After making curious statements about the sex trafficker she does not help her cause
Yesterday I wrote about the actress Ellen Barkin who has been making a series of accusations regarding Donald Trump having involvement with the billionaire-charged sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. In her desire to make the case that the President harbors some level of guilt Barkin made some comments that were, at the very least curious.
She stated that Epstein’s close associate, who piloted in numerous clients to his alleged “sex island”, had confessed directly to Barkin that she was a de facto sex trafficker. While Ellen may have thought this was a healthy dose of virtue signaling that places her as an authority on the issue what in fact transpired was a volley of questions about having direct knowledge about his actions and not taking any direct action.
Barkin likely came into this information at the time she had been married to her own billionaire, Ron Perelman. It is looking more apparent that Barkin stepped in her own trap, in her attempt to ensnare the President. After many people either questioned, or confronted the actress about her having standing knowledge of Epstein’s supposed crimes she attempted to deflect the criticism.
Her lecturing about making assumptions absent the facts is beyond ironic, as she is doing exactly that in regards to the President. Seeming stern here she was given a follow-up question, and her response seems to say quite a bit more than she intended.
There is a lot to untruck in just this one tweet. First, to say her tweet in question from yesterday was not about her is a piece of amusement, as she inserted herself directly into the narrative. She next tries to sashay around her statement of having been told direct information from one of the players. Her attempt here to stipulate that all she did was repeat well-known information, that anyone following along would have been wise to, is undercut by one basic source — her own words.
Barkin declared that Epstein’s personal associate was a known sex trafficker because, as Barkin herself stated, “I know because she told me.” That is not information that is known to “anyone”. She claims to have been informed directly by a large suspect in this case. Her choice of words now appears as a clear attempt to alter the narrative she has been forwarding.
She then closes out by saying this is all a case of people rushing to judgment, and obviously, she would like for people to stop doing that — now. It was fine when she spent days doing that very thing in reference to Donald Trump’s possible guilt in this matter, but after stepping on a rake that she herself dropped into her path Ellen now wants to have the practice of supposition suspended.
Note too that Barkin is the one to have volunteered her involvement. People’s curiosity became stimulated based on what SHE said. Asking her to clarify, or seeking other answers this has led to, is considered to be “making assumptions”, and “a rush to judgment”. Asking questions is neither of those things. Avoiding the answers to those questions is in fact very revealing.