Trump's MAGA base turns on him

[C C]

In the past, the bulk of them seem to be on record somewhere as forced (via gratitude) to say something to the effect that "Epstein is a great guy" -- due to [conventional] assistance he provided in some area.

This career-damaging dread revolving around the Epstein conspiracy might analogously be crudely compared to Roundup. Monsanto formerly, and now Bayer, is repeatedly sued over glyphosate due to baseless claims that it is a carcinogen (and successfully, in terms of settlements). There is no evidence for it causing cancer. And yet, the hysterical myth is so powerful that it triumphs over facts -- manipulates the court systems. But in the case of the Epstein conspiracy, it is the rumor-mongering "court of public opinion" that is the problem for these individuals. With the Epstein circus, the legal system at least does recognize that the situation is fabulism.

Are glyphosate’s days numbered?: These legal issues—with 67,000 pending suits, there is no end in site to its courtroom challenges—have led Bayer to consider ceasing production of Roundup unless it receives legal protections against future litigation. Bayer recently informed farmers, suppliers and retailers that it may stop selling Roundup, which would leave U.S. farmers reliant on imported glyphosate from China.

[Syne]

Yeah, association with Epstein is a third-rail that even innocent people would be desperate to distance themselves from. Roundup, GMOs, MSG, DDT, etc. have all fallen prey to a kind of public schadenfreude, to various degrees. The mob mentality, in tort or criminal law, often seems to invoke some sinister conspiracy that must be taken down.

Epstein does cross the Venn diagram of rich and elite, who are among the Monsantos, Gates, etc..

[Yazata]

[Image: GwCsDQMXoAAtcbB?format=jpg&name=medium]

[Magical Realist]

We've finally found something more important to Trumpers than Trump: their own pet conspiracy theories.

[Yazata]

[Image: GwF9tL-XIAArSf6?format=jpg&name=medium]

[confused2]

..in 2024 WIRED conducted an investigation uncovering the data of mobile devices belonging to almost 200 of his visitors. How strong was the data? So precise that we followed visitor's movements to and from Epstein Island to within centimeters—tracking their countries, neighborhoods, and even buildings of origin. This is Epstein Island’s Secret Data: On The Grid.

I don't know what credibility WIRED has .. they seem mostly interested in 'data'.
The video isn't very exciting unless you like red dots on maps.
But it does seem likely that someone wanting to sell (say) yachts could buy the name and address of every phone owner that visited 'Epstein Island'.
Only worth watching if you have 8:42 to spare

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/PjPHq-Ez0nc

[C C]

..in 2024 WIRED conducted an investigation uncovering the data of mobile devices belonging to almost 200 of his visitors. How strong was the data? So precise that we followed visitor's movements to and from Epstein Island to within centimeters—tracking their countries, neighborhoods, and even buildings of origin. This is Epstein Island’s Secret Data: On The Grid.

I don't know what credibility WIRED has .. they seem mostly interested in 'data'.
The video isn't very exciting unless you like red dots on maps.
But it does seem likely that someone wanting to sell (say) yachts could buy the name and address of every phone owner that visited 'Epstein Island'.
Only worth watching if you have 8:42 to spare

https://youtu.be/PjPHq-Ez0nc

VIDEO EXCERPT: "A lot of people were visiting the island, even after Epstein had pleaded guilty in 2008, and served jail time for procuring a minor for prostitution."

All sorts of celebrities and entertainment industry shakers and movers kept hobnobbing with and producing and promoting the films of Roman Polanski after he drugged and raped a 13-year-old-girl, too. Which is to say, the "first time" that an elite figure is either convicted or destined for it (prior to fleeing) doesn't seem to matter much to the world.

VIDEO EXCERPT: "Before we jump to conclusions, some sources have highlighted interactions between Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein at social events. But after Epstein's 2008 conviction, there are no verified reports of Trump maintaining a relationship with a convicted pedophile."

In step with that, supposedly the last [significant] contact they ever had was in 2004, before the "legal issues" spotlight initially dropped on Epstein in 2005.

Personal life: "In November 2004, Epstein and Trump's friendship ran into trouble when they became embroiled in a bidding war for a $40 million mansion, Maison de L'Amitié, which was being auctioned in Palm Beach. Trump won the auction for $41 million, and successfully sold the property four years later for $95 million to the Russian billionaire Dmitry Rybolovlev. That month was the last time Epstein and Trump were recorded to have interacted."

[Syne]

That's the only list I'd be interested in. Those people who were not deterred from association with Epstein even after his first conviction. I don't expect to see any evidence of their crimes, but I would, justifiably, assume they are bad people.

[Yazata]

I'd like to know

1. How many purported Epstein rape victims are there?

2. How many were interviewed by the FBI or other law enforcement?

3. How many alleged pedophiles who had sex with them did these girls report? The media certainly led me to believe there were more than just Epstein himself. Don't fixate on mere Epstein friends and associates, go straight to the perps.

4. Did the FBI compile a list of these alleged pedophiles? Are any of their identities known? That's the only list that really matters.

5. If so, why haven't any of them been charged?

6. Does the (hypothetical) list include any familiar names?

7. Did Epstein make videos of the sex, perhaps for purpose of blackmail? That was widely reported in the media. Did the FBI ever have possession of those videos? If so, where are they now?

[Syne]

As far as I understand it, there are hundreds of victims, but many are foreigners (outside of US jurisdiction, at least to compel cooperation).
Several known victims have made accusations toward multiple, high-profile people, but, sadly, these have not proven to be credible or reliable. Virginia Giuffre seems to be the sole source for the largest number of accusations, but was proven to have changed her story and been contradicted by evidence (at least in the accusations that have fully played out in court).
Since, in the US, you are considered innocent until proven guilty, defaming the accused without enough evidence to prosecute would be irresponsible. Very much along the lines of what has happened to many men during #MeToo, where many were simply convicted in the court of public opinion alone. Yes, these men are rich and powerful and the lure of schadenfreude is strong. Doesn't really change the underlying principles... if we adhere to any.
The only video cameras in Epstein's home seem to have been ones placed there by police, in public areas, after Epstein reported a theft by one of his guests.

So there is no credible list of others guilty of crimes. At least none with the evidence to prosecute.
Could there have been at one time? Maybe. But the DOJ has been weaponized and abused so much that any such evidence has likely long since been destroyed. If we cannot prosecute, it's a moot point. Exposing names would only open up the US to defamation suits.

Not something I want my taxes funding.