Burn. It. Down.
November 29, 2018·19 comments·In Brief
A serial abuser of minors received an extraordinarily lenient plea deal while remaining socially protected by prominent political figures who publicly praised him. The question isn't whether the justice system failed, it's whether it was ever designed to apply equally to the powerful. This gap between public accountability and private protection suggests something more structural than individual corruption.
- A future Cabinet member negotiated a plea deal that shielded the defendant from federal prosecution. The arrangement kept sealed documents and limited victim access to the full scope of crimes, raising questions about what remained hidden and why.
- Political figures across the spectrum publicly vouched for the defendant's character. Their endorsements came years after documented abuse, suggesting either willful blindness or something worse. The social protection was as important as the legal protection.
- Local law enforcement and attorneys kept pursuing the case despite pressure to abandon it. The investigation that finally surfaced decades later came not from institutions but from individuals who refused to let it disappear.
- The defendant's wealth and connections created a protective perimeter around him. Money moved him between jurisdictions, reputations shielded him from scrutiny, and the system absorbed him rather than held him accountable.
- This pattern reveals how the machinery of justice works differently for those inside the system versus those outside it. The question is no longer whether this happened, but how deeply this asymmetry runs through institutions meant to protect the vulnerable.
Subscribe Today to Read More
Unlock instant access to this and hundreds of other evergreen essays that explore the world of narrative through hard science and human wisdom.
- Make more informed decisions as an investor and citizen.
- See through the nudges of Big Politics and Big Media.
- Become a better consumer of news.
- Maintain your autonomy of mind in a swarm of narratives.
- Join a community of more than 100,000 truth-seekers.
Looking for Deeper Insights?
Unlock exclusive market intelligence, trade ideas, and member-only events tailored for investment professionals and active investors with Perscient Pro.
VISIT PRO
DISCLOSURES
This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein. This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor's individual circumstances and objectives.
Comments
Kevin Spacey too, not so oddly enough.
In contrast to the hysteria over Bret Kavanaugh, one hardly heard mention of this. Why are we only seeing this now? Because it is an angle against Trump? (Not that Acosta does not deserve the opprobrium.)
At least we are hearing it now.
Despicable us.
“It’s almost as if there’s a ruling class.” Sustained by an incestuous level of indifference, and a sense of entitlement. Expecting special attention and feeling entitled are key features of narcissism.
“Success has the seeds of destruction built into it” and the empire falls…
When has it not been so?
Regards the Miami Herald Julie Brown 11-28-18 article, aarrgghh, etc OMG!!!
The curious part above is the way some individuals were listed in the log: almost so obviously a play: President William J Clinton - seriously? I doubt the log hasn’t been manipulated or a manipulation. And I am a not-a-Clinton fan!
Occam’s Razor, smoke & fire. When you are part of the club that makes the rules why would you care where your name appears.
Epstein’s real-life Carcosa exploits and the cast of malignant characters that protected him sound like they inspired the plot for season one of True Detective.
And people wonder why far left and right media outlets continue to attract new subscribers? It is precisely because those are the only places who have not forgotten about Epstein’s sexual abuse of children and women. The far right QAnon conspiracy herd has spun the Epstein story into an international jewish illuminati child trafficking cabal. And the dirtbag left rightly excoriates Epstein as a premier example of the perversions that our pro-corporate pro-capitalist system generates and protects. In both instances, a moral argument about these horrors is what drives the narrative rather than the nothingness that defines centrist apologia.
As much as I agree with the title I am not sure that we don’t end up in a worse place to “protect” us from future evils.
Many crises ago after the tech bubble I think there was a brief movement by some high minded institutions that they were going to lean on corporations to be better stewards and not just capital disbursement schemes. Obviously that did not endure.
It seems to me that the way to strike at the heart of a corrupt system is to stop the money flow. What if a grass roots organization formed with enough voice to boycott select corporations. A day, a week a month enough to cause a stir and get a pulpit from which to ask for change?
If a large enough effort, maybe even demand it. Would enough people care? How many people out there are doing their job (like the local law enforcement from the article) but getting trampled by the corruption. When is enough, enough?
It worked for prominent disruptors of the past.
In fairness to legacy media, Miami Herald’s work here does feel like some proper reporting. Whether it qualifies as old school investigative journalism I’m not so sure. Maybe so if it emboldens more of Epstein’s victims to come forward. A few dogged attorneys and former law enforcement officials seem to deserve the most credit for keeping the case alive. But it is refreshing to see reporting where all of the involved parties were solicited for comment. Nobody from Team Epstein went on the record of course.
And I was just about to write off all legacy media for being hopelessly captured by commercial interests. Oh wait, what’s more commercial than a lurid child sex ring operated by a towel-clad billionaire?
Dr. Ben uses Team Elite as shorthand for the ruling class but I declare we should henceforth adopt Team Epstein. Seems apropos given the penchant for employing 14 year old cheerleaders with braces to
strokepromote their brand of narcissism.Continue the discussion at the Epsilon Theory Forum...