He got things for that money though. Epstein got to visit the MIT campus, with women in tow. Students were forced to make him a replica of the Disobedience Prize orb. He specifically cited scientists and tech people to intimidate his victims and persuade the police to leave him alone.
You have to look at the other side of the relationship when someone donates. It's not just about taking the money, the person giving it is getting something in return and that's not always a good thing. In Epstein's case, it was tragic.
Epstein cited his relationships with these schools (built through fundraising) repeatedly both to intimidate his victims into silence and convince authorities to let him go. This wasn't a case of him sending a check and walking away, he was extracting a lot of value for his predatory operation from these institutions.
He notoriously did not do his time for his crime. He got such a blatantly corrupt sweetheart deal that Acosta had to resign due to it. The lawyer that got him that deal? Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz. Also accused of sexually abusing young girls with Epstein.
Then take it up with the justice system (or intelligence), don't blame Epstein for taking the sweetheart deal, or use that deal to justify further punishment. Similarly, when cops avoid jail time for shooting incidents, society should stop referring to them as murderers when they are acquitted (Zimmerman, Yanez, ...). Accept the decisions of the court, or work to improve them. You have no right to play your own judge. Especially in the Epstein case it is common to take allegations as facts, and this is ugly, since a judge has not even rendered a decision (yet, here we are using allegations as justification for societal excommunication).
Epstein cited his relationships with these schools (built through fundraising) repeatedly both to intimidate his victims into silence and convince authorities to let him go. This wasn't a case of him sending a check and walking away, he was extracting a lot of value for his predatory operation from these institutions. They should face the music for their role in what happened.
Epstein cited his relationships with these schools (built through fundraising) repeatedly both to intimidate his victims into silence and convince authorities to let him go. This wasn't a case of him sending a check and walking away, he was extracting a lot of value for his predatory operation from these institutions. They should face the music for their role in what happened.
> They should face the music for their role in what happened
Harvard and MIT didn't play a role in Epstein's non-donation related activities. They have nothing to answer for.
Next you're going to tell me anyone that takes any Bill and Melinda Gates foundation money has to answer for Microsoft's monopolistic practices in the 90's.
They actually did play a role in his non-donation activities. Multiple professors at both schools are credibly accused of participating in Epstein's child sex trafficking. MIT allowed Epstein to bring girls to the campus (Harvard hasn't released enough info to know if he did that there as well). MIT _sent Epstein a Disobedience Prize orb_. MIT leadership worked to actively conceal the donations.
There was a lot of very questionable things going on. They didn't just get a check and call it a day.
There actually was a lot of Epstein news that dropped last night (presumably with the idea that the Democrat debates would drown it out):
1. This Harvard statement. "Money's gone, too bad".
2. MIT President Rafael Reif admitted to signing an Epstein thank you note and attending a meeting discussing Epstein's contributions. He also threw his whole staff under the bus.
3. Reid Hoffman admitted to arranging meetings with Epstein on Joi Ito's request. He shockingly threw Ito and unshockingly MIT under the bus.
>Oddly, Epstein also claimed to do all the investing by himself while his 150 employees all worked in the back office — which Kass says reminds him of Madoff’s cover story. Though it now appears that Epstein had many fewer employees than he claimed
What was almost certainly happening was that his hedge fund was a front for blackmailing people (after they had sex with his underage sex slaves).
It's also interesting to note that his client list has still somehow not leaked. Everyone on there is probably a (wealthy/powerful) pedo.
Gates himself has a lot to answer for. The MIT emails show Epstein funneling $2M from Gates to Media Lab. He also flew on Epstein's jet to Florida and hasn't answered why.
With the amount of powerful people involved in this story, I don't think we're ever going to find out any details what really happened about the actual trafficking crimes themselves, at best we'll probably just be fed a healthy diet of salacious stories like this until some other event is big enough to distract everyone.
But I sense this whole thing is yielding fruit in other ways. Reddit threads on the front page (and allowed to stay on the front page; this thread on HN has now been flagged I see) in normal subreddits are absolutely full of overwhelming conspiratorial comments, the nature of which the hivemind would previously have downvoted into oblivion, because as we all know conspiracies like this are "always" crazy lies, due to the fact that is it "literally impossible" for that many people to keep their mouths shut.
That's preposterous. A lot of times you need an assertion in order to gather evidence. To make an assertion and then immediately dismiss it because there is no evidence would be a criminals dream come true.
> A lot of times you need an assertion in order to gather evidence
it's not an assertion then, it's a hypothesis. in any case,
i think you may have misunderstood what i was tring to say: imagine if i'd said: "i've seen evidence that hillary clinton reports to the chinese/korean government. no proof, but still". it says nothing, doesn't mention the evidence i've seen, and yet seems to imply something "wrong".
i'm calling it out, because it it encourages belief without evidence. it's insidious.
I'm not calling for or encouraging belief. I'm skeptical of the claims myself.
I want to see if the allegations are true and I support further investigation to bring all the details to light, because they are quite alarming. I don't support any narrative other than the truth.
I posted out of curiosity, because I wanted to see if others could contribute more to the discussion.
Meanwhile you have people that are flagging stories like this for an unknown reason, which is frustrating.
Whether that approach is wise under the circumstances is another question. Personally, the safety of children ranks fairly high on my priority list, so I believe all details of this case are worthy of consideration.
