The Dershowitz loophole: ""Look, I've had sex with one woman since the day I met Jeffrey Epstein."

[pnwmom]

He doesn't say how many 15 and 16 year olds he has had sex with since meeting Epstein.

He doesn't say how many people, of any age, he has received sexual massages from since meeting Epstein.

[Demonaut]

1. a clintonesque answer

not to knock Bill but the evasion is the same

[Caliman73]

16. It's okay if it IS a knock...

We aren't conservatives, when one of our own does something dumb or wrong, we can call it out. We can still like Bill Clinton overall and think he was a good President but disagree with things he did.

[JI7]

18. what Clinton did does not belong with the epstein case

[Caliman73]

21. Never said that. No one did.

The whole point to both posts was that Dershowitz is trying to use loophole language to evade telling the truth. Clinton used technical terminology to cover the fact that he had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky.

Of course the acts alleged are nothing alike.

My response is that we have the objectivity to know when our leaders, and people we like, do things that are not okay.


Perhaps I was wrong about that...

[50 Shades Of Blue]

2. Good catch.

[ecstatic]

7. Agreed! nt

[at140]

3. Has evidence emerged to charge Dersh with underage sex activity?

If no evidence has emerged which will stand up in a court of law,
may be the principle of innocent until proven guilty should rule.

[leftstreet]

6. He's the one throwing out a defense without even being charged

It's bizarre

[at140]

8. That is a good point!

He does seem acting defensive without being charged.

But like I said, I will wait for evidence to emerge before calling him guilty.

[pnwmom]

10. How much evidence do you need? nt

[at140]

12. Examples of evidence...

Tapes confiscated at Epstein residence show Dershowitz clearly engaging in sexual activity with underage girls.

Or some girls come forward and testify under oath in a court.

[pnwmom]

15. There won't be any criminal charges because of the statute of limitations.

But two women have filed civil lawsuits against Dershowitz.

[pnwmom]

9. But he can never be proven guilty in criminal court because the statute of limitations expired.

Since he can't be charged now, that principle would mean we'd all have to pretend forever that he was innocent, no matter how much evidence came out about him.

Since he wrote in 1997 that the age of consent should be lowered to 15 (that 16 was too high) AND at least two women have said they were sexually assaulted by Dershowitz at Epstein's house when they were underage, I'm not able to view him as an innocent.

[at140]

11. Those tapes confiscated at Epstein's house

will expose a lot of people. Even if statute of limitations for crime could have expired,
statute of limitation for losing one's reputation never expires.

[FakeNoose]

14. America won't care about statutes of limitations

If Dersh's face shows up on any of Epstein's tapes, he'll be considered guilty as charged. This guy is 80 years old, it's too late to rehabilitate his reputation.

Even if by some miracle he's not on the tapes, everyone assumes he's guilty because of the way he's acting.

[Dennis Donovan]

4. "Look, I've had sex with one woman (and a few hundred children) since..."

Yup, that fixes it.

[RockRaven]

5. He's a weasel and a lawyer, that statement means nothing without each word being dissected in detail

For all we know, he means something very specific and even possibly obscure by the term "had sex" and hundreds or even thousands of specific discrete sex acts -- none of which a minor can legally consent to -- do not meet *his* definition of that term. And that is even granting him a concession he does not deserve: that his statement is even technically true from a very particular perspective. There is no reason for us not to believe he is just as likely to be brazenly lying his ass off.

Dersh has argued in bad faith on too many topics too many times for ANYTHING he says to be granted the benefit of the doubt of being accepted as true, even provisionally, and certainly not in the way he wants it to be accepted as true (i.e. broadly, expansively).

[fescuerescue]

20. And he's not under oath

Lawyers do get extremely technical under oath because the have to. And they know how to do it.

On twitter, or an interview? He can just lie.

[mokawanis]

13. ok, then I feel sorry for that one woman

Surely she could have found better.

[yellowcanine]

17. Depends on what the meaning of "sex" is.

According to Newty, a BJ is not "sex."

[BSdetect]

19. That's quite a long session for sex? What stamina.