Saturday, July 13, 2019

Briefly Noted: Acosta On Epstein The Intel Guy

H/T to emailer Jim. 

Guy Benson notes and asks: Theories Fly: Was Epstein Running a Massive Blackmail Scheme -- And Was He An Intelligence Asset?

Here's what's interesting. Benson quotes Alex Acosta at his press conference. Acosta is asked about that "intel guy" angle, that he supposedly told Trump transition vetters that the reason he did the Epstein plea deal was because:

he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta.

In his reply at his press conference Acosta says his guidelines don't allow him to comment on this matter, but he doesn't deny it. If this story was bogus, he could deny, IMO:

Asked about this angle during his presser, Acosta gave a convoluted and evasive answer:
"So there has been reporting to that effect and let me say, there’s been reporting to a lot of effects in this case, not just now but over the years and, again, I would hesitant to take this reporting as fact. This was a case that was brought by our office, it was brought based on the facts and I look at the reporting and others, I can’t address it directly because of our guidelines, but I can tell you that a lot of reporting is going down rabbit holes."
What does that mean?  Was Epstein a spy, or at least a valuable asset?  Was US intelligence exploiting his depravity because it helped ensnare connected and powerful people from around the world, furnishing exploitable leverage for gathering information?   
This seems like a far-fetched conspiracy theory on its face.  It's an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence -- evidence that we do not have.  But if Acosta did in fact tell Team Trump that 'intelligence' was running Epstein during the mid-2000's prosecution process, that might help explain so much weirdness about this case.  It also may have been a self-serving deflection.  Either way, the departing Labor Secretary did not seem interested in answering questions on this subject this week.  One wonders if the public will ever get satisfactory answers about any of this.  Parting thought: Do the blackmail and intelligence theories fail under Occam's Razor -- or are they buttressed by it?

I'm not sure what to say. Benson's bottom line seems correct: None of the answers so far have been satisfactory.


  1. I have to believe that if Acosta's reported claim were simply BS, someone would leak that. It hasn't happened so far.

  2. If the press had been more interested in facts rather than gloating over drawing blood from the Trump admin one of them might have asked directly, "Are you denying that you said this, or are you repudiating it as truthful?" Another glaring case of the Fourth Estate failing to "Commit Journalism".
    I am puzzled about the seeming difficulty many have believing that the U.S. Gov't would engage in the use of honey traps. This is as old as warfare (what do people think the story of Sampson and Delila entailed) and actively practiced by literally every nation on Earth that has the fiscal means to rent a hotel room. Any that has even a casual knowledge of counter-intel will tell you that sex is the most certain bait and shame/fear-of-exposure the most reliable means of control known to Man. Now, after what we already know about Coupegate, who can be surprised that .gov would cast as wide a net as possible for potential targets both foreign and domestic (don't forget Hoover kept files on all sorts of public figures on the off chance they might need 'persuasion'). Could the FBI/CIA MOU be related to this?

    The Deep State is a tribal ideology more than an actual organization. The Imperium Tribus, "My agency against our bureau, our bureau against our Dept., our Dept. against the world".

  3. Occam's Razor tells me Epstein is what he seems - A pimp protected by the U.S. gov. How else would Clinton so brazenly consort with him?
    Doesn't mean Epstein can evade all law enforcement, though. Off-shore prostitution with foreigners is fine, but when you invite American girls to your party, whoops...

    1. Right. Intel protection doesn't have as much currency in front of a federal judge as it may have with a USA.

    2. Something that is oft overlooked when people talk about the airplane rides and flt logs: if the aircraft was registered in the U.S., which is probably the case, anything that happened aboard it occurred in U.S. jurisdiction regardless of geography. Anyone on the log is either a victim, perpetrator, or material witness. Airplanes ain't that big. "I know nothing," won't float.

    3. Thanks a lot. I was wondering about that specifically.

  4. Everything you need to predict the outcome of the Espstein investigation/prosecution will be revealed in the bail determination ruling on Monday (assuming no delay). If bail is denied, then Epstein will be relatively safe in the short term and he will be pressed to make a deal and cooperate. If he is permitted house detention at his Manhattan mansion, then the Deep State will make sure he never talks, one way or another.

    Epstein had many buyers for his blackmail evidence, most were private, but not all.

    1. It seems to me beyond belief that a judge would open himself up to universal opprobrium--which would only get worse if things went awry--by giving him bail. Perhaps I should qualify that by saying nearly beyond belief.