Perhaps you’re suggesting his CIA handler(s) masterminded this, but a foot soldier in the CIA wouldn’t have any authority over the prison or FBI—they’re two distinct agencies.
There would need to be existing relationships for that. It might be that the CIA has a relationship with the prison that they have facilitated to be able to put pressure on individuals of the prison. Bribe someone who actually controls cell distribution and put people from whom the CIA wants intelligence together with someone who’s likely going to rape them. Then blackmail the person to give up the intelligence in return for the rape to stop.
Such a relationship can then be used in a case like this to get the prisoner who’s otherwise bribed to kill Epstein into the right cell block. You also shouldn’t underrate the capability of the CIA to blackmail people to get what they want through their surveillance infrastructure.
If any of those people have any moral compunctions at all and decide to pursue the matter with the OIG or send an anonymous telegram to the New York Times, you’re going to jail.
That assumes that the New York Times would actually do anything with the information. If they got such a letter they would go to their CIA contact person and ask them for more information and then the pressure would be created to keep them silent.
The fact that Epstein could openly operate for so long without places like the New York Times holding him to account.
I don’t think the CIA has a general moral code where they have a problem with killing people who are clearly bad people if that’s required to keep secrets that the agency wants to keep secret out of the open. Torturing people is a strong moral violation and CIA officials who engaged in it weren’t punished after it came out in the open.
This is in addition to an internal affairs agency that all government bureaucracies have, and other special oversight that’s been added to the CIA over the years by Congress.
That’s like the nuclear safety rules that nuclear weapons have to have special codes to be activated. The US military set them to 000000000 in the beginning to fulfill the legal obligation. The CIA does not have effective oversight by congress.
I’m not trying to be condescending, but a hundred thousand people have worked for the CIA since its inception—you need to pick a book written by one of those people, or a historian, or an investigative journalist, or a defector, or a state department official, or politician, and read it. You do not have an accurate and discrete enough mental model of the incentives and pressures of CIA work, or a strong enough understanding of what CIA officers take up the job for or do, and so you’re supposing plots that make no sense. I could sit here and go over them mechanically, but I suspect you will just move onto a hypothesis slightly more outwardly reasonable that I ultimately find the premise for to be ridiculous. If you want to suggest the current layers of congressional oversight of the CIA are just for show, then need to know what those layers are. Or maybe you need to try to tell a traffic officer that you’re a CIA officer and have the special bribing authority the next time he tries to give you a ticket and see how well that goes.
The CIA is not a person, and it’s unhelpful to think of it as if it were. Just because you perceive a moral equivalence between the MKULTRA program in the 1970s, or torture of foreign terrorist detainees during the 2000s, and the “bribing” of an American prison warden to facilitate the murder of a high profile American prisoner in 2019, doesn’t make the latter at all plausible. I’m not trying to argue with you about how ethical the CIA is or whether or not Mr. CIA has the moral compunctions to do such a thing, I’m trying to explain why I don’t think with 80% probability three or four low level rat handlers have the means or motive to arrange the murder of an American citizen inside the country’s highest security jail.
Epstein was hanging out with a variety of billionaires and other very powerful people. There’s no reason to assume that only low-level people had an incentive to get rid of him. It’s again a similar strawman as focusing on Alan Dershowitz as being the height of people with incentives to kill Epstein.
Let’s just agree to disagree then, at least until I write the next few posts in the sequence. Again, I do think it is at least more plausible that a billionaire or one of the friends he made outside of his contact with the CIA arranged a murder, I just find it too just-so that they had much authority over the prison or his death investigation. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.
There would need to be existing relationships for that. It might be that the CIA has a relationship with the prison that they have facilitated to be able to put pressure on individuals of the prison. Bribe someone who actually controls cell distribution and put people from whom the CIA wants intelligence together with someone who’s likely going to rape them. Then blackmail the person to give up the intelligence in return for the rape to stop.
Such a relationship can then be used in a case like this to get the prisoner who’s otherwise bribed to kill Epstein into the right cell block. You also shouldn’t underrate the capability of the CIA to blackmail people to get what they want through their surveillance infrastructure.
That assumes that the New York Times would actually do anything with the information. If they got such a letter they would go to their CIA contact person and ask them for more information and then the pressure would be created to keep them silent.
The fact that Epstein could openly operate for so long without places like the New York Times holding him to account.
I don’t think the CIA has a general moral code where they have a problem with killing people who are clearly bad people if that’s required to keep secrets that the agency wants to keep secret out of the open. Torturing people is a strong moral violation and CIA officials who engaged in it weren’t punished after it came out in the open.
That’s like the nuclear safety rules that nuclear weapons have to have special codes to be activated. The US military set them to 000000000 in the beginning to fulfill the legal obligation. The CIA does not have effective oversight by congress.
I’m not trying to be condescending, but a hundred thousand people have worked for the CIA since its inception—you need to pick a book written by one of those people, or a historian, or an investigative journalist, or a defector, or a state department official, or politician, and read it. You do not have an accurate and discrete enough mental model of the incentives and pressures of CIA work, or a strong enough understanding of what CIA officers take up the job for or do, and so you’re supposing plots that make no sense. I could sit here and go over them mechanically, but I suspect you will just move onto a hypothesis slightly more outwardly reasonable that I ultimately find the premise for to be ridiculous. If you want to suggest the current layers of congressional oversight of the CIA are just for show, then need to know what those layers are. Or maybe you need to try to tell a traffic officer that you’re a CIA officer and have the special bribing authority the next time he tries to give you a ticket and see how well that goes.
The CIA is not a person, and it’s unhelpful to think of it as if it were. Just because you perceive a moral equivalence between the MKULTRA program in the 1970s, or torture of foreign terrorist detainees during the 2000s, and the “bribing” of an American prison warden to facilitate the murder of a high profile American prisoner in 2019, doesn’t make the latter at all plausible. I’m not trying to argue with you about how ethical the CIA is or whether or not Mr. CIA has the moral compunctions to do such a thing, I’m trying to explain why I don’t think with 80% probability three or four low level rat handlers have the means or motive to arrange the murder of an American citizen inside the country’s highest security jail.
Epstein was hanging out with a variety of billionaires and other very powerful people. There’s no reason to assume that only low-level people had an incentive to get rid of him. It’s again a similar strawman as focusing on Alan Dershowitz as being the height of people with incentives to kill Epstein.
Let’s just agree to disagree then, at least until I write the next few posts in the sequence. Again, I do think it is at least more plausible that a billionaire or one of the friends he made outside of his contact with the CIA arranged a murder, I just find it too just-so that they had much authority over the prison or his death investigation. I could be wrong, but I don’t think I am.