Epstein client list, does it exist or not?
- Thread starter Mikie
- Start date
- Status
It’s bad for the uneven treatment, but anyone on that list is a stinging indictment of their behavior—regardless of political affiliation.
It may be more that people are being caught surprised that Trump’s layer of invincibility appears to be malfunctioning.
Unless I'm completely missing it, it's not clear if Thomas solicited that donation from Epstein while working for The New York Times. If that is the case, there's a serious red line he crossed. All of his subsequent reporting on Epstein could then be called into question. There's a serious cloud hanging over his journalistic standards.
MTG is in a safe (Republican) district. Trump and the GOP could afford to lose her if she wore out her welcome with them.
From what I understand, the Argentina bailout was to help out some of Bessent’s hedge fund buddies—so tracks with Trump’s history of grift.
In that light, it may fit into the Epstein mess—connected people doing whatever they can get away with, and denying involvement in the rest.
In that light, it may fit into the Epstein mess—connected people doing whatever they can get away with, and denying involvement in the rest.
This may be the crux of the current brouhaha.
Trump has repeatedly proven true his maxim of being able to shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it.
On the other hand, there are some influential people who were heavily involved in Epstein’s web who don’t benefit from this Teflon coating, and are calling in their chits to keep their dealings out of public domain. Trump needs these people, and thus has been slow walking the process.
That's where empathy comes in. There are people out there who have a significantly different mental model than you do, and any serious interactions with them have to take this into account.
Cool story.
But kind of hard to deny when flight logs exist. Way different than heading to a club in a city someone already is in.
It’s a fine line to walk. It’s been established there is a two tier justice system, which Trump is bending closer to his will. It’s a game of high-stakes lawfare where the rules are ever changing to benefit those in power.
Perhaps a good way to look at it is to compare it to the JFK assassination. Even if Oswald were truly the shooter, the government did themselves no favors with the handling of the aftermath. Apparently, the same could also be said of Epstein.
You know that there are some very powerful people implicated who were using their influence to stymie investigations and obfuscate involvement. Much was hiding in plain sight, for those who bothered to look.
As far as prosecution—look at the response to January 6 and the election interference by Trump. In a serious democracy, there would have been swift reaction. That's a big sign the fish is rotten from the head.
That's rich. The head of the reputational risk committee had to resign due to reputation issues.
Makes one wonder about her social IQ. Seemed like a ticking time bomb on her career.
Makes one wonder about her social IQ. Seemed like a ticking time bomb on her career.
There are firms that specialize in reputation management. Of course, this isn't branding/PR/advocacy—it's working to rehabilitate and/or shape dodgy reputations of companies, nation states, or influential people who have complicated histories, to put it mildly.
The Federal Reserve was designed to be independent of any political arm of the federal government in order to maintain monetary stability unfettered by political interference.
Unitary Executive Theory discussions aside, the Biden Administration dropped the ball on doing anything about Trump’s malfeasance. They were slow walking responding to grave threats to democracy—which ask some serious questions about their views of the lay of the land.
The results of the impeachment trials for the events of 1/6 clearly demonstrated that the legislative branch wasn’t going to do their constitutional duty, leaving the executive branch as the final backstop.
Biden is a staunch institutionalist. Historically, the US has been loath to prosecute presidents, either sitting or former. The conventional argument is that doing so would bring shame to the office. That’s small potatoes compared to preserving democracy. It’s essentially moving deck chairs on the Titanic.
Per the subject of this thread—many implicated in the Epstein scandal—including Trump—were probably banking on little happening during Biden’s tenure so that the problems could be swept under the rug when Trump had regained the White House. As history shows, they were right in this assessment.
In aggregate, party affiliation does not matter. The end result stands.
McConnell—even though he has great antipathy for Trump—chose the Faustian bargain over his constitutional duty because he felt it got his people closer to advancing their illiberal agenda. Which is turning the country into a neo-feudalist autocracy. There was no spinelessness here. The outcome was calculated. They, like the co-opted Supreme Court, actively chose this outcome over maintaining their independence and control.
It's becoming more apparent that the operation was a honeypot with apparent nation state involvement. Not to excuse him in the least, but Epstein was likely a highly compromised front to do the bidding of more powerful figures behind the scenes. There are probably numerous powerful people wrapped up in that web that are/were putting heavy pressure on whoever they can to keep things under wraps. Some of these people are well known and in the open for anyone bothering to pay attention.
If and when the full details are released, this sordid affair will be staining more than many would like to admit or acknowledge. It is a damning and expected indictment of the human condition.
- Status