And once again, the fact that ABC got someone fired from CBS on the mere suspicion that they might have leaked this (but probably didnít) proves pretty well where ABCs interests really lie. And it isnít with a well informed public.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 07:57 PM   #745
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,085
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I donít know enough about the specifics regarding Dershowitz to have much opinion. But I donít see that as much of an obstacle to the story. They could stick to the Epstein only stuff, they could hilight which claims were unsubstantiated, etc. Nor is ABC now claiming that her accusations against Dershowitz (which came out anyways) were the sticking point.

And once again, the fact that ABC got someone fired from CBS on the mere suspicion that they might have leaked this (but probably didnít) proves pretty well where ABCs interests really lie. And it isnít with a well informed public.
Unless you're a lawyer with knowledge of the specific circumstances of this case I wouldn't put too much confidence in that. There were sealed records. Some of them still sealed apparently. I think that there might have been legal jeopardy for ABC if they had carelessly run the interview without giving those she accused an opportunity to respond. ABC probably ran it through their lawyers as well as reached out for comment from the people she accused which was supposedly a who's who of big shots. Supposedly the full list of people she's accused is under seal. But I've heard it includes prime ministers and others.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/crime...y-david-boies/


Quote:
Beginning in late 2014, Giuffre began publicly accusing Dershowitz, now 81, of sexually assaulting her during the time she was with Epstein, purportedly at Epsteinís direction. By that time, the statute of limitations would have passed for a criminal case. Dershowitz immediately began an aggressive campaign to deny Giuffreís charges, calling her a ďcertified, complete, total liarĒ and making statements such as ďI can prove conclusively that she made the whole thing up.Ē
Quote:
Because Dershowitz contended that Boies and his partners had reviewed Dershowitzís documentation, purportedly agreeing that he could not have assaulted Giuffre, Dershowitz moved for Boiesís firm to be disqualified from the case. Last month, U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska agreed and tossed Boies and his partners out of Giuffreís defamation suit, saying they could not be both witnesses and lawyers in the case.
Quote:
Dershowitz also has written a book about the case, ďGuilt by Accusation: The Challenge of Proving Innocence in the Age of #MeToo,Ē which is scheduled for publication Nov. 19.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2019, 11:37 PM   #746
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Unless you're a lawyer with knowledge of the specific circumstances of this case I wouldn't put too much confidence in that. There were sealed records. Some of them still sealed apparently.
I don't see how that's relevant. If someone leaks sealed records, it's the person who leaked them that's in trouble, not the press.

Quote:
I think that there might have been legal jeopardy for ABC if they had carelessly run the interview without giving those she accused an opportunity to respond.
Nope. Unless they vouch for the subject's truthfulness, which they wouldn't need to do in order to air the story, then they aren't in jeopardy if she lies. That's on her, not them. And they could have given the accused an opportunity to respond, so that's no impediment to running the story either.

Quote:
ABC probably ran it through their lawyers as well as reached out for comment from the people she accused which was supposedly a who's who of big shots.
ABC isn't claiming legal issues dissuaded them. You're making up excuses on their behalf. And yes, I'm sure they reached out to the accused. We know they did, because threats from them are one of the things Robach complained about as to why the story was shut down. ABC didn't want to jeopardize access to the British royals.

And I notice you didn't comment on CBS's firing of Ashley Bianco, even though she's apparently not the leaker. ABC is trying to cover up their cover up, and CBS is willing to be complicit in that.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 06:59 AM   #747
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,085
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And I notice you didn't comment on CBS's firing of Ashley Bianco, even though she's apparently not the leaker. ABC is trying to cover up their cover up, and CBS is willing to be complicit in that.
This seems like a separate issue. I watched her interview with Megan Kelly, just now to catch up, and it seems like she probably wasn't the leaker. But I can't be sure. The fact that she saved the clip (which she fully admits) may have been a factor in how it eventually got leaked.

If, hypothetically, they knew for sure who the leaker was, that would probably be reasonable grounds for firing. Again though, this is a separate question from the original decision not to air the interview.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 07:29 AM   #748
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
This seems like a separate issue.
It isnít. Itís part of the same pattern: suppress the truth to protect the powerful.

Quote:
I watched her interview with Megan Kelly, just now to catch up, and it seems like she probably wasn't the leaker. But I can't be sure. The fact that she saved the clip (which she fully admits) may have been a factor in how it eventually got leaked.
James OíKeefe published a letter from the leaker which made it clear she isnít.

Quote:
If, hypothetically, they knew for sure who the leaker was, that would probably be reasonable grounds for firing.
Legally, yes. Morally, no.

Quote:
Again though, this is a separate question from the original decision not to air the interview.
And again, it isnít. Itís part of the same pattern of suppressing inconvenient truths that led to spiking the story to begin with. And itís played out many cases where powerful predators were protected by silence.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 07:57 AM   #749
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 361
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Legally, yes. Morally, no.
We learned earlier in this thread that the former is more important than the latter.
Max_mang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 08:15 AM   #750
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by Max_mang View Post
We learned earlier in this thread that the former is more important than the latter.
Iím not sure what this is in reference to, but thereís a difference between what youíre legally required to do and what youíre legally allowed to do. CBS was not legally required to fire Bianca. It was immoral to do so.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 09:05 AM   #751
Max_mang
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 361
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Iím not sure what this is in reference to, but thereís a difference between what youíre legally required to do and what youíre legally allowed to do. CBS was not legally required to fire Bianca. It was immoral to do so.
It was in reference to all the posters excusing and even promoting the coverup of the story because there could be legal hassles or it may not have technically met network TV editorial standards (even though Amy Robach said NONE of that in the leaked video).

If it's not clear, I'm in agreement with your position and think the opposing view is a symptom of the sad state of our society.
Max_mang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 03:49 PM   #752
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,692
Robach released a statement on Tuesday.
'As a journalist, as the Epstein story continued to unfold last summer, I was caught in a private moment of frustration. I was upset that an important interview I had conducted with Virginia Roberts didnít air because we could not obtain sufficient corroborating evidence to meet ABCís editorial standards about her allegations,' said Robach in a statement after the release of the video.

'My comments about Prince Andrew and her allegation that she had seen Bill Clinton on Epsteinís private island were in reference to what Virginia Roberts said in that interview in 2015. I was referencing her allegations Ė not what ABC News had verified through our reporting.'

She then added: 'The interview itself, while I was disappointed it didnít air, didnít meet our standards. In the years since no one ever told me or the team to stop reporting on Jeffrey Epstein, and we have continued to aggressively pursue this important story.'
Pretty much sums it up for me.

There is ZERO evidence that ABC were trying suppress the truth to protect powerful people. This is just a conspiracy nutter's wet dream.

There is ZERO evidence that Ashley Bianco was fired from CBS for leaking the video.

There is ZERO evidence that CBS and ABC were in some sort of mutual protection collision conspiracy - another conspiracy nutter's wet dream.


If anyone has some actual evidence that the above is wrong, then bring it to the table - and don't bother posting hearsay, innuendo, speculation or unsubstantiated opinion.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2019, 04:00 PM   #753
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
There is ZERO evidence that ABC were trying suppress the truth to protect powerful people. This is just a conspiracy nutter's wet dream.
Given that exactly this has been demonstrated in other cases (see Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer), I'm not sure why you find it so strange that it might have happened in this case.

Quote:
There is ZERO evidence that Ashley Bianco was fired from CBS for leaking the video.
Technically true. They fired her because they thought she might have been the leaker. She wasn't.

Quote:
There is ZERO evidence that CBS and ABC were in some sort of mutual protection collision conspiracy - another conspiracy nutter's wet dream.
Sure. It's just a coincidence that she got fired after ABC told CBS that she accessed the tapes. No connection at all to the leaks, or the embarrassment that caused ABC.

Go on, pull the other one.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 12:42 AM   #754
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,435
I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theory that Epstein did not commit suicide. However, certainly one of the coolest things about it (leaving aside the fact of Epstein's death removing a prominent pedo-skeeze from the world) is that 1) members of both extremes of the US political spectrum are heavily invested in the theory, and 2) each side's members believe that the "evidence" implicates prominent leaders of the opposing side, in both the alleged killing and Epstein's original crimes.
__________________
"ŅWHAT KIND OF BIRD?
ŅA PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 01:05 AM   #755
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,692
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Given that exactly this has been demonstrated in other cases (see Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer), I'm not sure why you find it so strange that it might have happened in this case.
For those cases, there is evidence.

People have stated that Weinstein was well known to have been abusing women, and there were a whole raft of people, not just the MSM that were saying nothing.

Do you have actual evidence that applies to this case?

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Technically true. They fired her because they thought she might have been the leaker. She wasn't.
True, but....

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Sure. It's just a coincidence that she got fired after ABC told CBS that she accessed the tapes. No connection at all to the leaks, or the embarrassment that caused ABC.
No, she was fired because she accessed the video when she was not legally and ethically entitled to. That's wrong and a serious breach of professional ethics. The fact that she didn't leak it is not really relevant - no harm no foul does not apply.

If you work for me, and I catch you looking through our confidential business stuff, regardless of whether or not you give it to anyone, that is a breach of trust - I WILL fire you, right there, on the spot - hand me your keys and get out.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 10th November 2019 at 01:06 AM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 04:57 AM   #756
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 21,217
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
The larynx is made of cartilage rings, not bones.


Which I see Checkmite already pointed out.
As did I. If you'll notice I referred to the "hyoid bone" and larynx and the misstatement by Baden.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th November 2019, 06:50 AM   #757
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 44,628
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
For those cases, there is evidence.

People have stated that Weinstein was well known to have been abusing women, and there were a whole raft of people, not just the MSM that were saying nothing.

Do you have actual evidence that applies to this case?
Seriously? Epstein was already a convicted pedophile at this point. But his social profile even after that conviction was still high. The rich and famous were still attending his parties. And not just the ones who knew him before his conviction, also new people like Bill Gates. And what were they saying? Nothing. What did ABC say? Nothing.

So Epstein was well known to have been abusing women, and there were a whole raft of people, not just the MSM that were saying nothing.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:00 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.