Profile in Courage on the Epstein Fiasco
Representative Clay Higgins (R, LA)
Is everyone ready for this? Getting what you wanted? There’s an old saying, “Be careful what you wish for… you might get it.” We’re about to have the most highly publicized rape trial media coverage in history for a rape trial that will never result in any convictions. A more tactless way of putting it is to say we are about to have the public pissing contest to end all public pissing contests.
Trump called for this bill to pass. Democrats are smacking their lips. Republicans are afraid that MAGA constituencies obsessed with a sense of injustice about the victims are melting away in Christian-sounding dudgeon. Now it’s going to happen. Sometime today probably. Passage of the bill, I mean. Actual distribution of the documents will still be a burdensome process because everyone agrees redactions will be needed to protect the innocent. But, but, but… we will get to see the Democrat Party’s idea of “Democracy” in action. No wonder every member of the House of Representatives voted for it. Except one.
Clay Higgins voted no. Who the hell is he? Some terrified Republican pedophile with a stash of Epstein island photos under his mattress? Um, no. I’m pretty sure all the pedophile votes went, with fingers crossed and double-crossed, to passage of the bill. When all other defense measures fail, hide yourself in plain sight in a big group of people demanding Justice. Here’s the thumbnail on Clay Higgins:
The gray icon near the end is an artifact of copying, not a redaction.
The whole Wikipedia entry is available here with the usual lib bias.
Interestingly, the Gateway post citing the Higgins tweet edited out the boldface sentence shown above and referred instead to the ‘X’ link. Everyone’s gung ho about protecting victims, not so much about other witnesses and the ‘he said/she said’ implicated. Why would a cop be opposed to the truth coming out and letting the people decide? Because as a cop Higgins has seen that rape cases are more difficult to prosecute and convict on than any other crime of violence. The conviction rates are still staggeringly low (~10% ?) even in the wake of recent (hysteria-driven) metoo# double standards regarding evidence. The legal system has always struggled with the challenge of protecting the rights of both victims and accused in such cases, since there are usually no witnesses or the willing witnesses are complicit/unreliable associates of one of the opposing parties.
When CourtTV first came on air, we got used to seeing the victim’s face obscured by a big dot, whether she was seated at the lawyer table or on the stand. Her name and photo were not released to the press. In court, however, the defense was permitted extraordinary liberty in its cross-examinations, which lacking exculpatory evidence, relied on depicting the victim as a loose woman, historically promiscuous, untruthful about her responses to traffic citations or unreliable in her payment of bills. (A tactic permitted even in states which barred citation of prior felony convictions by a defendant on trial for something similar.) A victim claiming rape was fair game because she was otherwise so protected from close public scrutiny.
Defense attorneys have made a fine living attacking the whole idea that eyewitness (read victim) testimony can be relied on in the absence of forensic evidence, and prosecutors have become too timid to try many cases where guilt is circumstantially obvious but impossible to prove before inflexible judges or to juries who have watched too many episodes of CSI.
On top of all this, the public at large has always had an insatiable interest in rape trials. Can’t get enough coverage in the tabloids, on cable TV (Nancy Grace has made a fortune convicting defendants in public before an ‘impartial’ jury can be sworn in.)
This is the underlying context in which the Epstein cases have played out over years in which timid prosecutors, influential suspects, and young/frightened/confused/forgetful/drugged victims were made hostages to investigations that didn’t even target their particular perpetrator… and there was big money involved, and political careers, and life reputation on the table to be made or broken on every side.
It’s not true that Trump promised to “release all the Epstein files.” He was repeatedly pressed to make that promise during the ‘24 campaign but he was careful to confine his commitment to a rapid review of the materials and release of those files which could be done so legally. Why? Because of all of the above. He had personally and confidentially assisted investigators himself, and he understood the fairness issues on every side of a public media bath in such salacious content. He had cut off contacts with Epstein when he learned what was reputedly going on at “the Island,” probably as much to protect himself from tabloid frenzy as to prevent Epstein from using Mar a Lago social events as a recruiting opportunity. By 2024 he was intimately familiar with just how far the mass media would go in exaggerating spectacularly unlikely accusations and how far a partisan public would go in believing them uncritically. It’s not possible he would have supported the current bill in 2024.
He does now. Why? Because the tabloid frenzy is already here. Epstein has become the go-to defense strategy of the Democrat Party against the extraordinary accomplishments of Trump 2.0 in just 10 months. The Democrats aren’t looking for justice or support for the victims. They know both Dems and Republicans will be dodging brickbats in the media clusterf**k (CF) to come. But they can escape consequences because both the brickbats and the hidey holes are in the “redactions.” Do you know what they look like?
Google the word. Endless examples here.
Assigning names and both exculpatory and inculpatory meanings to the blacked out words will be the main objective of mass media analysts, pundits, and legal experts who will actually be the only ones to read the released documents. The public at large will be feasting on the headlines, soundbites and psychotic extrapolations prompted by the black print. All of which will remain permanently unprovable and inadmissible as grounds for anything in a court of law.
But, you see, this much is already well underway based on unredacted snippets of junk and faked images in the underground world of the social media unwashed. (By unwashed I mean not paid by mass media or holders of elected office or responsible positions touching in any way on the principals in the Epstein CF).
Trump knows what will come of this. His decision to drive passage of the bill is to get the CF fully out in the open and out of the way ASAP. It can’t last forever. No good can come of it. When no good (however you define it) does come of it, the unwashed underworld will grow tired of it and latch onto some other psychoneurotic fixation. You know. “Democracy.”
If you’re dubious about my claims regarding the ‘unwashed underworld,’ I can report that I have been reconnoitering it, interacting with it, and perusing what profiles indicate about the most active, irrational, and bloody-minded of them. They consist overwhelmingly of the true-blue Trump haters, mostly Democrat/Prog/Socialists and a minority of Evangelicals who know sin when they see it. There is a clear sex differential here. About 20-30 percent of the haters are men, 70-80 percent are women (or female if you must). The men are angry and aggrieved and hungry for Democrat resurgence. They use bad words freely. The women are are so crazed you can even hear them shouting in their incoherent diatribes against a man who, to them, is a “proven pedophile,” “convicted rapist,” and so profoundly evil and lacking in ANY redeeming qualities that he must die. That’s the only acceptable justice, however achieved. All races are represented, though there is a tilt toward blacks among those who show profile pictures of themselves. Their fixation tends to be more on what a racist Trump is, although they’re not above sharing the desire to see justice for even the white victims of all the rich white pedophiles, including even Bill Clinton and Bill Gates. They’re nonpartisan in that way. The undercurrent is always immersed in sex however. Black men who didn’t know what pedophilia was a few years ago are now just as certain that all white men, especially Republicans, are engaged in a great pedophile conspiracy to rule the world and return blacks to slavery.
Don’t believe me. Go here. Join up. Take a walk on the wild side.
Back in November 2024, I wrote a post called “How the Hive Killed America.” It described a conspiracy seeking domination of this nation (and others) by forces of culture rather than specific political agents. The intent of the conspiracy is to remove or limit human consciousness to a level that dissolves individuality into the collective consciousness and will of the whole. In this it is like a hive, which is its own brain and lives in response to the seasons in a continuing cycle that needs no history since it never changes and there are no individuals to remember or wisdom to pass on. There is a queen, though not a ruler per sē, simply the source of fecundity seated on her throne of honey, served by workers and drones in perpetuity.
Innumerable cultural forces have been pushing humanity in this direction for two centuries at least. Unbeknownst to them, multiple political activists are actually tools of the emergent hive. For example, feminists have been used by the hive, but they will be no more favored in the collective half sleep of the hive than the males. The conscious mind is being gradually exterminated by the empowerment of emotions above all else, which will eventually burn out as well when thought ceases to exist.
What I did not provide in my post was a closeup view of what the hive building process looks and feels like. That’s what you can experience at Threads. I kid you not.
Why I began and will end this with a bow to Clay Higgins. His lone “No” vote will become a thing of the past when the great matriarchal hive is fully operational, when the unique male capacity to say “No” has been exterminated at last. Charlie Kirk was eloquent on the subject of a man’s duty and history of saying “No.” One of the most powerful motives for assassinating him. Which always goes, at the deepest level, back to sex, the sexes, and the differences between them. Why the one who assassinated him was a male who wanted more than anything to say “No” to being a Man. So much easier to use a gun to say “No” to a man who was a man. Which is so scary to the hive that males are useful only for providing sperm to the Queen.
Now the Queen has a new infusion of sperm. Let’s see what she does with it…
Comments