I needed a diversion so I came here for an hour.

[Bruh]

If you're investigated and there is not enough evidence to bring charges your name is not released. So it's entirely possible that the prosecutors chose to not file charges. Doing so doesn't mean they weren't investigated. In fact it means they were and the investigation didn't reveal enough evidence to warrant a trial that the prosecution couldn't win.

Therefore, he was wrongly convicted of having a sex trafficking network?

 

[Bruh]

Interesting indeed. I feel like I’m back in that logic philosophy class from so long ago. Perhaps Bruh would have been best served by stating that he thinks there’s a government coverup rather than stating there is a government coverup.

Are you saying that Epstein was wrongfully convicted of having a network with sex trafficking?

Network implies others were involved and he was convicted of this crime.

 

[Dr. Duck]

Are you saying that Epstein was wrongfully convicted of having a network with sex trafficking?

Network implies others were involved and he was convicted of this crime.

Nope, I’m saying I’m not convinced there’s a massive governmental coverup of his former network. After all, he did go to prison.

 

[Ransom]

Network implies other people.

Who are they, he asked again, fully expecting no answer.

 

[Ransom]

Are you saying that Epstein was wrongfully convicted of having a network with sex trafficking?

Duh has now pivoted to a second motte. Instead of defendng his claim of a government coverup of Epstein's sex-trafficking network, he's pivoted to the self-evident one that Epstein conspired with others.

 

[Bruh]

Nope, I’m saying I’m not convinced there’s a massive governmental coverup of his former network. After all, he did go to prison.

And no one within the network?
I’m trying to understand where everyone is coming from.

 

[Bruh]

Who are they, he asked again, fully expecting no answer.

Ok, we both agree that we have no clue who the others are. Do I understand you correctly?

Do we agree that there are others due to Epstein being convicted of having the network? Or no?

 

[Bruh]

Duh has now pivoted to a second motte. Instead of defendng his claim of a government coverup of Epstein's sex-trafficking network, he's pivoted to the self-evident one that Epstein conspired with others.

Ok he conspired with others we agree?

Because there are others and none as far as we know have not been investigated and arrested. Do we agree here?

 

[Dr. Duck]

And no one within the network?
I’m trying to understand where everyone is coming from.

I think the “network” was based overseas, hence another barrier in attempting prosecutions.

 

[Ransom]

Because there are others and none as far as we know have not been investigated and arrested. Do we agree here?

But your argument was not merely that there's no investigation that we know of. You started specifically by saying the government was covering up the network. That's not an absence of knowledge. That's supposed positive knowledge that due to nefarious purposes, there is no investigation.

Once again ... prove it.

 

[subllibrm]

Therefore, he was wrongly convicted of having a sex trafficking network?

More likely that, white enough evidence existed to convict him, such was not the case for other suspects.