Are children capable of committing fornication?

[Space Merchant]

1 minute ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

So, when will Bill Clinton, who I understand took 27 trips to Epstein's sex Island on his private  Boeing 727 jet, "The Lolita Express", be indicted?

As soon as the skeletons come falling out of the closet, for all the dotted lines will eventually connect. Epstein was a sick, very sick person and an immoral pedophile. One way he can be tagged easily is by means of Epstein's collection of recordings, for Epstein not only had a tendency to record his victims, but also those who are on his island.

He says he knows nothing, for to quote a source, it is said, Former President Bill Clinton denied knowing anything about the “terrible crimes” allegedly committed by billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein. In a statement released Monday, Clinton said he took 4 trips with Epstein in 2002 and 2003: 1 to Europe, one to Asia and 2 to Africa.

That being said, we didn't forget about Clinton's siphoning, the death of Seth, Klaus and others, Ms. Beck sent into hiding, etc, and evidently it will come back to haunt him as the events with Epstein unfold.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

They forgot about the "Lolita Express"'s pilots flight logs that are in effect a passenger manifest with everyone on every flight documented in the Pilot's own handwriting.

Now is about the time for all those surrounding the Clintons to start dying of heart attacks, airplane accidents, and suicides.

[JW Insider]

9 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

As soon as the skeletons come falling out of the closet, for all the dotted lines will eventually connect. Epstein was a sick, very sick person and an immoral pedophile. One way he can be tagged easily is by means of Epstein's collection of recordings, for Epstein not only had a tendency to record his victims, but also those who are on his island.

This is based on a mashup of ideas based on a quick reading of online and newspaper "revelations" that appear to quote from sometimes credible sources.

I understand that a lot of online sources about Epstein, including Wikipedia, got a Clinton wipe-down up until just the day before Clinton's press release minimizing his contact with Epstein. But it wasn't just Bill Clinton. It seems that names of almost all Democrats were removed from some of these sources as far as possible. But Twitter is now seeing a re-freshening of some of these sources through those who have taken an interest in the Epstein case for years.

In fact, NY's Southern District Court wants to take on this case, no doubt as a followup on the Mueller investigation into Trump that didn't take it as far as they hoped. That's a court with heavy behind-the-scenes Democrats who can't stand the fact that Trump has been an excellent president for those with Republican political values, and a lot of extra Democrats who overlap with Republican political values. This means that Trump is pretty sure to win again unless they can take him down by scandal.

I think Pelosi's daughter just said that it will take down some Democrats, too. And even the man who wrote Trump Nation, being interviewed a lot lately for his anti-Trump stance, is admitting that many high-level Democrats are also shaking in their boots, in case Epstein has off-shore vaults full of "life insurance." (His own life insurance, in the sense that Alan Dershowitz and others are probably under obligation to send out a lot of "envelopes" if anything happens to Epstein.)

As much as I hate "conspiracy" theories, this one really does appear to go right to the top of all political circles -- and that's by design.

When Acosta got him such a lenient sentence and illegally determined to offer Epstein a plea deal without informing the victim plaintiffs, he often claimed that he was innocent because this case was being monitored at all levels of government, and all told him he was doing a good job. We have to wonder why it was being monitored at all levels of government.

Also those who realize that Democrats have tried to misuse this against Trump, probably forget that Trump's time with Epstein included time when Trump was a Democrat and was hanging around with his great pal Democrats, the Clintons, and others.

But in truth, you should also watch the people who are recusing themselves from the current upcoming case, and start listening again to things that Acosta said when being interviewed about whether he thought his history with Epstein would hurt him, when Trump wanted him to be the Labor Secretary.

If this is true, [dailybeast source] it might be the whole key to whether Epstein is prosecuted as expected, or gets another deal. The current NY case no longer accepts the immunity of the men who kidnapped orphans and homeless girls for Epstein's underage prostitution rings. This provides for a set of "fall guys" to make it look like the court did its thing while appearing to give Epstein a harsh enough punishment while actually giving him a pass like Acosta did last time. (He was previously sentenced to jail, but was also told he only had to show up about one day a week to jail, and could spend the other six days running his business.)

His actual business, as you've said or implied, was probably based on a single source bankrolling a scam hedge fund operation that really seems like its actual source of growth was funded through a blackmail operation. With only one known name in his business, and no records of any Wall Street trades or investments, it appears that his entire operation could have been funded in the following way:

1. Invite interesting people, high level politicians, and a mix of billionaires to lavish parties.
2. Make sure that the parties include a lot of free drinking and 16 year old girls (he has victimized into prostitution) who can pass for 18 or 19.
3. Hope that at least one billionaire, or connected politician with a lot to lose will end up taking one of the "19" year olds to a conveniently wired bedroom.
4. Let the victim know the next day that she was 16, and that the solution to Epstein's silence is a hefty investment in his fund, with 5 percent fee payments to keep the money "managed."
5. Take advantage of the fact that some high level politicians and billionaires will learn of Epstein's ability to procure 16 year old girls and pay a lot of money for sex with them with or without blackmail involved.

But what if Epstein has been protected all these years because the CIA uses sexual scandal leverage against people all the time, and this is who Epstein's secret bank-rollers really were all along? In that case, I expect very little real success in a case against him. What gets found in his blackmail vaults will likely be filtered by whomever has the authority to look at it first. (Remember the Mayflower Madam? or DC Madam)

[JW Insider]

I added point number 5, because yesterday on WNYC I heard a person call in to a well-respected NYC talk show, and as what happened to a lawsuit that was supposedly brought against Trump over an event that might have been 30 years ago, where a mother brought suit for her young daughter who was supposedly raped by Trump. I heard it and thought, oh boy, obviously something like this would have been brought up during the last presidential election if it were true, and someone is clearly grasping at straws to denigrate Trump. To my surprise, the host knew very little about it but the interviewee appeared to have a lot of details about it and said the mother dropped the case because they were getting too many death threats, and feared for her life.

Then I see someone posting elsewhere, a realistic looking court document from 1989 that sues both Trump and Epstein together for a rape of a 13 year old girl. I'm assuming that this is the same case.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

It will be interesting to see who gets caught in the "honey trap", and who escape.

At the very least.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

I suspect that both political parties, and their leadership, are quaking in their boots, but the Democrats have the natural advantage, as they openly embrace every sort of evil and mental aberrations, and therefore have limited immunity to charges of hypocrisy.

The Republicans stand for wholesome values (as a general rule), but are incompetent and are easily sandbagged, and when they do the same things the Democrats do, are open to massive charges of hypocrisy.

I think that was a good point you made, JWI, that if Trump is involved, it was probably (?) back when he was a Democrat.

My best guess is, however is that he was not involved. Primarily because he supposedly has never drank alcoholic beverages.

It's like the old Chinese blessing and curse .....

"May you live in interesting times."

I fully expect to see a LOT of "convenient" deaths among the key players real soon, with the biggest pile among the Clinton associates.

 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

4 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I think that was a good point you made, JWI, that if Trump is involved, it was probably (?) back when he was a Democrat.

Here is a prosecutor who says when he was investigating yet another charge against Epstein years ago, Trump was the only one among high-profile people who responded to his requests for information:

https://truepundit.com/trump-was-only-one-to-help-prosecutor-in-2009-epstein-case/

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

...................... As a quick off-topic aside ... does anyone have any latest information about any Congregational Sanctions against a Brother or Sister whose conscience compels them to vote in a Presidential Election? ....................... Things change so often I get strobe shock from all the "new light", and lose track.

[TrueTomHarley]

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

As much as I hate "conspiracy" theories

As near as I can tell, Jehovah’s Witnesses buy into conspiracy theories in no greater proportion than the general population. It is a little surprising, since they have become privy to the greatest conspiracy theory of all—that involving “false religion.”

As for me, I find myself nibbling at the edges, and in some cases accepting them. If I follow anything on Twitter, I make a point also of following its polar opposite. Sometimes i find the polar opposite point of view to be represented much more persuasively than the common wisdom.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

9 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

As near as I can tell, Jehovah’s Witnesses buy into conspiracy theories in no greater proportion than the general population.

Did you use actual MATH?

How do you tell what is proportionate without data sets to compare?

OOPS, sorry ... you did qualify your statement "As far as I can tell ..."

.... never mind.

... as an aside .... did you know that Chewbacca is actually a suspected mutated Polar Bear? That's why he always wears that ammunition bandolier over his shoulder, everywhere he goes ... the .... *coff* .... right to Bear arms.

 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

Just now, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

OOPS, sorry ... you did qualify your statement "As far as I can tell ..."

.... never mind.

It never occurred to me that this statement would provoke such a response. What is your take? That JWs all think the moon landing was staged?

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

5 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

It never occurred to me that this statement would provoke such a response. What is your take? That JWs all think the moon landing was staged?

OF COURSE!

The July 20, 1969 Moon Landing was , as everyone in the know, knows, was filmed on a movie set on Mars!