new | ask | show | jobs
octoberfranklin 4 months ago  [ - ]

> Wasn't very good at discontinuing the relationship it seems.

Keep in mind that those summaries are AI-generated. There's gonna be a lot of confabulating in there.

theultdev 4 months ago  [ - ]

Yes, but the the summaries generated are referenced with sources.

Care to dispute the summaries using the sources?

octoberfranklin 4 months ago  [ - ]

Confabulators gonna confabulate.

godelski 4 months ago  [ - ]

I read the gp as saying you should just check the sources, not defending.

I mean here's a weird example. Searching Donald Trump there's the headline

  (1994-06 Wexner Mansion NYC) 
  Donald Trump forced to perform oral sex and physically abused 13-year-old female plaintiff and 12-year-old female.
Like that sounds weird... DT forced to rape? That doesn't make sense to me. The longer summary reads

  A declaration from Tiffany Doe (pseudonym) testifying that she witnessed Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump sexually abuse a 13-year-old girl and other minors during parties from 1990-2000 in New York City.
It references House Oversight 025937. The actual document looks much more like that summary. Here's a snippet

  7. It was at these series of parties that I personally witnessed the Plaintiff being forced to perform various sexual acts with Donald J. Trump and Mr. Epstein. Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Epstein were advised that she was 13 years old.
It gets worse so if you want to look further it's Case 1:16-cv-04642 Document 1-2 Filed 06/20/16 Page 1 of 2.

So far the paragraph summaries seem to be accurate in my poking around but the headlines are mixing ordering and have other weird errors like this. Anyways, always good to check when things are as serious as this...

Here's the link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11KzAOYCjxwEhnyrsiBpKM8OGBJp...

rayiner 4 months ago  [ - ]

Note that this document is from an anonymous lawsuit that was withdrawn and never substantiated or corroborated.

godelski 4 months ago  [ - ]

Also note that

  13. I personally witnessed Mr. Epstein physically threaten the life and well-being of the Plaintiff if she ever revealed the details of the physical and sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of Mr. Epstein or any of his guests. 
  14. I personally witnessed Defendant Trump telling the Plaintiff that she shouldn't ever say anything if she didn't want to disappear like the 12-year-old female Maria, and that he was capable of having her whole family killed. 
  15. After leaving the employment of Mr. Epstein in the year 2000, I was personally threatened by Mr. Epstein that I would be killed and my family killed as well if I ever disclosed any of the physical and sexual abuse of minor females that I had personally witnessed by Mr. Epstein or any of his guests.
Doesn't make it true but this seems to be consistent across different accounts and serves as a possible explanation to your note as well as why so many people might have quiet for so long.
rayiner 4 months ago  [ - ]

Epstein was tried and convicted based on a mountain and documentary evidence and there was never even an allegation that he did anything like that.

godelski 4 months ago  [ - ]

I think it is less about if he actually made any hits on people but rather that the threat existed. The question is not "has such threats been followed through" but "does the person being threatened have a reasonable belief that the threat is legitimate."

To that, I think the answer is an unambiguous "yes". If someone who is rich, well connected, and successfully covering up heinous crimes at a large scale, then yes, I believe a person threatened has a reasonable belief that such a threat is credible.

Seriously, we are talking about a world famous pedo who was pimping out girls to presidents, royals, billionaires, and when he was finally convicted he was only charged with prostitution and got a extremely light sentence that everyone now calls a "sweetheart deal." So years after does a witness have a credible belief that such a man can post a significant threat to her and her family?

Do you seriously believe that no person has any reason to fear Epstein? I find that laughable considering how much conspiracy there is about him being murdered and how the accusations are towards varying high profile people. You're trying to say that Epstein is a puppy dog that's all bark and no bite?

I agree, nothing is proven but it's absolutely laughable to claim that such a threat is not credible.

Why are you defending a pedo?