He wasn't framing the narrative around antisemitism, he's framing the narrative around the smear factor. They want to smear people when there's an objective to be had, that objective was to the fact he once defended Epstein, it had nothing to do with him defending Trump, actually he wasn't defending Trump he was defending the constitution during the Trump impeachment. He has made that perfectly clear. What he's so mad about is evidently, and you or I haven't looked far enough yet or they didn't release his exoneration from the charges leveled at him. He filed suit against the girls attorney because at first they refused to drop the allegations against him. He could prove he was in court on the day she accused him of having sex with her. The lawyers finally dropped her as her attorneys and dropped the case against him. He has a fair point in questioning the motives of some of these girls, they wanted to get back at him for defending Epstein not Trump, Trump hadn't even happened by then. That came down the road a ways. Now he has to relive all this stuff, being smeared in the media by a bunch of women and wants to know why these same women are out defending the actions of rapist in Israel, where's the outrage over that is what he is saying, he's not making an accusation this is related to antisemitism. Because you've been gone for two weeks the write ups by the media, from what I've seen, exonerates the stuff against Trump itself. Which I was quite surprised by. Which you happen to have mentioned, it's not clear nor was it ever acknowledged by anyone they even met Trump down in Atlantic city. I am no longer a Trump supporter but I do continue to defend him on that point. Trump did go to the island once but he couldn't wait to get off the island, he was appalled at what he saw there. I think that may be one reason he took Epstein down. It was almost like a first objective to him. That Billy Bush video where Trump said "you can grab them by the pussy", the part people leave out is "they let you do it", when you are a millionaire you have access to so many women you don't need to mess with kids or minors, that's just Trumps views on it. (Now here's another thing about all that, not sure if I've mentioned it before or not to you, but the continued thought of what the bigger threat is over why no one does anything about these vaccines, and we know they are Trump's baby despite what anyone else wants to believe, the thought hasn't been lost on me that the raid of the island also happened on Trump's watch and he could, or it's possible he has the goods on a whole lot of people). (Just sayin') It's not the only thought of what the bigger threat could be, just one of a few. Now Bill Clinton, they didn't let him off so easily having said he went to the island fifty times. I am sure he wasn't there collecting shells on the beach. I am pretty good at judging some men's characters and I am telling you I've watched Dershowictz in a lot of interviews, he doesn't have what it takes to cheat on his wife. It's just not in his character. Even in interviews on this subject itself, there was even one interview where he showed a lot of naivete when it came to Epstein, had he have known the extent to what was involved he said he'd chose differently in defending him. I have a saying, studies have put me pretty close to being accurate after having spent years saying it. 80% of all men will cheat, 10% will cheat with the right person and the other 10% won't cheat at all. Dershowitz falls in that 10% who won't cheat at all. It's a rare breed of men. One of the reasons I contribute to never have gotten married. Most of the friends I've had in life were men, as such I was pretty much just one of the guys when they'd all hang out, I've heard some stuff, they can be a sneaky lot for sure. Dershowitz's characteristics just doesn't have what it takes to be a cheater. Dershowitz is just as much a victim as those girls were, evil people took advantage of a good natured human being loyally married to his wife, that's why they chose to ask him to defend him, there was no way anyone would come up with something close to what they were guilty of, he had an untarnished reputation. In other words they used him.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I think you're a terrible judge of character.
Thanks!
have not seen the comment section this active on 3speak in a while. Great to see!
do you have a source for that?
i posted the same comment over and over again cause i dont understand 3speak yet, really sorry about that.
yes, your comment is posting just fine :)
@creativetruth would never cheat on a partner.
Don't know where you get your character opinions from. Very interesting. One could write a detailed biography on all of these people's secret lives without having ever met them.
Yeah, I think also that with Dershowitz, i'd just add - even if you were trying to do what Sunlit said - you are only seeing him on TV shows. So its an artificial construct, you are not seeing what he is like off stage.
Thanks!
You don't need to see what he is like off stage to determine if someone appears to be trying to squirm their way out of something. When you watch someone for years speak and all of a sudden they go out of what I call their element, or comfort zone, you know something is wrong.
If there was an ill side to that man, him being a democrat, would have never argued the constitutional aspect during Trump's impeachment trial. He has repeatedly said he was not defending Trump or did it to defend Trump, he did it because it was against the constitution what they were doing. It was a matter of right and wrong. There's something to be said of a person who'd stand up when there's wrong being done, especially when they know they'll be tarred and feathered for it. Right is right, and wrong is wrong, and it's to bad there isn't more people like that in this country. Though the other day he did disappoint me when he said that that's what lawyers are paid to do, defend people, he'd do it again if he had to, totally opposite what he told Laura a few years ago. Admittingly he was mad, upset that they didn't release the materials that would exonerate him but people can be worn down trying to defend themselves constantly. I've been that mad myself many times before when it came to something that was the equivalent of biting off my nose to spite my face, mad enough I said I'd do it again....despite it'd take the rest of my nose, lol.
I'd have to take your word solely that you wouldn't cheat on a partner. Now if I'd spent ten, fifteen years talking to you, or watching you for years speak, then I could seduce something more of your character as to if you were telling the truth.
About Dershowiz not cheating based on your examination of his character - I think its important to keep in mind that drugs are likely used - even drugs you are not aware of - For instance, there are drugs that they give horses to help with breeding, these are known drugs that can also be used in humans - I won't get into it, but I have read about such things being used by people - so they increase libido by a million percent or something - I am not sure the effects, i.e., if you know that you are on them if your drink is spiked or not - but you can always reduce the dose or something maybe - I am sure some chemist could figure it out, and this is a high level operation etc., . And that is just one drug - It is hard to say how someone would operate under such circumstances. You can use anything to get someone on camera really my guess would be, and that is just one drug.
Thanks!
I could go find it for you if you like. I tend to not want to spend an hour reviewing stuff when people really aren't going to care because they are part of the objective propaganda being spread. I actually had to do that the other night over someone challenging me on something so I had to blow it out of the water for them, took me a bit, I warned them I was once a supporter of Trump and defended him on the matter many a times, don't keep coming at me with he never said that especially since they pay little attention to what he does say and more attention to what the media says he said. I heard him when he said it. After spending a couple hours putting it back together evidently, they didn't like what I had to say because I haven't heard any argument back. Once I put the old and new pieces together I told them I might actually have to reconfigure my opinion on the matter. Not that I was calling him a pedo but he did hire a fifteen year old girl to work in the locker room at Mar A Lago, and said him and Epstein had a fall out over a real estate deal. Said he hadn't talk to him in about fifteen years or so. Given the timeline she said she worked there coincidence with his fall out. So what kind of "real estate" are we talking about here.
Anyway back to Dershowitz. The girl even admitted it was animosity towards Dershowitz as to why she made the claim against him because he defended Epstein. Her whole case fell apart and Dershowitz is confident when the rest of the papers are released he'll be exonerated.
As far as his editorial piece you should have been honest about that. He clearly stated he wasn't arguing the point on moral grounds. I think that if he had added, as he done with a lower age limit, a higher age limit when it came to men also. But he had a valid point that an 18, 19 year old man can have his entire life tarnished by having sex with a 16, 17 year old girl. The argument is more along the equivalent of you can be old enough to die for your country but not old enough to have a drink before you die type of situation.
The thought also didn't escape me that because of his lack of sexual promiscuous involvement those in power could have paid him to be the front guy distraction to the underlying truths. Something of that nature though would involve being in an exceptional bonded marriage with his wife, because something of that nature would involve her approval, strength to endure the backlash of it all. She would have to fully acknowledge the faith in their marriage that the whole thing wouldn't come back to bite them by some solid proof of wrongdoing on his behalf. I am not talking about being paid by Trump or Epstein entirely, if any at that, but I wouldn't put it past the Clintons at all since he's escape culprit- ability his entire life over his sexual promiscuousness.