Epstein client list, does it exist or not?

[Mikie]

Probably should add a poll to this, but what is the deal with this list? I figure one of three or four possibilities.

1) Doesn't exist and the chaos theory is running crazy
2) It exists, but Trump has elected to keep it to continue black mail (see BBB and republicans that hated it but voted for it)
3) It existed but was destroyed
4) Taco, but seriously, the list is right next to Trumps tax forms and we will never know

Is this just a backfiring of a plan when some theory was created to stir up MAGA against democrats, but now the tables have turned and they can't stop them.

Being as how they have lied about just about everything else, I lean towards the list never existed. But the fact several have misspoke and said client list specifically, makes me wonder. I see the blackmail angle, but at some point, they should have realized that their names were on the list and just never brought it up.

Or is it more so, the bad stuff these people have done, being on the list, private island activities don't even rate. The entire thing is just so odd, and in todays times that alone has such a meaning. Spent all the energy talking it up to now just simply say nope, nothing exists, we misspoke....

 

[sword_9mm]

We'll know right after they find Bigfoot and the Chupacabra.

 

[Megalodon]

Being as how they have lied about just about everything else, I lean towards the list never existed.

That's what I would have said prior to the furious denials. Nothing they could have said or done short of full disclosure could have done more to convince me there is a "there" there.

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

Whether kept by Epstein's people or compiled by the feds and others, we know one definitely exists. And we know Trump is hiding it at least in part because it would incriminate him personally and 90% of his significantly wealthy monetary supporters.

 

[Nazgutek]

View: https://www.reddit.com/r/gifs/comments/1luqw2n/an_11_hour_surveillance_video_of_jeffrey_epsteins/n1zyaw3/


If you've seen the so-called "Epstein cell video with a missing minute", did you notice the change of aspect ratio between the before and after segments? The reddit comments go into detail, including why there's a white bar in the top right corner for the 37 minutes leading up to the missing minute.

Drain The Swamp? The Trump family is a founding member of The Swamp and continues to be a member of The Swamp.

 

[monsterscraponme]

My take if forced to guess.

• Epstein did kill himself. He had plenty of motivation to make that decision as he was likely staring down the rest of his life in prison as a pedophile. I wouldn't underestimate the value of having his death remain enigmatic either. If there was no question Epstein killed himself, it takes some wind out of PizzaGate-ish sails.
• There is no "list" at least in some ways it's characterized as some concrete proof that "this list of people did something wrong." There is no entry such as: "My client, Prince Andrew, likes <insert flavor of child> and has made X orders." It was a dog toy the right wing ecosystem was able to use to create more polarization and distractions. The right wing grifters who make their living off conspiracies and gossip (but otherwise are acting perturbed by this) are also unreliable here as they have a financial interest in ensuring conspiracies continue.
• There is evidence linking wealthy/famous people to Epstein but much of it is not prosecutable any more than saying "Person Y once went to a Diddy Party." Some of these links are publicly known and Trump is very, very likely one of them, something basically everyone knows already. However, due to polarized politics, pointing that out had a muted political effect, until Musk made his statement as he has real clout on the Right.

It's clear the Trump admin is lying about something but I'm not sure how that's necessarily controversial to most normal people. They tell blatant lies literally all of the time in order to further some aim or distract. Trying to cherry-pick when they do tell the truth is a fool's errand unless you have the undisputed facts by your side. The pedophile stuff is a very strong political cudgel on the Right, one that could be wielded at any time to stir up the crazy folk. That is until Musk threw a wrench in things and said Trump was "on the list" which made one of their go-to dog toys a lot more annoying to use. I think this particular lie got too unwieldy to be politically useful and they're doing a very piss poor job trying to retire it.

That said, my initial reaction to this was to go on Fox News comments sections and demand that they release the files. A small, futile effort, but I think people shouldn't let this die. The MAGA world, arguably a branch of online basement-ey conservatism that matured in the Obama years, has obsessed about the pedo cabal for a long, long time (for reference: PizzaGate was 2016). Epstein is just another facet of this obsession. This matters a lot to a considerable segment of his base and nudging this further may bear more fruit than it may seem. They are either being used (my guess) like a cheap tool and/or their hero is a part of the conspiracy. Mostly they are in defense mode, making wild contortions to avoid facing reality. One I've seen in the Rightosphere is that the "Deep State" finally got to him and he's under physical threat.

/EDIT
Fixed sentences

 

[Technarch]

My take is that the client list exists and it doesn't matter. I mean we already have the pilot logs for the island and nothing came of that. There are rumors swirling on reddit that Epstein's blackmail videos are still floating around somewhere, but I seriously wonder whether even smoking-gun, explicit video evidence of violent child sexual assault would affect the perpetrators. MAGA would just call it fake and/or take it as a sign that pedophilia should be legal.

 

[Ecmaster76]

That's what I would have said prior to the furious denials. Nothing they could have said or done short of full disclosure could have done more to convince me there is a "there" there.

If it exists, it must incriminate all manner of people else it would have been out years ago

There is evidence linking wealthy/famous people to Epstein but much of it is not prosecutable any more than saying "Person Y once went to a Diddy Party." Some of these links are publicly known and Trump is very, very likely one of them, something basically everyone knows already. However, due to polarized politics, pointing that out had a muted political effect, until Musk made his statement as he has real clout on the Right.

Probably this. As tempting as it might have been for Epstein to keep dirt on powerful people, having such makes the blackmailer a target too. It's quite possible he only wanted to curry favor via the carrot and avoided the stick.

 

[Mikie]

I think I will hit up those places demanding the list. Just post everywhere.

@monsterscraponme great points, I am pretty sure it would play out like that. "...It's clear the Trump admin is lying about something but I'm not sure how that's necessarily controversial to most normal people. They tell blatant lies literally all of the time...The pedophile stuff is a very strong political cudgel on the Right, one that could be wielded at any time to stir up the crazy folk."

Except hasn't this occurred (pedophile/teens/sex trafficking) to some extent already? Gaetz, Minnesota senator, maybe Wisconsin, and you never hear about them anymore.

I would have thought they specifically would have released some kind of list at this point to appease the people, show how "open" they are and then on to the next lie.

I just imagine a huge spreadsheet with dates/times/links to videos. Not even sure at this point a list could be released. Its been built up so much that I don't see why they don't just put a few names on paper, hell, include Musk if they want to go all in.

 

[arcite]

I don't think it would do anything to de-radicalize the MAGA faithful, ie. a majority of GOP voters.

 

[Thank You and Best of Luck!]

I just assume the worst version of all of it is true. Both the crimes and the cover-up.

Why? Because a bunch of grown men sexually exploited a bunch of under-aged girls, and the only person in jail for any of it is a woman. System seems to be working as intended.

 

[Quirinus]

I think there is a list of some kind. Epstein probably wouldn't have been sentenced for prison without such evidence.

 

[poochyena]

No, not in the way conspiracy theorists are claiming. I don't see why someone would carefully document who he helped commit crimes and which crimes they committed. The only evidence of such a list has only been brought up by conspiracy theorists as far as I am aware.
The only list is likely a generic contact list that would be impossible to conclude anything based on. Was the person in his phone contact list his partner in crime? Or was it his hairdresser or just some guy he met once to buy a TV off craigslist?

I just assume the worst version of all of it is true. Both the crimes and the cover-up.

Why? Because a bunch of grown men sexually exploited a bunch of under-aged girls, and the only person in jail for any of it is a woman. System seems to be working as intended.

But Epstein was in jail too and even died there.

 

[lightspd]

I don't think Trump/Bondi have such a list in the way people think. That said, criminal enterprises tend to be a lot more organized than people give them credit for. So it wouldn't surprise me to find out that he did have a database of everyone, with likes, the girls, details on the girls, etc. Do I think the gov has it, I doubt it or maybe in encrypted form and don't know it.

 

[fractl]

I think there is a list of some kind. Epstein probably wouldn't have been sentenced for prison without such evidence.

Epstein hadn’t even had a trial when he died in jail, right?

 

[Stern]

Congratulations, you've become QAnon.

 

[DarthSlack]

Congratulations, you've become QAnon.

Yeah, no. Epstein was in jail because he was credibly charged with crimes. That means that at very least, prosecutors have a few boxes of evidence about his activities. And if he had people around him during those activities, then those people may be in that evidence as well. So while there may not be a database or little black book, there very well could be documentation of activities beyond Epsteins.

 

[Ecmaster76]

Congratulations, you've become QAnon.

Who exactly is this addressed at?

It's not really in question that people other than Epstein were involved. The only mystery is why we haven't heard more from prosecutors or victims

 

[Lt_Storm]

If it exists, it must incriminate all manner of people else it would have been out years ago

Quite the opposite, the Justice Department isn't in the business of releasing information that is merely embarrassing. if it incriminated people, then there would have been charges and that would require parts of it be released. But, if it has little to no evidentiary value (say, like the guest list for a Diddy party) then it would be private information of the sort that the Justice Department is supposed to keep secret.

Which essentially leads to my theory: either it doesn't exist or, if it does, it has little evidentiary value. The most it might have done is to place someone on the FBI's radar. When investigation found nothing else, well, incriminating is actually a very high bar to cross (see also Al Capone, for how many years did the FBI fail to incriminate him?).

 

[Deleted member 326875]

Yeah, no. Epstein was in jail because he was credibly charged with crimes. That means that at very least, prosecutors have a few boxes of evidence about his activities. And if he had people around him during those activities, then those people may be in that evidence as well. So while there may not be a database or little black book, there very well could be documentation of activities beyond Epsteins.

There are probably additional evidences. The evidences may or may not be enough to charge additional people. Sexual assault/abuse kind of crimes have been difficult to prosecute or simply under enforced forever. The victims would be dragged through the mud also.

The DOJ may not want to go after crimes without sufficient evidence or prosecutors are concern about their careers future. It is not uncommon for prosecutors only take on sure fire cases to maintain their convictions ratio.

 

[NervousEnergy]

It's the same playbook as that lawyer with the 'Release the Kraken' line and the pillow guy 'I have loads of proof of election results manipulation'. There was a detailed list when it helped the conspiracy theorists on the right to have a list. There isn't when it doesn't.

Trump admitted on national TV that he was a pedophile (well... hebephile to be more accurate I guess) when boasting about intentionally walking in on underage pageant contestants when he owned Miss USA. The electorate didn't care.

 

[Technarch]

Who exactly is this addressed at?

It's not really in question that people other than Epstein were involved. The only mystery is why we haven't heard more from prosecutors or victims

Prosecutors and victims run a real risk of getting Epsteined, on top of the extremely difficult nature of prosecuting sex crimes to begin with. Especially against well-connected and -financed defendants.

We have the flight logs, the photos, and witness testimony, sadly that isn't good enough to bring down a politician. It should be enough to keep them from being voted into office, but apparently there are enough voters who think child rape is a feature and not a bug, so.

 

[DarthSlack]

There are probably additional evidences. The evidences may or may not be enough to charge additional people. Sexual assault/abuse kind of crimes have been difficult to prosecute or simply under enforced forever. The victims would be dragged through the mud also.

The DOJ may not want to go after crimes without sufficient evidence or prosecutors are concern about their careers future. It is not uncommon for prosecutors only take on sure fire cases to maintain their convictions ratio.

I'm not really looking for any sort of evidentiary standard here. What I'm thinking is that there could very well be evidence that while not sufficient to convict someone with, could easily prove to be profoundly embarrassing if made public. So the DOJ is making sure that it isn't made public. Something like Trump walking in on underage pageant participants.

 

[Coriolanus]

I hate this thread and the other one where people tried to argue that the 2024 was stolen by a grand conspiracy.

Let's not be like the MAGA people, please.

 

[Thank You and Best of Luck!]

But Epstein was in jail too and even died there.

Sure. If you say so.

All this time analyzing edited video trying to support the idea that he was murdered as part of a conspiracy. Even easier to have helped him escape, no?

If you ask me, it's suspicious that we've never seen Pam Bondi and Epstein in the same place at the same time. We might have a real Doubtfire situation on our hands here.

 

[Lt_Storm]

I'm not really looking for any sort of evidentiary standard here. What I'm thinking is that there could very well be evidence that while not sufficient to convict someone with, could easily prove to be profoundly embarrassing if made public. So the DOJ is making sure that it isn't made public. Something like Trump walking in on underage pageant participants.

Which, generally speaking, is the job of the Justice Department. They aren't really supposed to make people's lives hard unless they have sufficient evidence to convict someone. This goes for Trump as much as it goes for you or I. (Though, of course, we know very well that they had enough evidence to convict Trump, not of this, but charges were filed against him and he was guilty as sin.)

 

[Megalodon]

Quite the opposite, the Justice Department isn't in the business of releasing information that is merely embarrassing. if it incriminated people, then there would have been charges and that would require parts of it be released. But, if it has little to no evidentiary value (say, like the guest list for a Diddy party) then it would be private information of the sort that the Justice Department is supposed to keep secret.

Which essentially leads to my theory: either it doesn't exist or, if it does, it has little evidentiary value. The most it might have done is to place someone on the FBI's radar. When investigation found nothing else, well, incriminating is actually a very high bar to cross (see also Al Capone, for how many years did the FBI fail to incriminate him?).

See, merely not releasing it would be fine. As you correctly note, that's just plain good policy. What raises my suspicions is the release of obviously edited footage and cack-handed denials.

Note that this doesn't mean I think there's some magical e-mail that if released will undo Trumpism. I don't think there is. MAGA has shown countless times that there is nothing Trump can demand of them that they won't eventually do, even if sometimes there's a little grumbling. But I do think the level of incompetence is funny and encouraging. They have tells. They are weak. They can be pressured in ways that cause them to make mistakes.

 

[Soothsayer786]

There is no question that investigators had to have compiled their own list of contacts. As for whether Epstein had one himself? I don't know. Honestly I didn't even realize until recently that people were referring to an actual list he had kept. I just assumed this was always about what the investigation uncovered. It made sense to me that they wouldn't necessarily release that full list because probably many of those contacts were not criminal in nature.

 

[Pont]

I don't see why someone would carefully document who he helped commit crimes and which crimes they committed.

Because blackmail.

1. Possibility of earning money.

2. Leverage to use to force "allies" to deal with whistle-blowers.

None of these people are trustworthy. Thus, they don't trust each other, either.

 

[poochyena]

Because blackmail.

1. Possibility of earning money.

2. Leverage to use to force "allies" to deal with whistle-blowers.

None of these people are trustworthy. Thus, they don't trust each other, either.

I don't understand the need for blackmail.
1. Presumably he was already making money through his operation. I don't see why he'd need to blackmail anyone to get their money. Wouldn't he ask for money up front? And if he wanted more money, he'd just charge them more for future visits.
2. How would that work? I don't get it. If someone comes forward to reveal the "truth", then what would epstein blackmailing anyone accomplish? Wouldn't that just make him no different than the whistleblower?

 

[garrobon]

I hate this thread and the other one where people tried to argue that the 2024 was stolen by a grand conspiracy.

Let's not be like the MAGA people, please.

Yes. We’ll tear apart conspiracies until they’re our own.

 

[Coriolanus]

Yes. Does no one see the irony?

I would like to have thought we were better, but apparently not. And I had some very angry people telling me why there's a massive conspiracy of shadowing organizations buying up power adapter companies which have Starlink satellite communications to allow those shadowy organizations to hack into voting machines and changing their vote totals.

Like, seriously, that was actually a comment someone made to me.

Let's not be like the MAGA people, please.

 

[Bardon]

I don't understand the need for blackmail.
1. Presumably he was already making money through his operation. I don't see why he'd need to blackmail anyone to get their money. Wouldn't he ask for money up front? And if he wanted more money, he'd just charge them more for future visits.
2. How would that work? I don't get it. If someone comes forward to reveal the "truth", then what would epstein blackmailing anyone accomplish? Wouldn't that just make him no different than the whistleblower?

Blackmail can be for more than just money, and the people who visited Epstein's island had lots of power beyond just cash. Trivial example: If Epstein were alive today and had evidence on Trump, he'd pretty much own the USA.

 

[Lt_Storm]

Trivial example: If Epstein were alive today and had evidence on Trump, he'd pretty much own the USA.

Counter-point: Trump can shoot someone in broad daylight on fifth avenue and nobody important would think he did anything wrong. If Epstein had proof that Trump slept with a young woman, he would have no power over him. After all, our sexual mores are very much situational and power deferent. Since Trump is the strongman, him doing such things is just evidence of his vital manhood. Nobody who matters* would care. (If you're famous, they let you do it, grab...)

* For values of matters that could change anything. Sure, 49% of the House and 51% of the Senate might be outraged, but, that would have little impact.

 

[Mark086]

He didn't need a list.

He needed on occasion to imply he had a list.

But the list would convict him too; so why retain it? He knew who he could manipulate if he wanted to.

The willing participants would play along, and the unwilling ones wouldn't make too many waves.

 

[DarthSlack]

Which, generally speaking, is the job of the Justice Department. They aren't really supposed to make people's lives hard unless they have sufficient evidence to convict someone. This goes for Trump as much as it goes for you or I. (Though, of course, we know very well that they had enough evidence to convict Trump, not of this, but charges were filed against him and he was guilty as sin.)

I fully agree, the DOJ is actually doing the right thing here. I'm just thoroughly enjoying the hypocrisy of MAGA screaming for ages that the DOJ was covering up embarrassing evidence and now that those very same MAGA swine have access to the evidence, they're busily covering it up. The resulting MAGA on MAGA warfare is going to be delicious.

 

[Shavano]

Probably should add a poll to this, but what is the deal with this list? I figure one of three or four possibilities.

1) Doesn't exist and the chaos theory is running crazy
2) It exists, but Trump has elected to keep it to continue black mail (see BBB and republicans that hated it but voted for it)
3) It existed but was destroyed
4) Taco, but seriously, the list is right next to Trumps tax forms and we will never know

Is this just a backfiring of a plan when some theory was created to stir up MAGA against democrats, but now the tables have turned and they can't stop them.

Being as how they have lied about just about everything else, I lean towards the list never existed. But the fact several have misspoke and said client list specifically, makes me wonder. I see the blackmail angle, but at some point, they should have realized that their names were on the list and just never brought it up.

Or is it more so, the bad stuff these people have done, being on the list, private island activities don't even rate. The entire thing is just so odd, and in todays times that alone has such a meaning. Spent all the energy talking it up to now just simply say nope, nothing exists, we misspoke....

I don't know but it's obvious Donald Trump desperately wants that story to go away, and I think that's why Levitt ordered the release of the review in the immediate aftermath of the Texas flooding disaster, and he showed obvious frustration and outrage that people didn't just drop it and only talk about the latest events instead.

 

[Shavano]

Yeah, no. Epstein was in jail because he was credibly charged with crimes. That means that at very least, prosecutors have a few boxes of evidence about his activities. And if he had people around him during those activities, then those people may be in that evidence as well. So while there may not be a database or little black book, there very well could be documentation of activities beyond Epsteins.

We know he had other people around him during those crimes because some of the women who were underage at the time testified about it.

That's why Ghislaine Maxwell is in prison. Dershowitz, if you think you can believe him, says he has a list.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...defending-himself-in-giuffre-case/ar-AA1ImMKQ
“But I’m bound by confidentiality — from a judge and cases — and I can’t disclose what I know,” Dershowitz said. “Hand to God, I know the names of the people whose files are being suppressed in order to protect them, and that’s wrong.”

 

[GMBigKev]

I would like to have thought we were better, but apparently not. And I had some very angry people telling me why there's a massive conspiracy of shadowing organizations buying up power adapter companies which have Starlink satellite communications to allow those shadowy organizations to hack into voting machines and changing their vote totals.

Like, seriously, that was actually a comment someone made to me.

Let's not be like the MAGA people, please.

People like conspiracy theories. They always end up in antisemitism but that's besides the point. We look for the easy answer, not necessarily the one that makes most sense. It's like that Principal Skinner meme - "Am I so out of touch? No. It's the children who are wrong." Why did President Trump win when he's a demonstrably awful candidate? Well it certainly couldn't be that the Democrats have been ignoring progressivism to embrace capitalism and the candidate wasn't their strongest option and all of the issues surrounding the end of the Biden administration and the disenfranchisement of traditionally Democratic voters. No, it was hacked voting machines!

 

[AverageDutchGuy]

I personally have a hard time believing he actually kept a list or records on who were his clients or whom he provided with girls and "services". I even have a hard time believing he was actually ever blackmailing anyone important. The sorts of people intended here absolutely have the power to make something and someone like that go away "on the down low". Epstein had everything to gain by simply currying the favour by providing "the service" but I doubt he'd get much done if he started blackmailing people. There would absolutely be back-door whispers between the sorts of people who would be his clients, even if it was a slightly more emphatic "I wouldn't talk to that guy, he's trouble" and not a full exposure of exactly why that is the case. Implication and insinuation is all that's needed at that level to get someone blacklisted and cut out of the "inner circles". At best he's going to have implied to some lower level people he could make their life difficult, but it's never going to have been outright blackmail and I doubt he'd ever have the actual evidence against them. Because all of it would work against him too. As he probably needed the protection from the powerful people who were his clientele to keep his operation going in the first place. Blackmailing them would not be a smart move and risks de-greasing the squeekie wheel.