Joseph McCombs
LightNews LightNews
Joseph McCombs
@popargot.bsky.social
160 followers 76 following 150 posts
Writer, editor, pop culture vulture, music trivia maven, mal vivant
Posts Replies Media Videos
I like it too, but I thought Firefall was infamous for their singles testing poorly among surveyed listeners?
November 15, 2025 at 8:29 PM
Were Jennifer Rush and Brenda Lee Eager there too?
November 15, 2025 at 6:37 PM
I might argue that CoH is his Todd Rundgren record (and “It’s a Laugh” is H&O’s Rundgren record).
November 15, 2025 at 6:30 PM
Reposted by Joseph McCombs
kissphoria.bsky.social
Epstein: ken, would take a stab at the article for the law journal. ? thx

Ken Starr: "In the spirit of the bedrock American belief in second chances, that unhappy chapter in Jeffrey's otherwise-magnificent life should be allowed to close once and for all."
From: Sent: To: CC: Subject: Matthew Hiltzik, 12/15/2018 6:40:52 PM Michael Wolff I Jeffrey Epstein [jeevacation@gmail.com]; Kathy Ruemmler Re: Darren Indyke Also think there should be a line in there somewhere which clearly confirms that JE understands and recognizes that he did something wrong Sent from my iPhone On Dec 15, 2018, at 12:03 PM, Michael Wolff < > wrote: Seems very good. Is there reason or opportunity here to evoke JE's Clinton connection? He had been publicly connected to the former President and became a proxy for the considerable anger at high levels of the Federal government that still surrounded Clinton. Likewise now, one reason to revive the story is that it is a way to tar a Trump administration official, who, in the normal course of his duties, happened to deal with the case. On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:28 AM J <jeevacation@,gmail.com> wrote: thoughts. - Forwarded message --- From: Ken Starr < Date: Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 11:24 AM Subject: Re: To: J< <jeevacation@gmail.com> Cc: Alan Dershowitz < Here goes: "Sweetheart deal! " So goes the critique of the resolution of a long-ago case involving our former client -- and now-friend -- Jeffrey Epstein. The critique is profoundly misplaced, supported neither by the law or the facts, nor by the structure of our constitutional republic. To the contrary, Jeffrey was subjected to an unprecedented federal intrusion into a quintessentially local criminal matter in south Florida. His offense to the social order --involving sex for hire -- was entirely a matter entrusted to laws of the several States, not the federal government. His conduct - a classic state offense --was being treated exactly that way by able, honest prosecutors in Palm Beach County, but the overweening federal government intruded where it did not belong. And now, over ten years after the fact, the current assault on federal decision-makers at the time, including now-Secretary of Labor Alex Acosta (then the United States Attorney in south Flo… aggressively enforce state criminal laws. No one turned a blind eye to potential offenses to the public order. To the contrary, the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office conducted an extensive 15-month investigation, led by the chief of the Sex Crimes Division. Mr. Epstein was then indicted by a state grand jury on a single felony count of solicitation of prostitution. During that intense investigation, the state prosecutors extensively gathered and analyzed the evidence, met face-to-face with many of the asserted victims, considered their credibility -- or lack thereof - and considered the extent of exculpatory evidence. Then, after months of elaborate negotiations, the state prosecutors believed they had reached a reasoned resolution of the matter that vindicated the public interest -- a resolution entirely consistent with that of cases involving other similarly-situated defendants. Then, in came the feds. The United States Attorney's Office tried, to no avail, to fit Mr. Epstein's situation into its vision of what it viewed as a commercial trafficking ring targeting minors. This was anything but. At long last, the federal authorities acknowledged that stark reality and grudgingly agreed to defer prosecution to the state. But there was a huge catch. In the face of our arguments sharply condemning their overreach, the federal prosecutors insisted on many unorthodox requirements that tugged at fundamental values of due process. For example, the agreement required Mr. Epstein to pay an undisclosed list of asserted victims $150,000 each. Even more, the feds insisted that Jeffrey pay for an attorney to represent such unidentified victims if any chose to filed civil litigation against him. When asked what possible legal authority supported this extravagant exercise of national power, the feds lamely cited a wildly inapposite case from Alaska involving cocaine and forced on-the-street prostitution. Apples and oranges. Under the federally-forced deal, Jeffrey was sentenced t…
November 13, 2025 at 8:02 PM
Reposted by Joseph McCombs
mtsw.bsky.social
I don't say this to "work the refs" or whatever but to open your eyes into the way the decision-makers in the media have not been and are not on our side, the side of truth and integrity etc. They like Trump and want him to win. Situation now is dramatically worse than in 2016.
November 12, 2025 at 2:45 PM
Yo what’s real good!
November 13, 2025 at 9:15 AM
*Guys, not Boys; can’t edit my post
November 12, 2025 at 6:57 AM
(“Shoorah Shoorah” is also a fave, but I don’t think it hit the Hot 100.)
November 12, 2025 at 6:55 AM