Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There are literally pictures of toddlers bound. Its insanity
You have the link?
Because I don’t believe you.
You're asking the PP to post child porn?
The NY Times has confirmed that victims' photos were published by the DOJ without even their faces redacted, as if that is enough..
I wasn’t.
I just wanted a source for this.
There is a lot of information.
Well, if it's important to you to find out if that's really out there, then I guess you'll have to google that. But I wouldn't.
The article was good enough.
NP. The article only talks about photos of young women or possibly teen victims:
"The Justice Department published dozens of unredacted nude images on its website, showing young women or possibly teenagers whose photos were contained in files related to the wealthy sex offender Jeffrey Epstein."
"The people in the photos appeared to be young, although it was unclear whether they were minors."
You are truly disgusting. Shame on you. It doesn't matter if they are all minors. They were abused by a very powerful network of depraved wealthy men. None of this is their fault, no matter how much your brain wants to justify that any of this is not how truly abhorrent and morally wrong and dangerous to all of us.
Keep up. I was posting in response to the person who claimed there were photos of bound toddlers. Yes, it matters whether the photos were of toddlers or not. Sorry you don't believe the New York Times, but stop spreading fake news.
Anonymous wrote:JK Rowling openly denied that her team invited the world's most notorious child rapist to a kid's play despite evidence directly disproving her claims. These people can rot in HEII
https://bsky.app/profile/theserfstv.bsky.social/post/3mdyg726luk2s
Anonymous wrote:What a bunch of pathetic men. Given they are all so wealthy, not understanding why they couldn’t buy dates with consenting adults??
Anonymous wrote:
I think Reid was only mentioned 2nd hand but was not involved at all.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Aaron Parnas:
Important update: Major criminal investigation opened after Epstein files released as Trump asks public to move on:
Human trafficking investigation opened in Lithuania.
Poland investigates Epstein’s ties to Russia.
DOJ caught redacting Melania Trump’s face. Trump judge caught in Epstein files.
Spread the word: https://open.substack.com/pub/aaronparnas/p/important-update-major-human-trafficking?r
The Western Press Are Trying To Spin Epstein As A RUSSIAN Agent
This is of course ridiculous. Epstein is a known intelligence operative for the state of Israel, not Russia. This is an established fact, and has been for some time.
Epstein documents have been confirming for months that he was clearly and undeniably an Israeli intelligence operative, which the latest round of releases have strongly reinforced. So naturally the western media are running with the story that Epstein worked for Vladimir Putin.
https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/2026/02/03/the-western-press-are-trying-to-spin-epstein-as-a-russian-agent/
The main thing to focus on right now is justice for the victims of sexual assault and trafficking. And obviously, pedophilia. There's plenty of time to trace back which governments benefited from and manipulated this information. For now, eyes on the prize: getting the criminals brought to justice.
Agree. Also doubt that JE was loyal to any one group. He did anything for $ and power.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Here's a gift link to the article by the NY Times about the nude photos posted by the DOJ.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/01/us/nude-photos-epstein-files.html?unlocked_article_code=1.JlA.pp0P.BCvWEUJeloSL&smid=url-share
How on earth can we possibly prosecute child pornographers if our DOJ is so careless as to publish these photos (which were not previously on the internet) themselves.
And yet, most, if not all, of the email addresses are redacted. Names, locations, etc. But not the victims. How utterly convenient. Makes you wonder who the DOJ actually thinks the victims are in this whole thing?
Or what their orders were.