News sites are still going over them. Expect some surprising revelations over the next few days and weeks.
Israel.....
Ah now come on
Honestly a thread about Jeffrey Epstein and you don't expect people to pull in every type of conspiracy possible.
Soon the flat earthers will be in telling us this is trying to stop the release of document on a falt earth
Hillary Clinton sickened again no doubt. Doubtful that Chelsea comes home anymore apart from the odd Christmas.
Bill you auld rogue
She's had Bill's back for a long time, she's not a fan of Doug's who seemed to turn on Bill in a big way over Epstein.
According to Vice "news" the Jeffrey Epstein story is "fanning the flames of far right Pedophilia panic "
OH YES OH YES OH YES MY PROGRAM HAS TERMINATED SUCCESSFULLY
In fairness it's easy snap a pic of Trump with anyone else in high society circles. It's another to be on Epstiens flight log. Also, I'm pretty sure it was under Trumps watch that led to Epstein's downfall.
Clear case of orange man bad post.
While I don’t understand fully what that statement is saying, from a practicality perspective, there’s nothing particularly “new” so far in these latest so called “revelations” - so “hot air” is not a bad summary of what’s happening right now - whether it’s blowing from the left or right, I couldn’t give a sho1te- it’s still “hot air”- they can “fan it” from whatever trajectory they wish.
"Trumps watch" lol
Do not speculate and do not request information via PM
Well they let Q convince them of all sorts, I'm sure there will be enough pedos of the gaps in this to keep them going.
Known by now list of names and accusations against those individuals.
Let's hope they go after the legit pedos like prince Andrew and Clinton etc .
More to follow. Nothing will happen. #meetoo me arse.
Erm, the reference to Clinton amounts to him "liking them young" which could very much so be somebody over 18. So there doesn't seem to be anything obviously criminal on that front unlike Prince Andrew for example.
.
Trump's lawyer is implicated you know?
It could also mean he likes 12 year olds.
And it's a leap to conclude that is the actual meaning. Eg Monica Lewinsky was 21, not 12 but that can easily be classified as "young". You've concluded it means criminality but there's absolutely nothing in the documents that indicates he actually committed a crime. Eg Dershowitz for example is absolutely implicated in a serious crime.
Nearly all men in this document I presume? It's always the same. Rape, murder, paedophilia, why do these crimes overwhelmingly get committed by men?
Western Plastics will be glad of the increase in profits.
Those pesky straight white males.
In a 2002 interview, Donald Trump told New York magazine that Epstein was a "great guy" and said they had known one another for 15 years.
He also said
There was a segment in I think a Jimmy Kimmel show where they went and found Trump supporters and progressively asked them what it would take for them not to vote for Trump. Even if Trump was a pedo most of them still said they'd vote for him.
Tell us who visited the island? No evidence that Clinton did from these files
You sound like the kind of person who believes that Marc Almond had ribs removed so he could suck himself off, and George Michael had to have his stomach pumped of 15 pints of semen. Easily swayed by absolute nonsense.
polling by Kimmel? maybe he should set up a polling company?, you seem pretty gullible as to how you from your opinions, do you not have a credible/not credible filter?
As someone who has followed the Epstein case since the initial Miami Herald expose, whatever your thinking on the files, the political cover he had was astounding. It's not the QAnon lunacy like some hope it is but it's also not some storm in teacup that can be dismissed easily either.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/key-takeaways-justice-department-review-jeffrey-epstein-sweetheart/story?id=74222922
Probably there in his house for financial advice in the early 00s. Seems it only happened once. Loads of celebs and high profile people were. It's what JE was known for and what he done. Vast majority of people on that list, whilst I'm sure they all knew what he was up to, were associated with him due to financial advisory reasons. It's a very dangerous game to be playing here. If you start pointing the finger, without actual evidence of any wrong doing at people, I'd hope your house is in order before you do.
Guilt by association in the modern social media age is appalling. I've known people down the years who, unknown to me, got up to some incredibly shady stuff. Does that mean I'm guilty of it too?
Does that mean I'm guilty of it too?
Yes, yes it does. Anyone who ever spoke to someone who committed a crime is proven to have been involved in the crime.
What did I accuse him of ? Where in my post did I say he done something wrong?
I mean, Michael Jackson liked to sleep with children in his bed, and some of those accused him of sexual assault, and now there's a proven link to Jeffrey Epstein too.
I think Jacko is probably more likely to be guilty by his own actions rather than through association with Epstein.
If you got up to your own shady stuff, then someone you've associated with was found guilty of their own similar shady stuff, you're not guilty just by association, but yeah it wouldn't look great for you either.
There could definitely be people on the Epstein list who had nothing to do with anything shady whatsoever, but at the very least they have questions to answer about their involvement with him.
Jackson was weird, no doubt about that. Whether he was a pedo or not I don't know but the guy was very weird.
