I don't know the particulars (I'm firewalled from reading the full piece), but I do agree with Mickey that putting trust in FBI reports when Hoover expressly weaponized the agency against MLK is going out on a bit of a limb, to put it lightly (though I'm not saying the writer's doing that).

The author did win a Pulitzer writing about Dr. King so I’m not sure he’d be one to attempt to destroy the guys legacy with with such charges. Apparently the audio is classified for another 8 years so it’ll just beat album 11 out of the gate. God knows what the Kennedys did.

Yeah, definitely, that makes sense; I think I'm less skeptical of the author than the source material.

I don't know if I think the author is attempting to do anything of the sort--he's reporting what he's found in the FBI files (he may have any such motive for doing so). My point is simply that what he's reporting--that the FBI claims to have a tape wherein MLK passively watches a rape--should be viewed with suspicion: it's well within the realm of possibility that the tape is doctored, fake, or that it doesn't exist at all.

It's also pretty widely known that MLK was a philanderer. Abetting a rape would certainly be a much more disturbing allegation and would absolutely necessitate complicating historical narratives about him, but the other shit--that he slept around, that he said "pussy eater" or whatever--isn't news.

More Max Landis stuff

Absolutely no difficulty in believeing any allegation against him.

He’s a vile stain

You don’t like him because he called Rey a Mary Sue.

You think Epstein became a billionaire by secretly filming very powerful people having sex with teenagers?

I've also wondered this

He’s incredibly intelligent and worked with ultra high net worth investors. He made his money hiding theirs. But I would bet good money he’s got a ton of tapes and that’s why charges never stuck.

we need a new Russiagate heading into 2020, so here we go.