Jeffrey Epstein: Difference between revisions
| Line 194: | Line 194: | ||
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1415842693335289857}} | {{#widget:Tweet|id=1415842693335289857}} | ||
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1415841953023893505}} | {{#widget:Tweet|id=1415841953023893505}} | ||
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1415440376106684416}} | {{#widget:Tweet|id=1415440376106684416}} | ||
{{#widget:Tweet|id=1415438469443190784}} | {{#widget:Tweet|id=1415438469443190784}} | ||
Revision as of 07:34, 12 July 2025
On YouTube
On X
2022
2021
So this just appears now!?! And what do we learn? That if "Sources and Methods" of the Intelligence Community might be compromised, prosecutors regularly decline to push for full prosecution EVEN IN THE CASE OF SEXUAL ABUSE of minors and INFANTS.
Bingo: Follow the Silence.
We have an undisclosed program; there's some kind of 'understanding' that we don't understand. I very well understand why we don't casually compromise "Sources & Methods". But trafficking kids is NOT casual business. Nor is USING them as part of 'Sources & Methods' for kompromat.
One question now creates 2 teams:
Team A) 'Sources & Methods' are above child trafficking in importance.
Team B) Child Trafficking is above any exemption for our 'Sources & Methods'.
I believe that if Epstein needed to use kids for S&M as Kompromat, we lost our plot entirely.
Seriously, I am not being naive here. If we have to abuse children to gain security for the country, maybe we don't have the right to a nation? If our intelligence community is so pathetic...look you get the idea. If the US isn't protecting kids from our own IC, we aren't the US.
I understand we may occassionally have to fell a monster overseas. I understand that sometimes there's a ticking time bomb and 'extraordinary methods' are needed. I understand that we must surveil people or engage in illegal acts while undercover.
But you-can't-use-kids. Period.
Is there some GIANT understanding involving our journalists & news desks that when the IC says 'Sources & Methods' we all just say 'Ok. Anything you say boys.' Like, for example with @arobach being shut down on Epstein: https://youtube.com/watch?v=vjwf9F_v5cI&ab_channel=FoxNews
Abuse of Kids > Sources & Methods
Notice how everything adds up if there's a giant understanding that Sources & Methods trump everything protecting innocent children? You just say 'Sources & Methods are at risk'. Explains Acosta, Robach, Veritas, etc. Boom: No more Epstein mysteries. It's all 'Sources & Methods'.
Q: Why no discussion of Villard House records? A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why no investigation of Epstein's Hedge Fund's trading partners & brokerage? A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why do editors claim no one cares about Epstein? A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Project Veritas? A: S&M.
Q: Why report Epstein was a disgraced Financier when no one seems to have traded with him? A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why so little interest in covering Ghislaine relative to Kyle Rittenhouse? A: Sources & Methods.
Q: Why did no one ask where GM last crossed a border? A: S & M.
Moral: Our kids cant vote. We bring them into the world totally dependent on us. If we have a country that deserves an Intelligence Service, we have a right to know that kids are 100% OFF LIMITS as regards 'Sources & Methods' by the IC of us or our allies. Period. Kids >>> S & M.
P.S. And...I appear to be back to being throttled more agressively after several threads were throttled less agressively or not at all by twitter.
At least at first on this thread. We will see whether that continues. CC'ing @lexfridman @benshapiro @jordanbpeterson @SamHarrisOrg @bariweiss @BretWeinstein @joerogan @esaagar
âIâve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,â Trump booms from a speakerphone. âHeâs a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it â Jeffrey enjoys his social life.â - @NYMag
What was that about? Jeffrey Epstein was not a âdisgraced financierâ, 14 year olds are not âBeautiful womenâŠon the younger side.â
Was Trump sending us a message, a warning or a confession? Whatever it was, itâs a big deal. Time to revisit this article:
https://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/#print
I once again note people reading things in that I didnât write. I canât help you. The difference between making a confession and sending us a warning about Epstein covers a *lot* of possible territory.
Think before assuming.
Many appear to be on the lookout for any and all issues that allow authoritarians to concentrate power. So far we have:
A) Child trafficking.
B) Climate catastrophe.
C) âX is actually a public health issue.â
D) Society is Structurally bigoted/Evil.
E) âItâs a PANDEMIC people!â
B) and E) are traditionally somewhat compelling but are clearly now being used by leaders. The others are transparently not compelling. Epstein taught us no one in office cares about child trafficking enough to get to the bottom of what was going on w/ our government and Epstein.
Disagree? Okay: Hold one brutal hearing this year on Epstein, the records of his mysterious Hedge Fund, child trafficking and any links between Epstein and Intelligence communities.
Iâll wait. Will apologize if it happens.
Cc: @alexstamos
So the problem is that climate and pandemic may require coordinated action. But there is seemingly no one honest & competent enough to forgo the opportunity to spread authoritarian control to surveillance, censorship, and expectations of obedience inconsistent with free society.
Iâd support the need of public spirited government to narrowly tell us what to do in the most limited of legitimate circumstances requiring coordination beyond our usual.
I donât support what Iâm seeing which is institutional fetish for using pandemic, climate, etc for control.
We have to rid ourselves of a class of authoritarians who want to turn everything into a catastrophe requiring the surrender of our personal freedom & privacy.
By the same token, sometimes there is a war or pandemic. And you may need war-time leaders over peacetime careerists.đ
âIn todayâs regulatory environment Itâs virtually impossible to violate rules. And this is something the public really doesnât understand...Itâs impossible for a violation to go undetected; certainly not for an extended period of time.â -Former NASDQ Chairman, Bernie Madoff
This is what institutional betrayal looks like when you stare straight in its eyes: relaxed, confident, respectable, smooth, knowledgeable.
Itâs COVID pronouncements. Or String Theory. Or CPI revisions. Or âLabor Shortagesâ. Or fast-track trade treaties:
Many years ago 2002-6, I would give talks about Madoff & Epstein using âBlack Arts Capital LLCâ as a proxy, with the tag line âWeâd tell you what weâre doing, but then...â
I guessed BM might be front-running his own business. Boy was I wrong on the specifics.
RIP Bernie Madoff.
I think folks get confused that Jeffrey Epstein was valued for providing sex to his circle.
I donât think thatâs right. Many in his circle had access to sex.
You have to take a next step to see it.
The thing Epstein offered that his friends just couldnât get...was silence.
Think Iâm wrong? Then where are any competent probing articles on this story in national news media.
Every one of us who talks about this story knows fear. I do. All the time. Fear is the product. Sex silenced by terror.
Are you a reporter? Then why havenât you filed the story?
Ask for the hedge fund filings. Ask on the whereabouts of the contents of his Villard House office. Then try to get some rest.
Not so easy as it sounded right?
No, Epstein provided a blackout curtain of silence woven from implied terror. And you need state cooperation for that. Usual Disclaimer: I am not feeling suicidal and have no further knowledge beyond what I put out months ago. I am not a threat as I only met him once briefly and have no other intimate secrets requiring my silence. Iâm now just a broken record that everyone has heard before.
Itâs so weird what the internet chooses to infer. Obviously Iâm worried about a tie back to some unit of Israeli intelligence. Itâs Robert Maxwellâs daughter for Godsake.
The internet fixates generally & internet Israel critics more than most. Internet inference is very weird. https://t.co/J7rnjkNDYO
Some of my motivation is to communicate that *if* some unit in Israel is ultimately directly implicated, it sure as hell isnât âThe Jewsâ or âIsraelâ that is behind this. That ordinary Jews would risk everything to stop such techniques. And Iâm willing to make the point concrete.
Do I know that it is Israel behind this? No. Do I think one nation acted alone? Iâm not even positive that Epstein was state sponsored. What do I believe? That Israel and the US WERE part of a GROUP of national ICs that turned a blind eye to child sex trafficking at a *minimum*.
How big is that group? Well, I believe *If* it exists it contains at least 2 nations not 1. And while I love Israel and have lived there, Iâm very worried about the universal silence over this.
Why am I doing this? In part to stand up for 2 countries I *love* & fear went wrong.
Israel has had some terrible operations (e.g. Lillehammer) like the US (e.g. Cointelpro). And their strength comes from being strong enough to face those horrors when the happen.
And I believe in my 2 favorite nations enough to ask the questions whose answers I fear to my soul.
I have said this before. But the fixation on Israel never rests. So neither will its honest critics and its defenders. I would like to think I can count my self among both their ranks. End.
What would you say to the same needs in reverse? I, for example, want to know if Jeffrey Epstein had ties to the US intelligence community and has some measure of immunity to operate as a pedophile & trafficker.
Q: Was his Florida arrest what you call a âBlue on Blueâ screw up?
Q: I want to know if I am risking my life by repeatedly asking why no national news organization asks you on the obvious direct on-the-record questions about his financial records or ties to the intelligence communities including the FBI. Am I?
Q: Do our sources and methods permit a blind eye to child sex trafficking by foreign controlled agents?
Q: Does the FBI work with tech platforms to control the reach of citizens who ask these questions to you that the @nytimes @washingtonpost, @cnn & @npr conspicuously will not?
Q: Do you have the financial records & filings of Jeffrey Epsteinâs supposed âhedge fundâ offices at Villard house? If not, why not? If so, was there a Foreign Currency trading fund?
Q: Can the FBI be trusted with End to End encryption if it will not answer these questions? đ
Note Added To Thread: There is no way in hell any account of this size taking this crazy risk to ask direct questions to the FBI about Jeffrey Epstein and the Intelligence community has engagement numbers this low without interference from Twitter.
@jack: can you hear me?
Please quote tweet the top tweet in thread to counteract downranking by Twitter. We need these questions asked by our news media. Make this a story. Force them to simply do their job on what could be the biggest story of the decade & donât ever call @TwitterSafety âSafetyâ again.
Thanks for the invitation. I can try to explain my concern.
There really *is* a problem w MAGA, Trump, Qanon & conspiracy theories running rampant. And it will result in death & destruction if it spins out of control.
However it is being fueled by those who claim to fight it.
The entire war over fact checking is a war of 2 low resolution teams.
One team wants absolute freedom to spread wild eyed theories that just about everything is a psyop or a false flag.
The other team wants to impose institutional consensus reality on everyone via media & tech.
Unfortunately, I canât live under either. So each of the warring parties thinks Iâm against them & for the other team. In their mentalities if you arenât on their simplistic team you are, de facto, working for the other side. Thereâs no basic concept of *responsible* heterodoxy.
No the Freemasons do not run everything on behalf of pedophile reptilians who faked Sandy Hook with crisis actors.
Yes there are/were conspiracies behind Epstein, H1B, @MSNBC, PPE, climate science, the âGreat Moderationâ, Great Reset...everywhere institutions want a âconsensusâ.
Having spent a good portion of my 20s at Harvard, I know *exactly* how this game works. Our betters sit down and try to figure out how to control others behind closed doors. They see themselves as the intrinsically enlightened people who need to do the thinking for all of us.
When they wanted to cut our Social Security payments & raise our taxes they opted to try to change the CPI rather than pass legislation. When they wanted to pay less for scientists they knew to keep *silent* about NSF Labor Shortage claims even though such shortages donât exist.
These are the folks who tell you âmasks donât workâ rather than âsave masks for doctors as we forgot to restock them and moved all manufacturing to China like moronsâ. They will then spin on a dime to tell you âOnly bad dumb people donât wear masksâ. This is the worst of Harvard.
So I donât want Alex Jones and Qanon nor do I want @TwitterSafety, @msnbc and @Harvard. I see them as very different forms of the same thing: people who want to take away our ability to see clearly.
And, I assure you, @Harvard tries to paint anyone it canât control as dangerous.
So, my belief is that anyone who rejects/questions Davos, Consensus Reality, Institutional Narrative, Public Health Campaigns, High Immigration, Peer Review, Primary Election Coverage, Trust & Safety...will be treated as Alex Jones sooner or Later.
This is Managed Reality âą.
I cannot live in Managed Reality âą because I think it defeats the purpose of being a human being. It negates being an American. It abdicates responsibility for our children.
I have defeated Harvard about half the times we have fought. How? Because they just arenât that good.
Managed Reality âą has a weak spot. Itâs not run by our A-team anymore. Fauci isnât Francis Crick. Biden isnât Elon. Janet Yellen isnât Satoshi.
In general, the A-Team is going independent because tech/media/Ed are enforcing way too much conformity through personal destruction.
So why am I worried?
Well, Iâve been trying to save the institutions. Itâs probably doomed, but almost no one is trying to do what I do: rescue the institutions from their death spiral by reinserting their critics in positions of prominence (eg Chomsky at MIT).
Hence my fear.
If I were a tech guy Iâd retreat into wealth. If I were a professor Iâd shut up and collect my salary with job security. If I was a politician or journalist Iâd follow the other sheep.
But Iâm a science guy, an American and a dad. And I want my kids to have a particular future.
Thanks.
Normally I would think that our interests would be best served by self-investigation of the IC through redoing the Church/Pike Committees.
But given the hands closing around the throat of free unsurveiled action and open idea exchange, pardoning Assange and Snowden makes sense.
Or more simply put: if our bizarre press and elected representatives refuse to ASK about Jeffrey Epsteinâs links to the Intelligence world, what choice do we have but pardoning those who do the work abdicated by government & the press while they cowardly refuse to do their jobs?
I should also say that the problem isnât as simple as Assange & Snowden. Assume for the moment that they both acted in a principled fashion and did so with great care. Youâd still have the issue that pardons send a signal to less principled actors which could be catastrophic.
We need an intelligence community we can trust to *not* be open. That is the conundrum we face. How do we gain oversight and protect ourselves against a secret world that we want to remain opaque?
This is a giant liability of not being able to rest on a shared national culture.
2020
I predict an escalating series of tragic spectacular coincidences surrounding Jeffrey Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell, our press, our wealthy and our intelligence communities.
Because Quantum Mechanics! Or because Black Lives Matter!! Or Something. Yep. Must be quantum or racism...
Jeffrey Epstein: coincidence magnet.
The âfair coinâ that comes up tails every time. Because no one wants to be labeled a conspiracy theorist.
As a Mathematician I can say that this IS statistically possible. As a human, I would say donât listen to me as a mathematician here... https://x.com/PalmerReport/s/PalmerReport/status/1285063675221606400
Listen carefully: you donât have to elect Biden or Trump.
The world has woken up via being suddenly shut in doors by crazy incompetent people largely born in the 1940s and 1950s without a coherent explanation. Or plan.
Lives lost. Nurses sacrificed. Jobs & businesses destroyed.
You donât have to take these choices. *Nobody* smart wants these people except to defeat each other. You donât really like Fox. Or CNN. Or the NYT. Except when they go after your enemies.
Okay. So go cold turkey. Call them all what they are: The UnWorkables.
You would be better off with a thoughtful and competent 45 year old electrician or self made businessperson as president. Almost no ordinary people have family business interests in China or Ukraine. Chose anyone without dementia. Pick someone who canât remember the moon landing.
Pick someone who never met Jeffrey Epstein. Pick someone who can code or with a masters degree or better in STEM.
You donât have to keep picking the card the magician is forcing you to select as your card. Itâs not YOUR card. Itâs the magicianâs card. Grab the magicians wrist.
That card says âBidenâ. Take that card and a lighter and set it on fire. Then grab the deck and pick another card, rifle it to check for markings on the back, look to see if they all say Biden, and chose a different card at random. This was never a primary. There was no election.
If the enormous generation of you young folk canât use this mismanagement of a pandemic by a bipartisan kleptocratic gerontocracy, then you arenât thinking like young folk at all. Demand your debt free future and the removal of this preposterous class of ancient legacy predators.
Learned helplessness is UnAmerican. This is like China or Russia controlling our minds from a bad sci-fi thriller. But we are being controlled by our grandparents and parents instead. And they donât care.
This is beyond insane and it has never been like this. Ever.
Rant over.
Where are we on State-Sponsored pedophilia honey-pots?
Letâs try the following: How can we be sure that China, Russia or Iran wasnât behind Epstein if we canât ask the question of Epsteinâs ties to intelligence? So either we KNOW his tie, or we are leaving a giant security hole.
Why is that anti-interesting? Wouldnât we want to be sure that Epsteinâs fortune didnât come from China, Russia, etc.? Thus we either *know* that it didnât and arenât reporting what we know, or we have left the door open to the states that we are certain are trying to control us.
Pursue this even further: if news desks arenât asking these questions, arenât they under suspicion of being under control of foreign or domestic intelligence? That is can we essentially back out that some intelligence has captured legacy media if they arenât willing to *ask* Qs?
Let me say as someone old enough to remember Watergate & the Church Committee, as recently as 40-50 years ago journalists would pursue stories about dirty tricks and Intelligence excesses. The phrase âNo Commentâ is familiar to anyone my age from this time.
Where is that phrase?
It is an entire concept that has disappeared: institutional accountability with institutions going after institutions rather than institutions going after those individuals who are the only ones who are still really raising questions.
The digital layer allows us to measure the market demand for many genuinely fascinating topics in which the legacy journalism layer pretends to take zero interest.
Odd. Guaranteed markets on real topics. Zero interest. Ownership of media by interests who do not need profit.
The digital layer allows us to to see reporters following people they never acknowledge even exist.
Who really cares? Why does it matter? Because institutions agree never to treat as real that which remains confined to the digital layer alone. Hence the reason weâve stagnated.
Iâd like to know where the âlast known whereabouts of Ghislaine Maxwellâ and âlocation of Epstein trading records from Villard Houseâ and âties to intelligenceâ investigations are stalled out. Even where these stories ran into brick walls would be fascinating. Where is the DISC?
My simple take on conspiracies: Looking at the @AndrewYang @MSNBC series, itâs clear that this is not a repeating accident. However what weâre really worrying about is this. What happens if we start to acknowledge these cryptic power moves? Does the world become Qanon & InfoWars?
If we teach COINTELPRO do we start believing in Reptilians? If we acknowledge the Powell Memo, do we believe in Illuminati next? Does questioning Epsteinâs death and any connection of his to intelligence communities legitimize all of Pizzagate? Does Jean Seberg destroy all news?
Does our suspicion that the Warren Report was used to silence questions around JFK open up the idea that our government is illegitimate when it releases findings?
Sadly, the answer is that weâre falling into 3 types. Conspiracy deniers, Conspiracy nuts & a tiny third group.
The deniers fear legitimizing deep questions & concern about ground truth, interests, power, leverage, cryptic organizations, etc. Better to avoid the slippery slope without near certain evidence they say.
Nuts want hidden order everywhere. They want to be in on a secret world.
The third group (mine) has had it with both of these groups. We know enough to discuss Type I vs Type II error. We donât know whatâs going on most of the time so the nutters make us crazy. We also donât believe that Jeffrey Epsteinâs coverage is normal. We can map irregularity.
We also know we can be wrong & donât think that makes us nutters or dupes. Itâs Type I vs Type II error & we refuse to get all weird because it involves conspiracies. This is a normal thing to think about unless you know ABSOLUTELY nothing about the history of proven conspiracy!
Two of the most important issues at the moment in this space are about the news:
A) What is the explanation for the bizarre coverage of Jeffrey Epstein?
B) What is the explanation for the bizarre coverage every 4 years of popular candidates outside the system gaining traction?
We know enough to know that something is wildly off in both cases but we donât know exactly what. That makes both the Nutters & the deniers extremely uncomfortable with us. We may be near certain something is off like nutters but reject detailed theories w/o proof like deniers.
My conclusion is simple: consider joining us. If youâve outgrown radical pro-life v pro-choice. If youâre too smart for pure capitalism vs communism. If you canât get the old camps to work for you, consider taking Type I vs II approach to conspiracies. As you would anything else.
2019
I think folks arenât getting at all what Iâm saying. I donât disagree that Epstein was a sociopath. That *was* my read of him. But there was a 2nd layer. A role,mission or job. The two were in conflict. The sociopath just wasnât focused enough on science/trading to play the role. https://t.co/2xMDu6IeIL
For 15 Yrs starting before his Florida conviction, Iâve said that Epstein was a âconstructâ because that sociopath could not have constructed that unnatural role by himself. My guess has been that someone/thing hired a sociopath to play a different one focused on science/trading.
So did he fool me? Perhaps. If he has no connection to any intelligence community, he fooled me. If he really cared about science he fooled me. If he really ran a ccy trading strategy out of Villard house he fooled me. If he was a genius he fooled me. If this wasnât kayfabe..
But intelligence communities do create assets. They do fit them with backstories and characters to play. That is my guess here. And the role that was being played was a badly drawn Gatsby-Bond like character who would never blink. So, am I wrong? Was this bastard state-protected?
Youâll note that Iâm completely agnostic in this theory as to whether the underlying sociopath would commit suicide given the opportunity. Maybe! How would I know? I wouldnât.
What I do know is that if he was playing a role, his character as written would never commit suicide.
What Iâve been trying to focus folks on is that thereâs likely more than one layer here. There was a sick man & a separate role he wasnât fully able to play. Poke at the role: ccy trading, Villard House, IC contacts, associates, tax evasion, etc and see it all come crashing down.
The Jeffrey Epstein I met would NEVER have killed himself. Lots of folks met him. His was a bizarre personality: find me anyone he met who found that personality compatible with a simple suicide.
If JE just hung himself, then the person we met was a character played by an actor. https://t.co/vpeqp2hMkZ
For the record, I donât know that Jeffrey Epstein didnât commit suicide.
What I am confident saying is this:
âJeff Epstein, wasnât a secretive self-made Billionaire hedge fund trading genius who simply just committed suicide w/o any ties to intelligence groups worth reporting.â
I absolutely AM saying that the lack of a vigorous and serious investigation by news media into his reported death and ties to intelligence befitting the severity of this story is essentially *proof* that there is NO functioning press in the United States. We now lack journalism.
A leprechaun said to an elf, âOur news is no longer top shelf, I mean what the âFâ, I donât know that Jeff- rey Epstein just killed himself.â
Said the Elf âI too must complain!
- No one* can locate Ghislaine?
I think that this time Iâll forgo my rhyme: This BS is now very scary.â
This is where I feel quite alone. Most friends in the developed world either close their eyes to our crimes (which are many & awful) or they go self hating & talk about the developed world as evil.
I LOVE the US, UK, AUS, Israel etc w/ eyes wide open for *struggling* to improve. https://x.com/holdenweb/stat/holdenweb/status/1188648675796496384
How great is it that I can tweet like this & still be alive despite openly calling for a second Church Committee to investigate the IC & its relationship to J Epstein for example? I can & do yell âTo hell with the Clintons, NYT & DJT.â
And Iâm still here. I frickinâ love the US.
Let me tell you whatâs totally & absolutely uninteresting: J Epsteinâs ties to the Intelligence Communities.
I commend our papers of record for not stooping to sell papers/win clicks even debunking such wild eyed theories. Ok: back to 24/7 coverage of the breaking slavery story.
BREAKING: Brexit, Rejection of the Lisbon Treaty, Jean Seberg, Andrew Yang, COINTELPRO, and Jeffrey Epsteinâs possible connections to Intelligence Communities may never have happened. Please return home.
[Letâs make this *the* issue. I canât live on a Truman show run by idiots.] https://t.co/nv6snNmVBf
Thatâs the home of my old congregation at Harvard: âWorship & Studyâ. Ugh.
Think about it this way. What would you fund if you wanted to observe & influence a good chunk of the future Jewish leaders within the US establishment? Harvard Hillel! For what was Epstein the front end?
How is this not an intelligence community issue at this point? Do we have no right to know whose asset this was and whether pedophilia was a bug or a feature of the choice to have Jeffrey Epstein play the role of âMysterious mega genius playboy currency traderâ? I still say bug.
Whoever authorized this thing to continue deserves what is coming. But this was probably a program run by a tiny number of people. We need to go after them rather than have them take down general faith in our national security apparatus. Which seems likely as this leaks further..
Letâs make this transparently obvious. What was Jeff Epsteinâs top trade of which anyone is aware?
Did he use prime brokerage? Did he have counterparties? Did he use an execution team? Did he buy execution algos? He claimed to be rich from trading. Ok. Give the best known one.
Iâll wait.
MIT engages in sensitive work. Epstein was acting oddly like a 1-man boutique funding agency after the US stepped away from certain funding.
A) Was Jeffrey Epstein a market genius?
B) If not, what thing X was funding Jeffrey Epstein?
C) Did MIT have a direct relationship to X?
https://x.com/dabeard/status/dabeard/status/1171592125936521216
It really feels to me like the pervert narrative is what brought an enormous covert structure into view and folks are treating it like the main story. But it seems to me that a large infrastructure was fronted by a badly drawn Gatsby character with no plausible source of wealth.
And the money isnât enough. Bill Gates didnât need the money. MIT didnât need dirty money that badly either. Jeffrey Epsteinâs public face was that of someone richer than 11 figures of net worth. And he just wasnât that rich.
Q: For what was Jeffrey Epstein the front end?
Epstein had an enormous secretive office in Midtown. I know because I dropped off trading materials there in 2004 before his Florida arrest brought him to light. If he was a self-made financial genius of supposedly infinite wealth there will be extensive records there. Anyone???
Why are we not focused on his office? Or am I also about to suddenly take my own life, have an unfortunate car accident, or meet a random lunatic for mentioning the obvious? If this is an intelligence operation why are we trusting intelligence to clean it up and investigate it?
Are we counting on MIT to research MIT? The NYT to report on the NYT? The intelligence community to investigate itself? Why is no one calling for a redo of the Church Committee?? This is not a genie that can go back into the bottle. No one can fake records of his trading prowess.
But by all means, do run yet another story on the âLolita Expressâ to âPedophile Islandâ as if thatâs the only story. We are all terrified to discuss the obvious. Follow the money. Where did this Dalton math teacher get so much? Where is the trading record? Money leaves a trail.
People tell me that news has now become commercial and that stories are simply constructed to sell papers/get clicks. This is just nonsense.
Nothing would get clicks, boost circulation or sell papers for a NYT/CNN/NPR like aggressively getting to the bottom of the Epstein story.
As I learned uncovering an immigration conspiracy to use visas to tamper with the free market for STEM labor by our national science complex, no news organization is trying to sell us the actual true stories that move news product organically. The stories we want are held back.
News is a lot like college admissions: itâs an insiders game. We know itâs rigged but canât quite figure out how.
Why take that kid/run that story? Why do you consistently have zero interest in the most interesting kids/stories?
Weâre just now learning *how* rigging works.
Take the current totally synthetic & transparent push for âauthoritative sourcesâ. Such sources would be the ones warning in 2005 that the âGreat Moderationâ was a lie & that a crash loomed. Someone like @nntaleb. Yet they mean the opposite. They mean cheerleaders like @nytimes.
Underrated cryptic tweets that I placed 9 years ago for future use. Unnoticed with *zero* likes in almost a decade.
Yes, our government developed a plan for rounding up people who could contradict the GIN. Thereâs a plan for a coming total collapse of confidence in our system.
The Gated Institutional Narrative or GIN is that which Section A of the reserve index was repurposed to protect. Itâs the false story of us as a country, and right now nobody smart has any idea why we shouldnât call for an independent investigation of the Gated Epstein narrative.
Seriously, you shouldnât believe it from me. If you think the idea of rounding up innocent professors, rich people, labor leaders, newscasters, professionals, etc is nutty....hey so do I. It sounds crazy.
So go search on that string. Tell me how you make out.
Whoâs crazy now?
1/ Long-time followers of this feed will note that I smuggle ideas at times. One of which is that itâs in societyâs best interest to pay certain groups vastly more money, and usually groups that infuriate me. If you look at Jeffrey Epsteinâs stable of scientists you may get why.
2/ Think of the underpaid U.S. research community (particularly theoretical physicists, molecular biologists, ML-experts & top mathematicians) as an unlocked Yellow Bugatti with the motor running and âSteal Meâ painted in red on the front hood, in Mandarin/Farsi/Russian/Arabic...
3/ Epstein offered many scientists ârestorationâ by dangling private planes, exotic locales & FUNDING (probably more than sex) the way colleges at Oxford and Cambridge use cellars and high table. We need to fire our worst researchers & start paying our best at a different scale.
4/ Were I Epstein or whoever created the âJeffrey Epstein Secretive Finacial Genius characterâ, my scientific targets would have partially overlapped his. But Iâd have bought off the entire IAS physics department outright. Those people should all be made very wealthy & happy.
End/ Oddly, Epstein was buying quite good people, but many who were distinguished by being outward facing rather than the quiet introverted types famous within the fields yet all but unknown outside of them. Thatâs a puzzle. Maybe they were the lure to entrap others. Or perhaps..
Like the Drake Equation, I feel we need an Epstein Equation to measure an asymptotically vanishing probability that the official simple story is true w/ each new bizarre development.
Just multiply a lot of small probabilities together to see how fast a product goes toward zero.
#IHaveZeroInterestInComittingSuicide #IDoNotIntendToShutUpAboutEpstein
I will be discussing the Epstein situation. At least thatâs my intention. But anyone can be silenced; I met him & it scared the hell out of me. He was not a financier. Some âthingâ had set him up to play one.
My predictions for what happens next in the Epstein death:
A) Lots of low quality conspiracy theorizing followed by: B) A call for platforms to 'Do something!' to stop A). C) New 'reasons' why G Maxwell and L Wexner can't be made to fill in the details.
This is such bullshit.
This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.