Kathy Ruemmler. How could she???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Some real all-or-nothing thinking I’m this thread. Yes, every person with power (White House, etc) will face some moral compromises and interact with some shady people.

Not everyone will accepts gifts from and cozy up to pedophiles. Which is why there are plenty of elites and billionaires who do not appear in these files.

Agree with a PP that saying “everyone does it” (when the “it” is being literal besties with a notorious pedophile) is itself a form of enabling.

Another one with conceptual thinking deficits. The principle you should have distilled isn't "everyone does it." Rather, it's to understand that the system of power we have is extremely corrupt and you must stop stupidly putting faith in the cover stories and mythologies with which these people explain their rise and cover their tracks. We, the People, cannot perform our watchdog function and hold power to count when we are so credulous. An investigation of EVERYONE in key positions throughout every administration in which Epstein operated is the least we should be demanding here. In a different country of people who hadn't internalized the falsehood that the powerful are heroes to be idolized, a government-wide investigation, along with investigation of private actors who were utilizing the revolving door throughout, would be already underway.

You're not doing anything special sitting around knowing that a literal cabal of pedophiles operated in this country for decades and then waiting for random unredacted names to leak so you can gasp and virtue signal with how shocked you are.

Respectfully, I think you think I’m more naive than I am. And somehow that you uniquely in this thread have the proverbial eyes to see.

But there are a lot of elite names that do not appear in these files. And obviously there are plenty that do. This thread is about the difference between those two categories of elites.

PP here. No, you're trying to create a conversation about the false dichotomy you have fabricated between people who are currently named and people who have not yet been exposed. You're pretending that the former are the only culpable parties while the latter are somehow innocent. Ask yourself why.

As I just pointed it out in a previous post, anyone paying attention right now is fully aware that the evidence in the public sphere is a mere fraction of the evidence that exists and the latter is a mere fraction of the evidence that once existed but was destroyed.

People like you, who like to place disproportionate focus on discrete individuals to obscure the reality of a literal pedophile cabal that either comprised or compromised virtually everyone in power over multiple decades, are part of the problem. You're sitting here exonerating people whom common sense should tell you were likely part of this or looked the other way at the very least, and then you're pretending this is some kind of attempt to hold people accountable? You're a clown.

The PP isn’t a clown. The PP is a wealthy person in the 2% afraid of the backlash when the other 98% of the population realize that the 2% is made up of deeply evil people. Ironically the attempt to manipulate the truth just shows that the PP is also in the deeply evil category.

I’m the PP, and you are incorrect about who I am.

Let me ask this: for those who are saying there’s no meaningful difference between those who appear (and you are correct to qualify this as “in the files that we have seen”), what process are you advocating, exactly? In your mind/s, what does accountability look like, and where does it begin?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have found it really interesting to search the files (the jmail site is great) to see who wasn’t in his circle. Romney, for example, only appears very abstractly and second/third hand mentions. So what makes Romney different from Clinton/Trump?

Along those lines, what made Kathy R such an enthusiastic participant in Epstein’s inner orbit, when Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, and Plouffe weren’t?

Yes, we need to not only name and prosecute, and yes: investigate every high level member of every administration to understand how something this monstrous could happen and ensure that it never, ever happens again. That is a structural response.

But OP’s question is about something different than structure. It is about individual, interior experiences and choices. It is not only a valid question, but an essential one: who sells their soul completely? Why?

Asking this question doesn’t mean ignoring the broader, structural ones. It’s entirely possible— and worthwhile imo — to hold side-by-side questions of structure and questions of individual choice within that structure.

Romney is very committed to his Mormon faith. He socializes primarily with other Mormons and there’s never been a whiff of him cheating.

And to be clear I think Mormonism is nonsense but not surprising he wouldn’t be in the files.

You don't know anything about Mitt Romney beyond what you see on TV and what his PR lets out. Why are so many of you so idol worshiping that you feel the need to exonerate public figures based on some weird parasocial affinity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Some real all-or-nothing thinking I’m this thread. Yes, every person with power (White House, etc) will face some moral compromises and interact with some shady people.

Not everyone will accepts gifts from and cozy up to pedophiles. Which is why there are plenty of elites and billionaires who do not appear in these files.

Agree with a PP that saying “everyone does it” (when the “it” is being literal besties with a notorious pedophile) is itself a form of enabling.

Another one with conceptual thinking deficits. The principle you should have distilled isn't "everyone does it." Rather, it's to understand that the system of power we have is extremely corrupt and you must stop stupidly putting faith in the cover stories and mythologies with which these people explain their rise and cover their tracks. We, the People, cannot perform our watchdog function and hold power to count when we are so credulous. An investigation of EVERYONE in key positions throughout every administration in which Epstein operated is the least we should be demanding here. In a different country of people who hadn't internalized the falsehood that the powerful are heroes to be idolized, a government-wide investigation, along with investigation of private actors who were utilizing the revolving door throughout, would be already underway.

You're not doing anything special sitting around knowing that a literal cabal of pedophiles operated in this country for decades and then waiting for random unredacted names to leak so you can gasp and virtue signal with how shocked you are.

Respectfully, I think you think I’m more naive than I am. And somehow that you uniquely in this thread have the proverbial eyes to see.

But there are a lot of elite names that do not appear in these files. And obviously there are plenty that do. This thread is about the difference between those two categories of elites.

PP here. No, you're trying to create a conversation about the false dichotomy you have fabricated between people who are currently named and people who have not yet been exposed. You're pretending that the former are the only culpable parties while the latter are somehow innocent. Ask yourself why.

As I just pointed it out in a previous post, anyone paying attention right now is fully aware that the evidence in the public sphere is a mere fraction of the evidence that exists and the latter is a mere fraction of the evidence that once existed but was destroyed.

People like you, who like to place disproportionate focus on discrete individuals to obscure the reality of a literal pedophile cabal that either comprised or compromised virtually everyone in power over multiple decades, are part of the problem. You're sitting here exonerating people whom common sense should tell you were likely part of this or looked the other way at the very least, and then you're pretending this is some kind of attempt to hold people accountable? You're a clown.

The PP isn’t a clown. The PP is a wealthy person in the 2% afraid of the backlash when the other 98% of the population realize that the 2% is made up of deeply evil people. Ironically the attempt to manipulate the truth just shows that the PP is also in the deeply evil category.

I’m the PP, and you are incorrect about who I am.

Let me ask this: for those who are saying there’s no meaningful difference between those who appear (and you are correct to qualify this as “in the files that we have seen”), what process are you advocating, exactly? In your mind/s, what does accountability look like, and where does it begin?

*between those who appear and those who don’t (or don’t yet)

[Anonymous]

The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

How do you think she got the job of white house counsel? No one gets let into the room where the most sensitive misdeeds of the American president are being discussed, much less gets to make decisions about those misdeeds, without already being known as someone who is compromised and who is never going to get out of pocket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

How do you think she got the job of white house counsel? No one gets let into the room where the most sensitive misdeeds of the American president are being discussed, much less gets to make decisions about those misdeeds, without already being known as someone who is compromised and who is never going to get out of pocket.

That's the next question

The initial jump from Latham to the WH would have required someone powerful to vouch for her. Who was it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Some real all-or-nothing thinking I’m this thread. Yes, every person with power (White House, etc) will face some moral compromises and interact with some shady people.

Not everyone will accepts gifts from and cozy up to pedophiles. Which is why there are plenty of elites and billionaires who do not appear in these files.

Agree with a PP that saying “everyone does it” (when the “it” is being literal besties with a notorious pedophile) is itself a form of enabling.

Another one with conceptual thinking deficits. The principle you should have distilled isn't "everyone does it." Rather, it's to understand that the system of power we have is extremely corrupt and you must stop stupidly putting faith in the cover stories and mythologies with which these people explain their rise and cover their tracks. We, the People, cannot perform our watchdog function and hold power to count when we are so credulous. An investigation of EVERYONE in key positions throughout every administration in which Epstein operated is the least we should be demanding here. In a different country of people who hadn't internalized the falsehood that the powerful are heroes to be idolized, a government-wide investigation, along with investigation of private actors who were utilizing the revolving door throughout, would be already underway.

You're not doing anything special sitting around knowing that a literal cabal of pedophiles operated in this country for decades and then waiting for random unredacted names to leak so you can gasp and virtue signal with how shocked you are.

Respectfully, I think you think I’m more naive than I am. And somehow that you uniquely in this thread have the proverbial eyes to see.

But there are a lot of elite names that do not appear in these files. And obviously there are plenty that do. This thread is about the difference between those two categories of elites.

NP, but I honestly don’t understand what point you think you’re making. The person to whom you responded is 100% spot on.

You say they’re “enabling” or “normalizing” this behavior by… pointing it out? Are you insane? The files themselves PROVE that this depravity IS business as usual and has been for (at least) decades! That happens not because everyone in a position of power is a literal pedophile rapist, but because the VAST majority of those in power, at a minimum, choose/chose to look the other way.

I suspect you’ve done plenty of looking the other way on various matters in your career and that’s why you’re so defensive.

It’s all right there clear as day for all of us to see. And who is the only person in jail over this decades long global child sex trafficking ring? Oh that’s right, the woman. Wake up.

DP and you make good, sobering points.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Some real all-or-nothing thinking I’m this thread. Yes, every person with power (White House, etc) will face some moral compromises and interact with some shady people.

Not everyone will accepts gifts from and cozy up to pedophiles. Which is why there are plenty of elites and billionaires who do not appear in these files.

Agree with a PP that saying “everyone does it” (when the “it” is being literal besties with a notorious pedophile) is itself a form of enabling.

Another one with conceptual thinking deficits. The principle you should have distilled isn't "everyone does it." Rather, it's to understand that the system of power we have is extremely corrupt and you must stop stupidly putting faith in the cover stories and mythologies with which these people explain their rise and cover their tracks. We, the People, cannot perform our watchdog function and hold power to count when we are so credulous. An investigation of EVERYONE in key positions throughout every administration in which Epstein operated is the least we should be demanding here. In a different country of people who hadn't internalized the falsehood that the powerful are heroes to be idolized, a government-wide investigation, along with investigation of private actors who were utilizing the revolving door throughout, would be already underway.

You're not doing anything special sitting around knowing that a literal cabal of pedophiles operated in this country for decades and then waiting for random unredacted names to leak so you can gasp and virtue signal with how shocked you are.

Respectfully, I think you think I’m more naive than I am. And somehow that you uniquely in this thread have the proverbial eyes to see.

But there are a lot of elite names that do not appear in these files. And obviously there are plenty that do. This thread is about the difference between those two categories of elites.

PP here. No, you're trying to create a conversation about the false dichotomy you have fabricated between people who are currently named and people who have not yet been exposed. You're pretending that the former are the only culpable parties while the latter are somehow innocent. Ask yourself why.

As I just pointed it out in a previous post, anyone paying attention right now is fully aware that the evidence in the public sphere is a mere fraction of the evidence that exists and the latter is a mere fraction of the evidence that once existed but was destroyed.

People like you, who like to place disproportionate focus on discrete individuals to obscure the reality of a literal pedophile cabal that either comprised or compromised virtually everyone in power over multiple decades, are part of the problem. You're sitting here exonerating people whom common sense should tell you were likely part of this or looked the other way at the very least, and then you're pretending this is some kind of attempt to hold people accountable? You're a clown.

The PP isn’t a clown. The PP is a wealthy person in the 2% afraid of the backlash when the other 98% of the population realize that the 2% is made up of deeply evil people. Ironically the attempt to manipulate the truth just shows that the PP is also in the deeply evil category.

I’m the PP, and you are incorrect about who I am.

Let me ask this: for those who are saying there’s no meaningful difference between those who appear (and you are correct to qualify this as “in the files that we have seen”), what process are you advocating, exactly? In your mind/s, what does accountability look like, and where does it begin?

I'm the PP who keeps posting about the systemic rot. I have a suggestion. Not that it's ever, ever, ever going to happen in America, but something along the lines of the Nuremberg trials crossed with South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission is needed here.

(Although even those tribunals were highly compromised and not allowed to look too far lest they expose too much. For instance, the number of high-level Nazis that the American government hired in places like NASA, for instance, was not allowed to be mentioned or even touched upon during the Nuremberg trials.)

A systemic years long effort to clean up at least some of this mess by demanding everyone in power in that given time testify under oath is necessary. The carrot will be the same as that of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission: That those, except the highest level of perpetrators, who come clean and expose everything publicly will be allowed to move on with their lives. I hate to see evildoers go unpunished, but it's going to take granting immunity to some level of evildoers -- the legal fixers, PR people, staff, and other enablers, but not the rapists, murderers, or traffickers -- to make sure that the worst ones are exposed and the whole system of corruption is weakened. Notice I say weakened because that is the most we can aspire to here IMO.

All of this is better than what we're currently seeing. Americans are letting the most powerful actors, who orchestrated the scheme with Epstein, leak the names of easy scapegoats to create the appearance of justice being done and to direct attention away from the system that is STILL operating.

[Anonymous]

What's the connection between Karp and Ruemmler. It seems like Epstein was meeting with both of them at the same time. Was he getting off the books legal or strategic advice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

How do you think she got the job of white house counsel? No one gets let into the room where the most sensitive misdeeds of the American president are being discussed, much less gets to make decisions about those misdeeds, without already being known as someone who is compromised and who is never going to get out of pocket.

That's the next question

The initial jump from Latham to the WH would have required someone powerful to vouch for her. Who was it?

Now, you're asking the right questions. These are the kinds of questions that the powerful are determined not to let the public ask. They would rather have you gasp about her than ask who her cronies and mentors were and what they're doing right now to maintain their power.

Ask yourself how she ended up hired by Obama and what that tells us about Obama. Ask how Epstein was so powerful that Obama's counsel was his errand girl and plaything. The implications of just that thought process alone get scary very fast.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Some real all-or-nothing thinking I’m this thread. Yes, every person with power (White House, etc) will face some moral compromises and interact with some shady people.

Not everyone will accepts gifts from and cozy up to pedophiles. Which is why there are plenty of elites and billionaires who do not appear in these files.

Agree with a PP that saying “everyone does it” (when the “it” is being literal besties with a notorious pedophile) is itself a form of enabling.

Another one with conceptual thinking deficits. The principle you should have distilled isn't "everyone does it." Rather, it's to understand that the system of power we have is extremely corrupt and you must stop stupidly putting faith in the cover stories and mythologies with which these people explain their rise and cover their tracks. We, the People, cannot perform our watchdog function and hold power to count when we are so credulous. An investigation of EVERYONE in key positions throughout every administration in which Epstein operated is the least we should be demanding here. In a different country of people who hadn't internalized the falsehood that the powerful are heroes to be idolized, a government-wide investigation, along with investigation of private actors who were utilizing the revolving door throughout, would be already underway.

You're not doing anything special sitting around knowing that a literal cabal of pedophiles operated in this country for decades and then waiting for random unredacted names to leak so you can gasp and virtue signal with how shocked you are.

Respectfully, I think you think I’m more naive than I am. And somehow that you uniquely in this thread have the proverbial eyes to see.

But there are a lot of elite names that do not appear in these files. And obviously there are plenty that do. This thread is about the difference between those two categories of elites.

PP here. No, you're trying to create a conversation about the false dichotomy you have fabricated between people who are currently named and people who have not yet been exposed. You're pretending that the former are the only culpable parties while the latter are somehow innocent. Ask yourself why.

As I just pointed it out in a previous post, anyone paying attention right now is fully aware that the evidence in the public sphere is a mere fraction of the evidence that exists and the latter is a mere fraction of the evidence that once existed but was destroyed.

People like you, who like to place disproportionate focus on discrete individuals to obscure the reality of a literal pedophile cabal that either comprised or compromised virtually everyone in power over multiple decades, are part of the problem. You're sitting here exonerating people whom common sense should tell you were likely part of this or looked the other way at the very least, and then you're pretending this is some kind of attempt to hold people accountable? You're a clown.

The PP isn’t a clown. The PP is a wealthy person in the 2% afraid of the backlash when the other 98% of the population realize that the 2% is made up of deeply evil people. Ironically the attempt to manipulate the truth just shows that the PP is also in the deeply evil category.

I’m the PP, and you are incorrect about who I am.

Let me ask this: for those who are saying there’s no meaningful difference between those who appear (and you are correct to qualify this as “in the files that we have seen”), what process are you advocating, exactly? In your mind/s, what does accountability look like, and where does it begin?

I'm the PP who keeps posting about the systemic rot. I have a suggestion. Not that it's ever, ever, ever going to happen in America, but something along the lines of the Nuremberg trials crossed with South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission is needed here.

(Although even those tribunals were highly compromised and not allowed to look too far lest they expose too much. For instance, the number of high-level Nazis that the American government hired in places like NASA, for instance, was not allowed to be mentioned or even touched upon during the Nuremberg trials.)

A systemic years long effort to clean up at least some of this mess by demanding everyone in power in that given time testify under oath is necessary. The carrot will be the same as that of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission: That those, except the highest level of perpetrators, who come clean and expose everything publicly will be allowed to move on with their lives. I hate to see evildoers go unpunished, but it's going to take granting immunity to some level of evildoers -- the legal fixers, PR people, staff, and other enablers, but not the rapists, murderers, or traffickers -- to make sure that the worst ones are exposed and the whole system of corruption is weakened. Notice I say weakened because that is the most we can aspire to here IMO.

All of this is better than what we're currently seeing. Americans are letting the most powerful actors, who orchestrated the scheme with Epstein, leak the names of easy scapegoats to create the appearance of justice being done and to direct attention away from the system that is STILL operating.

Nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Epstein had an egg-shaped dick. Attorneys at Boies Schiller deposed him in one of the civil suits about his deformities. He had a noggin sized for Rapa Nui and no aesthetic sense. His rape mansion photos show that he could not collect art or design the interiors for shit.

Obama didn’t cozy up in return with Ruemmler or JE. She launched from the WH to Goldman and could buy her own wine but she’s a cheap loveless whore who thought she was superior to everyone her hatchet faced self interacted with at a rest stop. She’s a supremacist, that’s how they think.

Wow, did she not hire you? What’s with the hate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Epstein had an egg-shaped dick. Attorneys at Boies Schiller deposed him in one of the civil suits about his deformities. He had a noggin sized for Rapa Nui and no aesthetic sense. His rape mansion photos show that he could not collect art or design the interiors for shit.

Obama didn’t cozy up in return with Ruemmler or JE. She launched from the WH to Goldman and could buy her own wine but she’s a cheap loveless whore who thought she was superior to everyone her hatchet faced self interacted with at a rest stop. She’s a supremacist, that’s how they think.

Wow, did she not hire you? What’s with the hate?

Huh? What’s with the hate? Pretty obvious to me.

DP

[Anonymous]

When will she be fired???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing that's troubling me is when and how did she meet Epstein?

The released emails start in the summer of 2014, very soon after she left the White House, and are already chummy. Which implies that they already knew each other.

That fall is when Holder resigned. At some point she withdrew her name from AG consideration supposedly because confirmation would have been difficult. Did someobody know about the Epstein connection then?

How do you think she got the job of white house counsel? No one gets let into the room where the most sensitive misdeeds of the American president are being discussed, much less gets to make decisions about those misdeeds, without already being known as someone who is compromised and who is never going to get out of pocket.

That's the next question

The initial jump from Latham to the WH would have required someone powerful to vouch for her. Who was it?

Now, you're asking the right questions. These are the kinds of questions that the powerful are determined not to let the public ask. They would rather have you gasp about her than ask who her cronies and mentors were and what they're doing right now to maintain their power.

Ask yourself how she ended up hired by Obama and what that tells us about Obama. Ask how Epstein was so powerful that Obama's counsel was his errand girl and plaything. The implications of just that thought process alone get scary very fast.

It looks like it was Alice Fisher. Who just so happened to be AAG in 2008 when Acosta gave Epstein the sweetheart deal.

Fisher interestingly enough was on Trump's shortlist for FBI director after he fired Comey.