Mediaboss Marketing

Have you watched Filthy Rich yet? Its the Netflix docuseries about Jeffrey Epstein. Throughout the series, and right off the top, Epstein is seen in deposition footage repeatedly pleading the fifth. Im not a lawyer and yes, I knowwwwwww that the fifth amendment has its value in legal situations but if youve watched Filthy Rich, it almost becomes a mockery of, like, common decency. Every time hes asked whether or not he repeatedly preyed on underage girls, whether or not he regularly procured the services of underage girls aka RAPED THEM and whether or not he received gifts of underage girls (!!!) for his birthday, he pleaded the fifth.

If you were accused of all that vileness, and instead of being like, F-CK NO, I WOULD NEVER DO THAT, you plead the fifth, what in goddamn is going on in your grossness of a life?!

What the docuseries makes very clear is that Jeffrey Epstein was surrounded, constantly, by minors. And that it wasnt a secret. The minors werent travelling around in a portable trailer and hidden from Epsteins circle. They were visible to airport employees, tech support who visited Epsteins properties to install his satellite equipment, and to his guests. Or maybe the better way of saying that is FOR HIS GUESTS. Bill Clinton was seen so many times on Epsteins private island, dubbed Pedophile Island, as was Prince Andrew, who was observed, according to one witness, rubbing himself up against a topless Virginia Roberts, then 17 years old.

Epsteins f-cksh-t was condoned then, even encouraged, by the people he spent time with. And its a long f-cking list. Like Ghislaine Maxwell? Find that woman and have her answer to her complicity, at the very least, and her crimes at worst. And the people who were in and out of Epsteins orbit, who would have no doubt noticed that, hey, this dude is constantly accompanied by young girlshow can they explain their inaction?

Because its so NORMAL! Its NORMAL to see 40 year old actors with just-turned 18 year old models. Its normal to see 60 year old rock stars with 18 year old models. Its normal, normal, normal, normal, normal. So normal that crimes become condoned. So normal that crimes become scenery. God that was disgusting to write. I just described underage girls as scenery, like a painting, a sculpture, property. But isnt this the truth? Are we guilty of accepting this normalisation as a part of a worldview that we dont challenge?

To go back to Prince Andrew then, who no one believes despite multiple denials from the British royal family that he had no idea what Jeffrey Epstein was doing, even though Virginias claims have been corroborated by multiple people AND A PHOTO (for f-cks sake!), it was reported a few days ago that hes been permanently retired. According to the Sunday Times:

"The monarchs reportedly favourite child is not expected to represent her on the public stage again," writes the publication's royal correspondent Roya Nikkhah.

"The royal family has 'no plans to review' his position and the Queen is believed to be resigned to her second sons permanent removal from public life."

Shes resigned to it? Like, what? Reluctantly? Like its a concession? Thats another problem right there. An entire royal institution has been mobilised, for years, to protect this man from himself. In doing so, they gaslit a girl whose life was permanently altered by sexual abuse and by extension so many other women who had no allies. Because, of course, the Crown comes first.

The Crown, however, even though theres a series by the same name that airs on Netflix, does not control Netflix. And, as expected, Andrews appearance in Netflixs Epstein docuseries has done major damage to the brand. Millions of people have watched it, millions of people have heard about Prince Andrew and his friend Jeffrey Epstein, the dead rapist pedophile. Millions now have seen that photo, have heard from Virginia and the other survivors, have learned about their trauma. This is now irrevocably Andrews association. And also, by relation, the British royal association. Good look!

On a related note, Prince Andrews ex-wife and life partner Sarah Ferguson just launched a charity. Heres her message on Twitter:

The comments below it are welltheyre facts.

See original here:
Prince Andrew has reportedly been permanently retired as Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich docuseries is released o - LaineyGossip

MINNEAPOLIS (WFLA/AP) All four officers involved in the death of George Floyd have invoked their fifth amendment right against self-incrimination according to CNN who spoke with Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman following a news conference Thursday afternoon.

According to CNN, Freeman said he is looking at the Freddie Gray case for guidance in the Floyd case and wants to have the full picture of the case before moving forward.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz called in the National Guard on Thursday bracing for more violence after rioting over the death of George Floyd.

Another protest was announced for Thursday evening near county offices in downtown Minneapolis. Some stores in Minneapolis and the suburbs closed early, fearing more strife. The city shut down its light-rail system and all bus service out of safety concerns.

The46-year-old Floyd diedas police arrested him outside a convenience store after a report of a counterfeit bill being passed. The U.S. Attorneys Office and the FBI in Minneapolis said Thursday they were conducting a robust criminal investigation into the death and making the case a priority. The announcement came a day after President Donald Trump tweeted that he had asked an investigation to be expedited.

The FBI is also investigating whether Floyds civil rights were violated.

The officer who kneeled on Floyd and three others were fired Tuesday. The next day, the mayor called for him to be criminally charged. The mayor also appealed for activation of the National Guard.

Read more:
Officers involved in George Floyds death invoke Fifth Amendment right, reports say - WFLA

Netflix's new documentary series Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich was released on Wednesday, May 27. OVer the four episodes, the series looks at the allegations against Epstein and hears testimony from his accusers. During the documentary, there is harrowing and graphic descriptions of the alleged abuse.

The programme starts off with Epstein being questioned in January 25, 2012 as part of a deposition in which hes questioned under oath by a lawyer.

As part of his sworn evidence, he states he has holiday homes in New Mexico, Palm Beach, Paris and New York.

Epstein confirms he has been convicted of a crime, saying there are two counts one for soliciting prostitution and the other procuring a minor for prostitution.

When asked whether he committed these acts, Epstein says: Im going to invoke my Fifth Amendment right.

The interview continues and hes asked more questions including how many times hes solicited a minor for prostitution and where he's solicited minors.

READ MORE:Jeffrey Epstein Filthy Rich Netflix release date: How many episodes?

Each time Epstein invokes his Fifth Amendment right and says same answer as he refuses to answer any questions.

A second lawyer is heard saying: Lets take a break. Were going to go off the record.

The lawyer asking Epstein the questions then asks: So you are terminating the deposition at this time?

The second lawyer says: We are recessing the deposition.

While this conversation is going on, Epstein can be seen removing his microphone and walking away from the desk.

READ MORE:Ghislaine Maxwell disappearance: Where is Ghislaine Maxwell now?

The Fifth Amendment is one of the first 10 Amendments of the US constitution, which makes up the Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights outlines the rights and privileges enjoyed by American citizens in relation to the government.

Other civil liberties mentioned in the Bill of Rights include the freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, the right against cruel and unusual punishment.

The wording of the Fifth Amendment reads: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

DON'T MISS...Filthy Rich Jeffrey Epstein documentary Netflix release date[EXPLAINER]Royal shock: Why Westminster Abbey bells WILL ring for Prince Andrew[ANALYSIS]Epstein saga has long way to go, say RICHARD AND JUDY[COMMENT]

By invoking this right, a person can stop themselves from self-incrimination either during an interrogation or voluntarily.

This also means a person would not be forced to testify against themselves.

The Fifth Amendment prevents double jeopardy, which means a person cant be tried twice for the same crime.

Other stipulations of the Fifth Amendment are the due process of law, which means all levels of the American government must act within the law and in criminal cases has the right to a grand jury.

READ MORE:Jeffrey Epstein: How did Jeffrey Epstein make his money?

An article from the Michigan Law Review from Yale University, has analysed the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment with the authors Akhil Reed Amar and Renee B. Lettow describing it as an unsolved riddle of vast proportions.

In the past, people have pled the Fifth both inside and outside the courtroom.

According to the Constitution Center, the Fifth Amendment Privilege can be used by any witness and the defendant in a criminal trial.

Additionally, the Fifth can be used by any witness in a civil trial, legislative hearing, grand jury, and any other government proceedings.

Essentially, the self-incrimination clause means a witness should not have to give responses which could be used against them in either present on future criminal cases.

Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich is streaming on Netflix now

Read the original:
Jeffrey Epstein Netflix documentary: What is the 5th amendment right? - Express

Since the U.S. Supreme Courts decision in Knick v. Township of Scott (2019) 139 S.Ct. 2162 eliminated the requirement for a plaintiff to exhaust state court remedies before pursuing a takings challenge in federal court, there has been a significant uptick in federal lawsuits alleging a Fifth Amendment takings claim. For example, as we recently reported, a federal lawsuit was filed earlier this month alleging that the response by California agencies to the COVID-19 situation violated the state and federal Constitutions, and resulted in a partial or complete taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment. But as we noted in that post, there are serious questions as to the viability of alleging a Fifth Amendment takings claim in federal court against a state agency, given that Knick did not contain any discussion of eliminating a states sovereign immunity, and at least two courts have expressly held that Knick did nothing to abrogate a states sovereign immunity in the takings context. We now have a California district court decision to add to that growing list.

In ONeil v. California Coastal Commission, a property owner filed an action in federal court alleging that the actions of the California Coastal Commission and a local public agency violated his substantive due process rights and resulted in a taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment. In response the Coastal Commission filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that because the Commission was an arm of the state, the doctrine of sovereign immunity recognized in the Eleventh Amendment to the United State Constitution prohibited the claim. In an effort to sustain his claim, ONeil argued that after Knick the Eleventh Amendment was no longer a viable defense to a federal takins claim. The district court disagreed with Mr. ONeil, and dismissed the takings claim against the Coastal Commission.

Addressing the Knick decision, the district court stated: Knick did not address Eleventh Amendment immunity. Thus, as [the Coastal Commission] argues, Knick did not conceive of an additional exception to the Eleventh Amendment immunity. The district court also noted that while the Ninth Circuit has not yet addressed this specific issue, two other circuits have, and in each instance the Circuit Court found that the Eleventh Amendment barred the takings claim.

The district court also found that the plaintiff could not rely on the Ex Parte Young exception to the Eleventh Amendment which permits a plaintiff to sue a state official in federal court in order to seek prospective injunctive relief because it could not characterize ONeils relief request as prospective as he seeks just compensation, or damages, for the prior allegedly unconstitutional taking.

So even after Knick, the federal courthouse doors continue to remain closed to Fifth Amendment takings claims against the state or arms of the state.

Go here to see the original:
Cant Sue Here Federal Court Closed to Takings Claim - JD Supra

I am 82-plus years old, with two heart defects, making me exceptionally vulnerable to death should I get COVID-19. The ideal for me, of course, would be community lockdowns until a vaccine is found. But that cant be what is best for society. Last month 21 million Americans lost their jobs to lockdowns. The month before that nine million became unemployed. America is being destroyed financially. I can only imagine the intense financial and emotional devastation of those millions of people.

We need to get the country working again. Of course, when human contact increases, so too will the spread of the coronavirus. Still, individuals in large measure can take precautions, even in the workplace. And people over 65, the most vulnerable to the bug, can take special precautions. The reason we see so many young people attending, say, a rodeo or public beaches in California is that they likely view themselves as nearly invincible, having only a 1 or 2 percent risk of death should they be infected.

We are now living in a country where governors have seemingly become despots benevolent despots, but despots nonetheless. And these good people have run their states inconsistently. The automobile industry in Michigan can go back to work despite high numbers of infected in the state, but that same industry in California cant. My own view is that, say, Elon MuskElon Reeve MuskNASA, SpaceX and the private-public partnership that caused the flight of the Crew Dragon SpaceX capsule successfully docks at space station Trump calls Floyd death 'grave tragedy,' decries violent protests in Florida speech MORE will make his employees safe and should be permitted to do so. A California assemblywoman yelled, F--- Elon, but I think she is misguided. What is her view on the four million people in California who have lost their jobs to the virus?

There is another problem I have with state lockdowns: the U.S. Constitution has been tossed out the window. As former chief of staff to Chief Justice Warren Burger, I am especially protective of the human rights that the Constitution recognizes and protects. The Commerce Clause has been tossed: we generally cant travel or even leave our homes. First Amendment religious freedom has been altered so that we cant go to church even in a safe manner. The First Amendment right to assemble is gone. The right to private property as especially enumerated in the Fifth Amendment has been denied, as has due process. That amendment reads: we cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Yet governors deny our shops and jobs without due process or just compensation. Thirty million people so far have been left out in the cold. Some get a relatively small stimulus payment from the government but note that this government money was initially taken from taxpayers or borrowed or printed.

Another problem I have is with the cheap criticism pervasive throughout the country. I think President TrumpDonald John TrumpFauci says his meetings with Trump have 'dramatically decreased' McEnany criticizes DC mayor for not imposing earlier curfew amid protests Stopping Israel's annexation is a US national security interest MORE, California Gov. Newsom (D) Michigan Gov. Whitmer (D), New York Gov. Cuomo (D), Dr. Fauci, and all the other leaders in the country are trying to do the best they can. But this universal nightmare of worldwide contagion by an invisible bug is so big and so multifaceted that no one knows fully how to handle it. Even the trusted and revered Dr. Fauci, in a radio interview with host John Catsimatidis on Jan. 26, said about the coronavirus outbreak in China, Its a very, very low risk to the United States.... It isnt something that the American public needs to worry about or be frightened about.

Dr. Fauci, governors, and officials in Washington, D.C., are not omniscient, but they are doing their best and should be spared nasty criticism. Try walking a mile in their moccasins. G. K. Chesterton once observed that something can be so big that many do not see it. COVID-19 is as big as the world. No one should be expected to have all solutions.

Ronald L. Trowbridge, Ph.D., is a policy fellow at the Independent Institute. He was appointed by President Reagan to the United States Information Agency and later became chief of staff for Chief Justice Warren Burger.

Excerpt from:
An old man like me should be made more vulnerable to death by COVID-19 | TheHill - The Hill