This is how the laundry is washed.

They are going to gingerly document what they have to about Les Wexner, Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Ed Razek, Jean-Luc Brunel, “Ace” Greenberg, Deutsche Bank, et. al. This is important for putting distance between the perps and their collaborators – especially the lawyers and law firms and judges.

Forty years ago, in the North East and the Mid West, someone like Lex Wexner would be unselfconsciously referred to as an “organized crime figure.” It would all be “rumors” but the “locals” would remember when “Wexner’s lawyer got whacked.”

No one in Columbus is going to speak too loudly because Wexner runs everything – in one way or another, your paycheck comes from Wexner. That is why his name is on all the buildings.

The old taboos of the Boomer generation continue to break down as the Internet swallows everything.

But the coming documentary on Victoria’s Secret is instead going to focus attention on this instead:

https://www.elle.com.au/culture/rise-and-fall-of-victorias-secret-documentary-24735

Watch as the attention gets shifted:

Said behaviour was more frequently perpetrated by Ed Razek, the CMO for parent company L Brands. Razek resigned in 2019 after facing backlash over past transphobic comments he had made, while Leslie Wexner, longtime L Brands CEO, ignored complaints and insulted Razek. The former CMO also had connections with convicted sex trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein, who posed as a Victoria’s Secret recruiter on a number of occasions to target aspiring models.

This is full of interesting things: names, for one. Possibly crimes, for another. Even more interesting connections.

But discussing specifics is low-class. Instead, to be seen as smart and “with it” you have to discuss abstractions. So instead of the names, dates, places, crimes, instead they want to talk about this:

But of course, the brand’s cultural impact had been in question long before the Epstein allegations came to light. While the world—and other influential fashion brands—continued to champion body positivity, diversity and inclusion, Victoria’s Secret were criticised for its extremely limited sizing, casting mostly thin, white models.

We see how Elite Discourse – in this case, the language of “Social Justice” with a “feminist” gloss, is used to distract from the material facts.

This “Social Justice” discourse, with a gloss of “critical race theory,” is used by corporations like Amazon to interfere with union organizing and worker solidarity; the most “diverse” workplaces are the ones with more management control of workers.

The Boomer generation idealized “journalists” mostly because of the Washington Post writers that “took down Nixon” – meaning, the two writers who took dictation from Nixon’s enemies at the CIA and FBI. But the Boomers had a warm, fuzzy feeling about “journalists” who “held the powerful accountable” – meaning, taking down Republican politicians disliked by the elites and praising politicians beloved by the elites, like Merrick Garland.

But no one has that Boomer take on “journalists” anymore. The Internet had ended the importance of “journalism” and anyone trying to make a heroic film about Woodward and Bernstein in 2021 would be laughed at.

There’s another Boomer taboo, and that is the pretense that judges and the judicial system are somehow “not political” and that the Supreme Court has some sort of “independence” from the rest of the political system.

This is ridiculous, absurd, of course. 60 years of Hollywood and TV shows like LA Law and Law & Order have indeed given Boomers a hilariously inept idea of just what judges and lawyers do.

Boomers believe the TV show version, where lawyers “argue” with each other about the “law.” A certain sort of cynicism is allowed – lawyers aren’t expected to “believe” their own case, necessarily.

But the TV version is that judges make decisions based on some interpretation of the law and the lawyer’s arguments.

Which is absurd – ridiculous. Judges make decisions based on their own political and personal interests. The law is barely even a fig-leaf. Words mean whatever people want them to mean.

The “Left” and the Democratic party are quite forthright about this, while the Republicans shamelessly posture and pretend they care about the law “as written” or even – in the cases of comical jokes like Antonin Scalia – the “original intent.”

In reality, the lawyers and the judges are simply front line political workers. The judges on trials like that of Epstein – or 9/11, or OKC, or the first WTC bombing – are there to keep certain names and certain facts out of the official record.

These are not unintelligent people, they are fully conscious and aware of their own political interests. Some, who have a “moralistic” personality, may perhaps even have internal conversations with themselves – they may “struggle” with their “principles” or whatever – but 99% of the time, they rule in their own political interests – just like all politicians do.

Judges are no different.

And judges are just humans. Ask that judge that was assigned to the Jeffrey Epstein case and had her son and husband murdered by a “lawyer” that worked for CIA front companies in Russia.

In any case, the coming stories about Victoria’s Secret will have all sorts of interesting aspects, but the role of “journalists” is to get you talking about “beauty standards” as opposed to “sex trafficking” and “rape” and “white slavery” and “blackmail.”

And the role of “law firms” and “lawyers” and “judges” is to cover up the crimes of their allies and hurt their political opponents via fines, jail time, or even executions.