Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Harvard admits to receiving $9M from Jeffrey Epstein

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–47 of 47 posts

Re: Harvard admits to receiving $9M from Jeffrey Epstein

#41

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

nullc wrote: post #24
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #11

There is a huge difference with what Harvard did and what MIT's Media Lab did. According to the article, Harvard didn't take any money from Epstein after his conviction, while at the Media Lab they continued to take it even after MIT put Epstein on its donor blacklist , and tried to hide the source of the funds.

> Media Lab they continued to take it even after MIT put Epstein on its donor blacklist, Turns out this was a misrepresentation: * https://www.technologyreview.com/s/614299/mit-media-lab-jeff... Apparently "disqualified" status was a flag in their CRM essentially just meant "don't bother trying to cold call this person", usually set after three failed attempts to fund-raise from them. It in no way signaled any kind o…

Thank you very much for posting it, this is an important piece of information I was unaware of, but note your links are broken.

Re: Harvard admits to receiving $9M from Jeffrey Epstein

#42

Post by msghacq »

howeyc wrote: post #38
msghacq wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. This witch-hunt stuff needs to stop.

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.

Re: Harvard admits to receiving $9M from Jeffrey Epstein

#43

Post by foxhill »

par wrote: post #23
foxhill wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if it can be asserted without evidence, it can be dismissed without discussion.

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.

Re: Harvard admits to receiving $9M from Jeffrey Epstein

#45

Post by bowcoy »

msghacq wrote: post #39
bowcoy wrote: post #37

I would have commended Harvard and MIT for not taking Epstein's money, with the reasoning that he was a scientific lightweight trying to buy academic clout. As of now, it just sounds like damage control. It takes zero courage to join the herd in saying that sex crimes are horrific. The justice system means that -- after you committed a crime and done your time -- you are supposed to rehabilitate and rejoin society. I…

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).

Re: Harvard admits to receiving $9M from Jeffrey Epstein

#46

Post by msghacq »

bowcoy wrote: post #45
msghacq wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

What is ugly is child sex trafficking. The justice system has failed here, hence the public's anger.

Re: Harvard admits to receiving $9M from Jeffrey Epstein

#47

Post by echelon »

foxhill wrote: post #43
par wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 call…

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.

Post reply on HN