Archive

Posts Tagged ‘jeffrey epstein’

Assorted Joe Rogan Show Clips: Jeffrey Epstein Did Not Kill Himself..

December 6, 2019 Leave a comment

By now, most of you have heard some version of the “Jeffrey Epstein did not kill himself” meme. I myself recently posted a video showing a Senator making that point at Judiciary Committee oversight hearing. Over the past few weeks, I noticed that Joe Rogan is repeatedly bringing up this topic with multiple guests on his show. Here are a couple of clips..

Clip # 1: from JRE #1386 w/Matt Taibbi

Clip # 2: from JRE #1394 w/Matt Farah

and here are a couple more

Clip # 3: from JRE #1390 w/Tim Dillon

Clip # 4: from JRE MMA SHOW #82 w/Israel Adesanya

What do you think? Comments?

A Recent Clip of Senator Kennedy talking about Jeffrey Epstein’s Death

November 21, 2019 4 comments

I came across this interesting clip, from two days ago, of Senator Kennedy (R-LA) at a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing. The punchline is: “Christmas ornaments, drywall and Jeffrey Epstein – name three things that don’t hang themselves”. And yes.. the clip is on the YT channel of C-SPAN. I am sure that many of you are eager to express your thoughts on this topic.

Here are some of my older posts about this specific topic and Jeffrey Epstein in general.

New Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein is More Problematic for Democrats (after he was rearrested).

Some Thoughts on Jeffrey Epstein’s Interactions with Teenage Girls (after he was jailed).

Initial Thoughts on Jeffrey Epstein’s Suicide While Under Suicide Watch (after his “suicide”).

What do you think? Comments?

Initial Thoughts on Jeffrey Epstein’s Suicide While Under Suicide Watch

August 10, 2019 9 comments

Just over a month ago the mysterious and reclusive billionaire, Jeffrey Epstein, was arrested in NYC and charged with sex trafficking of minors in Florida and New York. At that time, I wrote a post about my thoughts on Epstein’s interactions with teenage girls. Anyway, there has been a lot of drama since he was re-arrested for something he was initially arrested, convicted in 2008 and released after 13 months of minimal jail time. Yes.. I am aware that it was in Florida, not NYC, but he was effectively charged with the same crime two times. Since then, a bunch of “moralistic” losers who thought his previous sentence was too light were trying to get him charged for those same ‘crimes’ for almost a decade. As you might also know, what Epstein was alleged to have done was no worse than what many famous rockstars did in the 1970s, 80s and 90s.

Since Epstein was rearrested and some previously sealed documents were released, the internet speculation mill had been in high gear. The names of his many famous and powerful “friends” who allegedly participated in certain activities on his private island in the Caribbean and various cities in USA had been the subject of discussion in many parts of the internet. These include people such as Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, Marvin Minsky, Bill Richardson, George Mitchell, Glenn Dubin and many more. One could go further and say that many super-rich people in USA from backgrounds as diverse as finance, business, politics and Hollywood have likely enjoyed the company of under-18 girls supplied by Epstein. And yes.. a rather high percentage belong to a certain minority ethno-religious group.

I was therefore not surprised when, earlier today, the news of Epstein’s suicide in jail while under suicide-watch started making the round on Twitter. It is very clear that too many famous and “powerful” people had a lot to lose if his case went to trial and resulted in the disclosure of even more evidence. In fact, this particular turn of events was predicted by many people on Twitter since the day he was re-arrested in NYC just over a month ago. I am sure many of you have heard theories about how Epstein was an intelligence asst for the Mossad or CIA. Frankly, this is unlikely for a number of reasons from the risk involved in such an operation to the sheer lack of creativity and competence in both those agencies. Yes.. you heard that right.

There is, however, a far more likely alternate explanation for why Epstein was “friends” with so many celebrities who shared his interests. Ever considered the possibility that Epstein operated an enterprise which procured under-18 teenage girls and over-18 but still young attractive girls for his rich and famous friends? These people in turn paid him by providing money for investing, which he likely did in safe and reliable index funds. Since such investments are very safe and perform as well as other targeted strategies over the long-term, his clients were perfectly fine with it. Moreover, their payments to him were perfectly legal and impossible to associate with the real services provided by his enterprise. In other words, Epstein was a pimp who provided a certain type of pussy for his rich “friends” in a manner that was discrete and not risky, for them.

So what do I make of his suicide in jail while on suicide watch? Was it really a suicide? While it is hard to rule out foul play, especially given the stakes for his and famous “friends” if they were exposed further, it still might still technically have been a suicide. Let me explain.. It is possible for his death to be due to suicide, even if the act was strongly encouraged and facilitated by his rich “friends” and their flunkies. Maybe they conveyed to him that he would be prosecuted to the full extent of law and end up in a nasty prison for the rest of his life. Maybe they told him that he would be imminently murdered in jail. So while they technically did not get him murdered to make it look like a suicide, it is still possible that he encouraged and facilitated the act.

What happens next? Nobody knows for sure, but is very likely that Epstein must have put plans to release incriminating information about his “friends” if something was to happen to him. you know.. a dead man’s switch. I would not be surprised if evidence of sexual encounters between under-18 girls and his famous “friends” starts being leaked at random on the internet. We have already seen his apparent suicide being tied to Bill and Hillary Clinton on Twitter. But this is just the beginning of this phase of the Epstein saga. It is going to get more interesting, to put it mildly. Finally let us talk about two stupid clowns associated with the Epstein saga, Alan Dershowitz and Mike Cernovich.

Given his unusually strident but most peculiar denials, Dershowitz almost certainly partook in the services provided by his friend and client. Sooner or later, we are very likely to see independent evidence implicating Dershowitz. As for Sternovich, his desire to be close to this case as well as previous history with PizzaGate, the alt-right, numerous dietary supplements scams and his own history with accusations of rape are very likely to catch up with him- regardless of whoever is paying him right now. His utility to foreign governments and intelligence agencies is over and Cernovich has now become a huge liability rather than an asset. I would not be surprised if some “mentally unstable” person goes after him in the upcoming months. It does not help that Cernovich cannot afford the type of personal security he could have, if he was really rich.

My prediction is that the Epstein saga is not over, and the next few months could be far more interesting than the past one. And ya.. and it is unlikely to end with Epstein’s death. And here is Michael Tracey’ take on Epstein’s “suicide”.

What do you think? Comments?

Some Thoughts on Jeffrey Epstein’s Interactions with Teenage Girls

July 11, 2019 27 comments

Readers might have noticed that the previous post on Jeffrey Epstein focused almost exclusively on the potential political fallout of new investigations into his numerous dalliances with teenage girls, rather than the “morality” or “legality” of such interactions. Here is why. Firstly, anybody who has read enough human history or studies the world around them understands that human beings, as a species, lack the concept of anything approaching “morality”. Whatever passes as human “morality” is best described as selective hypocrisy towards others while turning a blind eye to their own selves. A good contemporary example of this is people in USA pretending to be outraged by “human rights violations” in China while imprisoning far more people (numbers and percentage) than the later. Or how most Americans pretend that ‘social credit score’ is a bad idea while trying to improve their own private credit scores while also cheering on internet monopolies who sell their personal information to other corporations and government agencies etc.

Similarly, the concept of “legality” is highly dubious. Let us not forget that USA was founded on land stolen from its original inhabitants who were genocided and later built by the institution of race-based slavery. In fact, slaves rather than land or machinery accounted for the largest class of financial assets in pre-1860 USA. Similarly, the systemic theft and genocide of many millions in early 20th century Congo perpetrated by Belgium (under Leopold II) was “legal” as were the various genocides perpetrated by the Turkish (1, 2) and Nazi regimes (3, 4) in the first half of the 20th century. The same can be said about the Late Victorian Holocausts in certain parts of India and Bengal famine of 1943. We should also not forget that overt race-based discrimination was official government policy in USA until the late 1960s and its less obvious manifestations persist to this day. My point being that “legality” is nothing more than whatever the governing system in power chooses to support and enforce.

With that in mind, let us have a look at other aspects of the case against Jeffrey Epstein.

1] Many of you might might have noticed that Epstein is being portrayed as sexual predator of children. But is that correct? Based on what we know about the evidence so far, most of the girls he was involved with were between 15-17. While some might want to see a 15-17 year old girl as a child.. but let us get real.. while girls between 14-17 are not “legally” adults, they are certainly not prepubescent aka children. The medical definition of a child is a human being between the stages of birth and puberty or between the developmental period of infancy and puberty. There is a very good reason most if us make the distinction between children and teenagers. Even if we assume that Epstein’s encounters were largely with girls between 14-16, there is no evidence (as of yet) that even one was pre-pubescent or even barely pubescent.

2] So let us talk about how age of consent in USA ended up at 18, and yes.. it does vary a bit across jurisdictions. FYI, it varies even more around the world. One can, however, see a trend where most reasonably well-off and stable countries seems to put it around 16. Note that the age of consent in almost all countries is lower than the age at which people can vote or enter into legal contracts as adults. I am guessing that you are now starting to see why the age of consent became what it is now in USA. While it is easy to argue that, for the vast majority of human history, a girl past menarche was considered a women- there is another way to make a similar argument. It starts by considering human agency aka capacity of a person to make conscious decisions and act in a given environment.

Human agency, however, is not an all or none thing. For example, the vast majority of people do not believe that a 10-year old has the mental maturity to vote in elections or enter into legal contracts on their own. However, the same people will not challenge the agency of that child to make choose their hobbies or which peers they develop friendships with. The question is.. why is that so? One could make the argument that choosing hobbies and friends can often be almost as consequential as voting in elections or entering into some legal contracts. In my opinion, the difference between the two categories of decisions (listed above) is correlated to the ability to understand their impact. A 10-year old can quickly gauge positive and negative effects of having certain hobbies and making certain friends. However, he or she, does not yet have sufficient experience with politics or legal contracts to properly assess benefits and risks of their decisions.

3] And this leads us to the rationalization for Patriarchy aka subjugation of women in agriculture-based societies. Have you ever wondered how a small percentage of rich men justified patriarchy, racism and oligarchical systems of governance? Easy.. they justified everything from patriarchy, racism and socio-economic oligarchy by claiming that certain groups such as women, non-whites and non-rich people were either incomplete humans or non-human and hence lacked capability for full human agency. Claiming that the target of abuse, exploitation, theft etc had reduced or no capacity for personal human agency has always been the most important argument to justify such shitty behavior. Indeed, first and second wave feminism, anti-racist movement, anti-colonial movements and socialism spent much time successfully arguing that the groups they represented were capable of full human agency. So why are modern leftists and the “woke” crowd trying to turn back the clock?

The thing is.. human agency does not follow made-up rules of social conventions or currents norms of “respectability”. For example- a woman is not always going to aim for a respectable guy or girl. Indeed, she may actually prefer the so-called ‘bad boy’ type over the pathetic doormats aka beta. Similarly, one has to factor that a woman may end up having sex with guys for all sorts of “less respectable” reasons such as monetary or career gains or just temporary infatuation. In other words, accepting the fact that women have personal agency means also accepting that they will often willingly act in ways that not “proper”, “nice” or “respectable”. But how does this apply to the Epstein saga?

4] Have you ever considered the possibility that all those teenage girls who were blowing or riding Epstein were fully aware of what they were doing and did so voluntarily? But why would they have sex with a guy old enough to be their father? Well.. maybe they did it for the money. Epstein always paid the girls, he had sex with, quite generously. And this is also true for the non-teenage women who had transactional sex with him. One could go so far as to say that having sex with Epstein opened many opportunities for the women he fucked. By all accounts, his so-called “sex slaves” now have far richer lifestyles than they would otherwise have had. But.. but.. what about “human trafficking”. Well.. it is just the modern version of what used to be called “white slavery” in USA.. an ironic term, if you ask me. Long story short, both terms have nothing to do with helping women and everything to do with maintaining a particular racial hierarchy.

Now tell me.. how was willingly giving BJs to Epstein for lots of money any worse than working at Walmart? How was willingly having sex with him for money more degrading than working at Amazon or a subcontractor for FakeBook and Google? Why was willingly having sex with him for money any more nauseating than being on the staff at the mansion or luxury yacht of some rich asshole? How was sucking of Epstein for decent money more dehumanizing than working at a call center? How was jerking him off any more disgusting than working for internet click-bait mills such as BuzzFeed. In summary, it is clear that the teenage girls in question understood what they were doing for money. I am not saying that they liked it, but they went along anyway- for the money. Most importantly, they were clearly mature enough to understand and demonstrate their personal agency.

And you know something else.. the financial and psychological outcome for Epstein’s “sex slaves” has, so far, been much better than those who enlist in the american armed forces.

What do you think? Comments?

New Investigation of Jeffrey Epstein is More Problematic for Democrats

July 8, 2019 7 comments

Over the past few days, many media sites have suddenly started to post long and turgid articles about a reclusive american billionaire known as Jeffrey Epstein. Most focus on two aspects of his life, namely his ‘history’ with underage teen girls and the nature of his fortune. While Epstein’s sexual interest in, and encounters, with teenage girls have been public knowledge since 2008, most of what we knew was based in rumor and hearsay because the non-prosecution agreement his lawyers made with Alexander Acosta, who was district attorney for southern district of Florida in 2008, also sealed the evidence files about that investigation. Consequently, for over a decade mainstream media seldom (if ever) mentioned this case, let alone discuss it in any detail.

It also helped, that Jeffrey Epstein like Harvey Weinstein, had teams of excellent lawyers and knew a lot of powerful and influential people. The list of people who he hung out with reads like a who’s who of american and international political and media figures- such as Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, Charlie Rose, Mike Wallace, Ralph Fiennes, Alec Baldwin, David Blaine, Jimmy Buffett, Ehud Barak, Tony Blair, David Koch and many more. Even more oddly, we still do not understand why so many rich and famous people wanted to party with such a reclusive billionaire, especially since we still don’t understand how he made all that money. And this brings us to the biggest mysteries about Jeffrey Epstein..how did he make all that money?

Epstein was not born into wealth, dropped out of university twice and never finished his degree. According to a recent Bloomberg piece, he initially worked as a tutor at a fancy school, then got a job at Bear Stearns where he rose from entry-level to partner within four years and then left to startup his own wealth management business. And yet he somehow managed to snag a number of long-term billionaire clients. Even though we do not know his exact worth, Epstein owns the most expensive mansion in Manhattan, multiple luxury properties all over USA and Europe, a small island in the Caribbean, a bunch of executive jets and one 727. What makes all of this even stranger is that Epstein’s businesses have almost no public paper trail and it is unlikely he invests in the stock and financial markets like most other rich people or their wealth managers.

Which brings us the next question.. why did so many rich and powerful people hang around and party with him for decades? Was Epstein such a great conversationalist, party host or did he offer them something else in return? While it is tempting to believe that he had enough money to bribe multiple presidents, prime-ministers, famous media figures etc, that is unlikely. Investing money for them or procuring underage teen girls for sex are far better explanations for his popularity with the rich and famous. Maybe a combination of the two? This would also explain why Acosta ended up giving him such a sweet deal in 2008. It is almost certain that somebody as crafty and systematic as Epstein probably has enough photographic and video evidence to put many rich and famous behind bars if they did not exert influence on his behalf.

Also, Epstein (and his acquaintances) were interested in teenage girls, not children. What they were doing wasn’t considered abnormal as late as the 1990s. Lets us now talk the real reason why establishment media is covering something that they largely ignored for over a decade. The short answer is.. Trump. While Acosta might be presented as the target of this expose, you would have be retarded to believe that all this smoke and noise is directed at anyone other than Trump. As many of you know, establishment democrats have gone through over half-a-dozen stupid schemes to get Trump out of office. These range from the ‘Mueller Report’, Stormy Daniels saga, multiple rape accusations to targeting people who work in administration via pressure from other elites. As many of you also know, they have failed and Trump is still in office.

Reopening the case against Epstein is yet another establishment democrat brain-fart which they believe will magically result in impeachment or utter humiliation of Trump. The major problem with this belief is that democrat-leaning coastal elite are very over-represented in Epstein’s black book. To put it another way, people like Bill Clinton and big political honchos from coastal ‘blue’ states are going to in trouble way before the trail of evidence reaches Trump. Furthermore, the effete ivy-league educated leaders of that party have not displayed sufficient ruthlessness and strategic thinking to pull off something like this. Let us not forget that Epstein is a pragmatic person without party loyalties who will throw tons of democrats under the bus if necessary.

To summarize, reopening the case against Jeffrey Epstein was a really dumb move that is far more likely to hurt the political careers of prominent establishment democrats than Trump. Then again, democrats have perfected the art of scoring self goals and shooting themselves in the foot.

What do you think? Comments?