I think that's one way of dealing with a scandal: make it so absolutely bizarre and outlandish and give the room to the most eccentric conspiracies, you make it simply too crackpot for people to hold interest. Just remember what happened to the 9/11 truthers. — ssu

Some of the things I've heard can be described as "crackpot theories", but surely there's enough evidence to take the accusations of extreme child abuse seriously, at least? Or do you not think so?

To add to the Epstein conspiracy theories, here's a draft statement announcing Epstein's death dated a day before he died.

I wonder why they don’t want ICE to wear body cams? Because it captures the behavior of the deranged agitators.

ICE surveillance concerns shift Democrats’ demands for body cameras

I wonder why they don’t want ICE to wear body cams? — NOS4A2

They do. The article literally says:

“Obviously we want them to be wearing body cameras, but we would want restrictions placed on what that information could be used for,” Markey said. “We want to make sure that we have the accountability for how these officers conduct themselves on the streets of our country, but we don’t want it in turn to be used as a way of coming back and suppressing free speech.”

...

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer say they want to tack on restrictions to how ICE can use body camera footage, according to a letter sent to Republican leadership on Wednesday night.

“Prohibit tracking, creating or maintaining databases of individuals participating in First Amendment activities,” the letter says.

Clearly I’m not in the habit of believing everything they say.

hey want to tack on restrictions to how ICE can use body camera footage, according to a letter sent to Republican leadership on Wednesday night.

Not seeing the issue??

Are you ever going to make claims you can back up? This one would be actionable if you had any public personality.

Another one for the pile of things that don't add up.

I see trump is trying to rile up his racist followers to criticize the NFL. Maybe that explains why he randomly put out that Obama tape the other day. He was trying to get the ball rolling.

Of course the NFL does a half-time show in some dialect of Spanish, with everyone waving foreign flags. There is no better way to celebrate America’s 250th birthday and unite the country than an expression of woke globalism. Flyover football fans must be loving this one.

“If you are seriously threatened by a performance that celebrates diversity and tolerance and love and joy, maybe America is not the right place for you.”

Of course the NFL does a half-time show in some dialect of Spanish, with everyone waving foreign flags. There is no better way to celebrate America’s 250th birthday and unite the country than an expression of woke globalism. Flyover football fans must be loving this one. — NOS4A2

“If you are seriously threatened by a performance that celebrates diversity and tolerance and love and joy, maybe America is not the right place for you.” — Questioner

Hmm... Well, our MAGA-enthusiast @NOS4A2 lives in Canada, so perhaps your right.

Back to the Epstein-scandal.

Have people noticed just how international this has become?

Keir Starmer is having his share of the scandal with the British ambassador having been a close member of the Epstein-circle. (The ex-Prince is already yesterday's news.)



And Norway is having it's own royal scandal with Epstein!





What a wonderful world elite we have. But it's interesting to notice just how different countries handle the Epstein-case.

Of course, starting with the hero of the Q-anon movement who ought to have got rid of the pedophile rings in power: Donald Trump and his trusty sidekick and favorite of @NOS4A2, Kash Patel. :lol:

(Remember how things were going to be, MAGA?)

Have people noticed just how international this has become? — ssu

Yeah. I mean, some of the most key players seem to have been exonerated in some sense, but there are all these weird names popping up like some you've noted. Obviously, being in the files doesn't, in and of itself, mean there was untoward or criminal behaviour but good god. It almost makes you a right-wing conspiracy theorist.

MAGA-enthusiast — ssu

"Imagine being so hateful that you can't hear joy, just because it is in Spanish."

Obviously, being in the files doesn't, in and of itself, mean there was untoward or criminal behaviour but good god. It almost makes you a right-wing conspiracy theorist. — AmadeusD

Yes, well, Philosophy Forum itself wanted to interview one Epstein contact, namely Noam Chomsky. (If I remember correctly, Chomsky declined the PF interview because of his ill health.) Knowing somebody like Chomsky and Hawking gives respectability. Epstein seem's to have been a man that carries out many kinds of favours. A mr fix-it, who fixes also other things than being just a pimp for billionaires.



Chomsky actually was one of the few that defended Epstein after his first sentence. Reason seems to be that Epstein had helped Chomsky:

Valeria Chomsky also clarified the basis for two financial transactions between Chomsky and Epstein. On one occasion, Epstein sent Noam Chomsky a $20,000 check as part of a linguistic challenge Chomsky developed, she said. She also said Epstein helped Noam recover $270,000. Epstein helped after Noam Chomsky discovered “inconsistencies in his retirement resources that threatened his economic independence and caused him great distress”.

Of course it's called "networking". What are friends for?

But from the Epstein case comes to mind another criminal who made it Big Circles: Bernie Madoff. Who Madoff scammed were also some royal families and Madoff was also "discreet", a somewhat shadowy figure yet reputable, the one time chairman of NASDAQ. And Madoff of course, simply turned himself in. With a bit of luck, he could have wiggled away like a Bitcoin-conartist.

What is obvious is how small these circles are. I remember that in 2016 VICE News, which btw. made outstanding coverage of the start of the Russian intervention in Ukraine in 2014, simply said that the Epstein-scandal wouldn't go anywhere, because the Clinton and Trump, hence both ruling parties, were embroiled in this issue.

Now as both are deep in this stuff, one perhaps alot deeper than the other, it's hilarious to see how the partisan commentators simply aren't able to face how both parties have sex-offender presidents.

both parties have sex-offender presidents — ssu

Is this relying on the pre-Epstein stuff for Trump?

?

Well Clinton was a womanizer, and Trump, hmm, when did he meet Epstein for the first time?

Remember when Trump walked in with Paula Jones and other women claiming that they were sexually harassed by Clinton? I mean these two sexual predators... But I guess for Trump it seemed a "smart" move to get the MAGA-cult all enthusiastic about taking down pedophile rings and attack sexual predators like Clinton.