Anonymous wrote:Erika Kirk, groomer?

So shocking.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/lifestyle-buzz/erika-kirk-hit-with-new-grooming-claim-over-alleged-messages-to-15-year-old/ar-AA1W8SFc

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go… finally getting to why Epstein got the sweetheart deal in the first place.

Julie K Brown has been relentlessly reporting on this when very few would. Recommend her substack.

+1 She’s the whole reason any of this is happening. Not exaggerating.

Who should be charged? You do know that you need proof--or, more evidence than "xx says?"

Do I think there are likely guilty people? Yes. Do I think there is enough to convict? Probably not.

As for the women at the hearing. None of those women was a child at the time they were involved in Epstein shenanigans.

Not sure what post you meant to respond to but even the publicly released files have evidence of crimes. BTW, it’s illegal to traffic adults too.

Epstein is dead. Ghislaine is in jail. So, who do you intend to charge? You need clear evidence. It cannot be just suspicion.

There's a vast network. Maxwell wasn't the only person there - Epstein had others arranging "massages" and logistics involving the victims. The rest of the network involved in trafficking, and those who took advantage of the girls all need to be held accountable. You seem deeply out of touch acting like there's nothing left to do with Epstein dead and Maxwell in prison.

No. Not out of touch, but close enough to prosecutors to know that you need evidence and proof. I don't question there are people who are guilty--but convicting them is a whole other issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go… finally getting to why Epstein got the sweetheart deal in the first place.

Julie K Brown has been relentlessly reporting on this when very few would. Recommend her substack.

+1 She’s the whole reason any of this is happening. Not exaggerating.

Who should be charged? You do know that you need proof--or, more evidence than "xx says?"

Do I think there are likely guilty people? Yes. Do I think there is enough to convict? Probably not.

As for the women at the hearing. None of those women was a child at the time they were involved in Epstein shenanigans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go… finally getting to why Epstein got the sweetheart deal in the first place.

Julie K Brown has been relentlessly reporting on this when very few would. Recommend her substack.

+1 She’s the whole reason any of this is happening. Not exaggerating.

Who should be charged? You do know that you need proof--or, more evidence than "xx says?"

Do I think there are likely guilty people? Yes. Do I think there is enough to convict? Probably not.

As for the women at the hearing. None of those women was a child at the time they were involved in Epstein shenanigans.

Not sure what post you meant to respond to but even the publicly released files have evidence of crimes. BTW, it’s illegal to traffic adults too.

Epstein is dead. Ghislaine is in jail. So, who do you intend to charge? You need clear evidence. It cannot be just suspicion.

There's a vast network. Maxwell wasn't the only person there - Epstein had others arranging "massages" and logistics involving the victims. The rest of the network involved in trafficking, and those who took advantage of the girls all need to be held accountable. You seem deeply out of touch acting like there's nothing left to do with Epstein dead and Maxwell in prison.

Those personal assistants and schedulers though, they were unindicted, no idea if they were promised immunity, they never once SAW a single thing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had an epiphony about DEI and JE. Merit never existed. DEI created a system where an individual had to prove that they were qualified. Regular people fell for the lie that DEI needed to go away so that we could get back to a merit system that NEVER ACTUALLY EXISTED. What JE files let us see, is that the rich secret society of people like to make the rules that benefit them. Think about this. Women get 2% of venture capital. A tiny program for black women was eliminated b/c it "excluded" white men and women. But in the files we find out that rich people just hook each other up. You need $100m? Meet my banker at JP Morgan and it's done. There is no such thing as merit. It's called your relationships and if you aren't in the club, you are screwed. DEI made them open up the club and they didn't like it. It created merit.

That’s why DEI is stupid because it’s really about money and not skin color.

DEI was about women, not just race.

Sure but a white man from a poor family is not given any favors by people like JE just because they have white skin. You need to be a billionaire in order to join that club.

No. Epstein and his cronies were all Jewish supremacists who didn’t even consider themselves white. They called non-Jew white people goy cattle and blacks the n-word.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go… finally getting to why Epstein got the sweetheart deal in the first place.

Julie K Brown has been relentlessly reporting on this when very few would. Recommend her substack.

+1 She’s the whole reason any of this is happening. Not exaggerating.

Who should be charged? You do know that you need proof--or, more evidence than "xx says?"

Do I think there are likely guilty people? Yes. Do I think there is enough to convict? Probably not.

As for the women at the hearing. None of those women was a child at the time they were involved in Epstein shenanigans.

Not sure what post you meant to respond to but even the publicly released files have evidence of crimes. BTW, it’s illegal to traffic adults too.

Epstein is dead. Ghislaine is in jail. So, who do you intend to charge? You need clear evidence. It cannot be just suspicion.

There's a vast network. Maxwell wasn't the only person there - Epstein had others arranging "massages" and logistics involving the victims. The rest of the network involved in trafficking, and those who took advantage of the girls all need to be held accountable. You seem deeply out of touch acting like there's nothing left to do with Epstein dead and Maxwell in prison.

No. Not out of touch, but close enough to prosecutors to know that you need evidence and proof. I don't question there are people who are guilty--but convicting them is a whole other issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go… finally getting to why Epstein got the sweetheart deal in the first place.

Julie K Brown has been relentlessly reporting on this when very few would. Recommend her substack.

+1 She’s the whole reason any of this is happening. Not exaggerating.

Who should be charged? You do know that you need proof--or, more evidence than "xx says?"

Do I think there are likely guilty people? Yes. Do I think there is enough to convict? Probably not.

As for the women at the hearing. None of those women was a child at the time they were involved in Epstein shenanigans.

Not sure what post you meant to respond to but even the publicly released files have evidence of crimes. BTW, it’s illegal to traffic adults too.

Epstein is dead. Ghislaine is in jail. So, who do you intend to charge? You need clear evidence. It cannot be just suspicion.

There's a vast network. Maxwell wasn't the only person there - Epstein had others arranging "massages" and logistics involving the victims. The rest of the network involved in trafficking, and those who took advantage of the girls all need to be held accountable. You seem deeply out of touch acting like there's nothing left to do with Epstein dead and Maxwell in prison.

Anonymous wrote:More stuff just laying around in plain sight

In unearthed footage, rapper Uncle Luke if 2 Live Crew describes his experience at a Trump Mar-a-Lago party in the 90s.

Host: So women just naked in rooms with no music?

Uncle Luke: When I start looking at some of these girls’ faces, I was like, “Man, these girls don't look like they're old enough.” ... I was like, “I can't be up in here. I gotta go. If I'm going to jail, then somebody's going to extort me.” ... So you got a whole bunch of these women running around, some women look too young ... Were they old enough to be enjoying themselves? I don't know.

Host: Was there sex?

Uncle Luke: Of course there was sex.

Host: You're saying that all this was going on and you weren't clear as to whether these were adults?

Uncle Luke: I wasn't clear whether or not they were adults. And I wasn't clear whether or not I wanted to be in that kind of environment with some of these other things that was going on.

Anonymous wrote:Anybody who continues to [/b]believe [b]Epstein killed himself is a fool. That man had so much dirt on the most powerful people in the world. Correction officers are lowly paid and the right one will take a bribe to leave a cell door open for the right price. Epstein was murdered.

Anonymous wrote:This is phenomenal work - the documents have been ingested, indexed, cross referenced, mapped into social network graphs, timelines built out and so on.

Discussion:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Epstein/comments/1r3joqr/i_mapped_every_connection_in_the_epstein_files_it/

Data: https://epsteinexposed.com/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go… finally getting to why Epstein got the sweetheart deal in the first place.

Julie K Brown has been relentlessly reporting on this when very few would. Recommend her substack.

+1 She’s the whole reason any of this is happening. Not exaggerating.

Who should be charged? You do know that you need proof--or, more evidence than "xx says?"

Do I think there are likely guilty people? Yes. Do I think there is enough to convict? Probably not.

As for the women at the hearing. None of those women was a child at the time they were involved in Epstein shenanigans.

Not sure what post you meant to respond to but even the publicly released files have evidence of crimes. BTW, it’s illegal to traffic adults too.

Epstein is dead. Ghislaine is in jail. So, who do you intend to charge? You need clear evidence. It cannot be just suspicion.

There's a vast network. Maxwell wasn't the only person there - Epstein had others arranging "massages" and logistics involving the victims. The rest of the network involved in trafficking, and those who took advantage of the girls all need to be held accountable. You seem deeply out of touch acting like there's nothing left to do with Epstein dead and Maxwell in prison.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here we go… finally getting to why Epstein got the sweetheart deal in the first place.

Julie K Brown has been relentlessly reporting on this when very few would. Recommend her substack.

+1 She’s the whole reason any of this is happening. Not exaggerating.

Who should be charged? You do know that you need proof--or, more evidence than "xx says?"

Do I think there are likely guilty people? Yes. Do I think there is enough to convict? Probably not.

As for the women at the hearing. None of those women was a child at the time they were involved in Epstein shenanigans.

Not sure what post you meant to respond to but even the publicly released files have evidence of crimes. BTW, it’s illegal to traffic adults too.

Epstein is dead. Ghislaine is in jail. So, who do you intend to charge? You need clear evidence. It cannot be just suspicion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please please please find out that Les Wexner gave Jim Jordan a lot of money for his cooperation!!!

Oooh timely… speaking of Wexner and Jordan