ADVERTISEMENT

Who was 'running' Epstein

Do you think the Epstein stuff was just an intelligence operation - a honeypot?

  • Yes, but no clue who was doing it

    Votes: 3 8.8%
  • Yes, Mossad

    Votes: 7 20.6%
  • Yes, CIA

    Votes: 5 14.7%
  • Yes, other I can explain below

    Votes: 1 2.9%
  • No, just a pedo with a lot of important friends in important places.

    Votes: 18 52.9%

  • Total voters
    34
I don’t get why she would announce that she has it if she wasn’t going to do something with it. Let all the chips fall where they may.

If she takes too long even the MAGA folks might wonder which GOP leaders are featured in the report. You know if it was just Clinton we would have it already.
 
I don’t get why she would announce that she has it if she wasn’t going to do something with it. Let all the chips fall where they may.

If she takes too long even the MAGA folks might wonder which GOP leaders are featured in the report. You know if it was just Clinton we would have it already.
I'm telling myself they are waiting until they have the people listed basically already caught before announcement.


Real talk, who knows who is promising what to not let that thing out right now.
 
why do people think that a super rich guy couldn't get away with sex crimes unless he's involved in the intelligence community?

was bill cosby a secret spy too?
It has to do with his relationships and associations.
But the biggie is what Acosta said:

.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblo...elonged-to-intelligence-and-to-leave-it-alone

In my earlier post I mentioned the reporting of Vicky Ward who did a lengthy piece on Epstein for Vanity Fair in 2003 and is now revisiting the story in The Daily Beast. (Ward had a detailed version of the underaged girls part of the story but Vanity Fair cut that from the 2003 story.) I wanted to flag your attention to a passage in her latest piece at The Daily Beast which reports that Acosta told Trump transition officials that he’d been told to back off the Epstein case at the time and that that was why he gave Epstein such a generous deal.

Here’s the passage …

Epstein’s name, I was told, had been raised by the Trump transition team when Alexander Acosta, the former U.S. attorney in Miami who’d infamously cut Epstein a non-prosecution plea deal back in 2007, was being interviewed for the job of labor secretary. The plea deal put a hard stop to a separate federal investigation of alleged sex crimes with minors and trafficking.

“Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)
 
I'm telling myself they are waiting until they have the people listed basically already caught before announcement.


Real talk, who knows who is promising what to not let that thing out right now.
I hope you are right and they are just lining up prosecutions. But common sense tells me something else is afoot. I’m guessing the obstacle is orange, quite a bit overweight and currently resides in the White House.
 
I don't recall if this question has been asked.
I think so and would wager Epstein and his island were a place the (insert nefarious actor) could take a politician or influencer and get them drunk/high and photograph with minors to start blackmail and coercion.

Epstein himself probably started the island with his own funding just to have a good time and it was identified as an ideal guy and ideal location so the same (insert nefarious actor) compromised Epstein to do their bidding.

The nefarious actor…..?











































norm-mac-donald.gif
 
It has to do with his relationships and associations.
But the biggie is what Acosta said:

.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblo...elonged-to-intelligence-and-to-leave-it-alone

In my earlier post I mentioned the reporting of Vicky Ward who did a lengthy piece on Epstein for Vanity Fair in 2003 and is now revisiting the story in The Daily Beast. (Ward had a detailed version of the underaged girls part of the story but Vanity Fair cut that from the 2003 story.) I wanted to flag your attention to a passage in her latest piece at The Daily Beast which reports that Acosta told Trump transition officials that he’d been told to back off the Epstein case at the time and that that was why he gave Epstein such a generous deal.

Here’s the passage …

Epstein’s name, I was told, had been raised by the Trump transition team when Alexander Acosta, the former U.S. attorney in Miami who’d infamously cut Epstein a non-prosecution plea deal back in 2007, was being interviewed for the job of labor secretary. The plea deal put a hard stop to a separate federal investigation of alleged sex crimes with minors and trafficking.

“Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)
Or a great excuse for not digging into something that would be embarrassing to a lot of people.
 
I hope you are right and they are just lining up prosecutions. But common sense tells me something else is afoot. I’m guessing the obstacle is orange, quite a bit overweight and currently resides in the White House.
He wouldn't have set himself up to have the domino's fall against him. If that's the case we end up with "who was the one redaction" type stuff.



It will come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gus is dead
Given the Maxwell ties, my guess would be Mossad. Though I don’t know that anyone was “running” him. He could have just traded blackmail info to them for favors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawk_82
It has to do with his relationships and associations.
But the biggie is what Acosta said:

.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblo...elonged-to-intelligence-and-to-leave-it-alone

In my earlier post I mentioned the reporting of Vicky Ward who did a lengthy piece on Epstein for Vanity Fair in 2003 and is now revisiting the story in The Daily Beast. (Ward had a detailed version of the underaged girls part of the story but Vanity Fair cut that from the 2003 story.) I wanted to flag your attention to a passage in her latest piece at The Daily Beast which reports that Acosta told Trump transition officials that he’d been told to back off the Epstein case at the time and that that was why he gave Epstein such a generous deal.

Here’s the passage …

Epstein’s name, I was told, had been raised by the Trump transition team when Alexander Acosta, the former U.S. attorney in Miami who’d infamously cut Epstein a non-prosecution plea deal back in 2007, was being interviewed for the job of labor secretary. The plea deal put a hard stop to a separate federal investigation of alleged sex crimes with minors and trafficking.

“Is the Epstein case going to cause a problem [for confirmation hearings]?” Acosta had been asked. Acosta had explained, breezily, apparently, that back in the day he’d had just one meeting on the Epstein case. He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)
The deal was cut after about a dozen of the top defense attorneys in the country showed up at a preliminary meeting vs the gov’t. Gov’t had all kinds of drug and other shit going on in south fla.
The timing of the complaints didn’t help either since some of the girls returned to his house or in some cases recruited friends.
 
To paraphrase Chis:

CIA is Mossad
Mossad is CIA

I vote for a joint effort.

It's amazing someone like Maxwell could get convicted of trafficking without a single 'customer' being named.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawk_82
I'm telling myself they are waiting until they have the people listed basically already caught before announcement.


Real talk, who knows who is promising what to not let that thing out right now.
You're including Trump in this?

You are such bizarre weird people. Everything is freaking projection.
 
I don’t get why she would announce that she has it if she wasn’t going to do something with it. Let all the chips fall where they may.

If she takes too long even the MAGA folks might wonder which GOP leaders are featured in the report. You know if it was just Clinton we would have it already.
I know social media is not the greatest barometer, but there are some pissed off conservatives about this. I don’t blame anyone, regardless of political leanings, for being frustrated.
 
What part of "no data" is confusing for you here?
Yes, just ignore the other link that shows your statement to be wrong. No doubt there is a big problem in Eastern Europe, but it is not "the most". Muslim countries and Asia are the worst.

Where is human trafficking most prevalent?​

According to the ILO’s latest data, the Asia and Pacific region has the highest number of victims of forced labor and marriage, accounting for more than half of the global total — 29.6 million. However, if we take population size into account and examine the prevalence per thousand people, then the Arab States have the highest rate of exploitation at 10.2%.

The regions of the world, ranked by number of people in human trafficking:

  • Asia and the Pacific: 29.3 million
  • Africa: 7 million
  • Europe and Central Asia: 6.4 million
  • Americas: 5.1 million
  • Arab States: 1.7 million
The regions of the world, ranked by prevalence (per thousand people) of human trafficking:

  • Arab States: 10.1%
  • Europe and Central Asia: 6.9%
  • Asia and the Pacific: 6.8%
  • Africa: 5.2%
  • Americas: 5%
Source: ILO, Global Estimates of Modern Slavery: Forced Labour and Forced Marriage, 2021

What countries rank the worst for human trafficking?​

The Global Organized Crime Index assesses the criminality level of 193 countries, along with their resilience to organized crime. According to the 2021 report, human trafficking has become the most pervasive criminal activity in the world. Informed by qualitative and quantitative measures and expert input, the five worst-scoring countries for human trafficking are:

  • Libya
  • Eritrea
  • Yemen
  • United Arab Emirates
  • Turkmenistan
 
I'm telling myself they are waiting until they have the people listed basically already caught before announcement.


Real talk, who knows who is promising what to not let that thing out right now.
Also there was a supposed whistle lower saying the FBI had already destroyed a LOT of Epstein evidence...
 
Epstein was running an influence/ blackmail scheme. he knew people in high places so the cia were using him and the island to get people to spill the bean or to prevent them from snitching. he wasn't a Cia agent, but the Cia would use him to achieve certain outcomes.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT