Adam - Wow. I just read some of the comments and they were far more hostile and argumentative than I think this deserved. You took a different and interesting perspective on this list, which was refreshing and thought provoking. While I personally think it would be interesting to see the list, the list alone doesn’t prove anything other than some people have questionable taste in friends. The list alone is not evidence that one is a pervert or child molester. It casts suspicion on people and in the political world that’s all one side needs to try and assassinate the character of an opponent from the other side. Slight suspicion and innuendo. The list is, at best, only the starting point of an inquiry or investigation, not the final answer.
And by the way, one comment attempted to distinguish between children under 13 and “mid-teens.” The law makes no such distinction, and a 45 or 50 year old man enticing a 15 or 16 year old teenager into having sex is, in the eyes of the law and in my personal viewpoint, exactly the same as doing the that with an 11 or 12 year old. It’s vile and reprehensible and criminal in either case.
Don’t despair Adam. Your commentary was thought provoking, not something people should be casting aspersions and arguing over in a mean spirited manner. I think we’re all basically on the same side with this question and people are really in violent agreement…adults who have sex with children…which is defined by the law as basically anyone under 18…are vile and despicable and should be punished under the law. Epstein was a bad, evil man. Got it. The elites who engage in such activity should be punished. All agreed. The reality? Some people get away with crime and those who do are not all elites. Elites have an advantage because of money and friends. That shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone with at least a room temperature IQ. Your basic premise…I don’t care about the list because it proves nothing…is not faulty. As I said, the list is the first step, not the last. Whether anything useful would come from taking more steps is another question.
Hope you and yours have a wonderful Christmas Eve, a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Be careful out there.
Thank you for the kind words. My objective is to make people think and challenge concepts occasionally. I don't expect everyone to agree but I just want people to have good faith when interpreting my words.
Refreshingly Well reasoned article! Unfortunately people will use this release of names as a political tool. When the real issue is children being exploited whether left or right or on some list.
Yes, the big question is that can be believe anything these days from the media or any other source ? It’s an ongoing issue who we believe or calling a lier… besides ‘if it stinks, must be sh.t around’ it’s extremely difficult to find out the truth as the overwhelming quantity of layers produced by liberal universities finding excuses, cover-ups even for the most obviously rotten cases/people…..
Alan Dershowitz has asked for the records to be released and he was personally accused, erroneously...likely to be on the list. He wants it released anyway so maybe there is a good reason why? I really don’t care, especially since you make a point about it not being de facto evidence of anything...on its own. Left-wing X is salivating at the idea it is Trump. I really hate when they get their way.
Right-wingers went nuts over Epstiein because he was a Democrat. Yes, he associated with Trump; he associated with a lot of people. They make a big deal out of people flying to his private island but fail to understand that the women who were there were models and were in their late teens and twenties. He's accused of being a pedophile when the girls he hired to give him massages in Florida were all in their mid-teens (and thus no longer children. Pedophiles prey on CHILDREN, who are younger than thirteen.) Epstein was a con-man and he had some sexual perversions. He was convicted in Florida. He may have been guilty of flying an underage girl from New York to New Mexico and having sex with her but "underage" means different things in different states. My personal opinion is that those women decided to get money out of Epstein after they were older. Virginia Guiferre is the worst of the lot. She's accused just about every well-known person in the world of having sex with her when she was working for Epstein. She is connected to Donald Trump; she was working for him at Mar Lago when Maxwell met her and offered her a job with Epstein. Actually, I don't think she's accused Trump of anything.
A left imprisoning citizens because they’re on some FBI list as being in DC on 1/6 is ok, but citizens looking askance at elites on a pedo list shouldn’t be doing so?
That you failed to note the parallel between lists and gov honesty, or lack thereof, was the root of my comment. Not everything is about Trump. But to use lists to castigate one side while not using an exactly analogous situation to balance the piece seemed worth pointing out. It’s like you decided that only Trumpers can use a list dishonestly while refusing or failing to note the extraordinary - violative of 1A - dishonesty in other government lists.
I appreciate your engagement with a reader. It’s your article, not mine. I just found it odd, as I noted above. We can agree to disagree as adults, right?
Some massive Q Anon run out of a pizza store or wtf it was is stretching a lot; a honey trap for a few; and it would only be a few; would be more reasonable. Cherry on the top; you'd get plenty of horny middle-aged you could guilt-by-association. The 'Squad' showed up and the Dems rep really toileted. "No smoke without fire"; so get a smoke generator. Eric Weinstein has a strange story of meeting the guy on Chris Williamson's YouTube. Well worth a listen; he believes Epstein doesn't add up as a "real" person. That may be part of the cover: the thing looks so crazy when you scratch the surface that anyone would only look deeper when there was a background of perhaps lesser crazy to see it against. The world accelerated tech/media wise and here we are: whatever it is/was couldn't be as well curated anymore. Further effort would only risk exposure of stuff besides Epstein. I don't know a list will help or hinder owt; we already know a lot of faces already and like I said; I think most of them are opportune targets: whoever will say "Tah very much", but all the Trumps and Windsors do is muddy the waters and add to the maskirovka. They areb't the main event; just something to draw the scent for the prurient and the yellow press. They are an accidental or deliberate Body of Lies. Watch the Weinstein interview; at least his thinking might allow us to ignore distractors and try and see what is actually going on.
Adam - Wow. I just read some of the comments and they were far more hostile and argumentative than I think this deserved. You took a different and interesting perspective on this list, which was refreshing and thought provoking. While I personally think it would be interesting to see the list, the list alone doesn’t prove anything other than some people have questionable taste in friends. The list alone is not evidence that one is a pervert or child molester. It casts suspicion on people and in the political world that’s all one side needs to try and assassinate the character of an opponent from the other side. Slight suspicion and innuendo. The list is, at best, only the starting point of an inquiry or investigation, not the final answer.
And by the way, one comment attempted to distinguish between children under 13 and “mid-teens.” The law makes no such distinction, and a 45 or 50 year old man enticing a 15 or 16 year old teenager into having sex is, in the eyes of the law and in my personal viewpoint, exactly the same as doing the that with an 11 or 12 year old. It’s vile and reprehensible and criminal in either case.
Don’t despair Adam. Your commentary was thought provoking, not something people should be casting aspersions and arguing over in a mean spirited manner. I think we’re all basically on the same side with this question and people are really in violent agreement…adults who have sex with children…which is defined by the law as basically anyone under 18…are vile and despicable and should be punished under the law. Epstein was a bad, evil man. Got it. The elites who engage in such activity should be punished. All agreed. The reality? Some people get away with crime and those who do are not all elites. Elites have an advantage because of money and friends. That shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone with at least a room temperature IQ. Your basic premise…I don’t care about the list because it proves nothing…is not faulty. As I said, the list is the first step, not the last. Whether anything useful would come from taking more steps is another question.
Hope you and yours have a wonderful Christmas Eve, a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Be careful out there.
Thank you for the kind words. My objective is to make people think and challenge concepts occasionally. I don't expect everyone to agree but I just want people to have good faith when interpreting my words.
God bless and Merry Christmas.
Refreshingly Well reasoned article! Unfortunately people will use this release of names as a political tool. When the real issue is children being exploited whether left or right or on some list.
Yes, the big question is that can be believe anything these days from the media or any other source ? It’s an ongoing issue who we believe or calling a lier… besides ‘if it stinks, must be sh.t around’ it’s extremely difficult to find out the truth as the overwhelming quantity of layers produced by liberal universities finding excuses, cover-ups even for the most obviously rotten cases/people…..
Totally agree!
Alan Dershowitz has asked for the records to be released and he was personally accused, erroneously...likely to be on the list. He wants it released anyway so maybe there is a good reason why? I really don’t care, especially since you make a point about it not being de facto evidence of anything...on its own. Left-wing X is salivating at the idea it is Trump. I really hate when they get their way.
Right-wingers went nuts over Epstiein because he was a Democrat. Yes, he associated with Trump; he associated with a lot of people. They make a big deal out of people flying to his private island but fail to understand that the women who were there were models and were in their late teens and twenties. He's accused of being a pedophile when the girls he hired to give him massages in Florida were all in their mid-teens (and thus no longer children. Pedophiles prey on CHILDREN, who are younger than thirteen.) Epstein was a con-man and he had some sexual perversions. He was convicted in Florida. He may have been guilty of flying an underage girl from New York to New Mexico and having sex with her but "underage" means different things in different states. My personal opinion is that those women decided to get money out of Epstein after they were older. Virginia Guiferre is the worst of the lot. She's accused just about every well-known person in the world of having sex with her when she was working for Epstein. She is connected to Donald Trump; she was working for him at Mar Lago when Maxwell met her and offered her a job with Epstein. Actually, I don't think she's accused Trump of anything.
Have I got this right?
A left imprisoning citizens because they’re on some FBI list as being in DC on 1/6 is ok, but citizens looking askance at elites on a pedo list shouldn’t be doing so?
You’re kidding, right?
1. Where did I say that it was okay or even make reference to January 6th at all?
2. I literally said I understand why people are looking for this list and know it comes from a good place.
3. I'm not kidding because that's not what I was implying at all. Wanting justice is fine.
4. Re-read what I actually said because this is a terribly bad faith interpretation of this 700 word article.
That you failed to note the parallel between lists and gov honesty, or lack thereof, was the root of my comment. Not everything is about Trump. But to use lists to castigate one side while not using an exactly analogous situation to balance the piece seemed worth pointing out. It’s like you decided that only Trumpers can use a list dishonestly while refusing or failing to note the extraordinary - violative of 1A - dishonesty in other government lists.
The lack of talking about something or someone doesn't mean I am permitting something. I'm specific about who I'm talking about for a reason.
Not talking about something doesn't mean I'm agreeing with it and that's a terrible assumption.
I didn't say everything was about Trump, I was using this as a singular example. I'm not even saying they're using the list dishonestly but you are.
Like I said, none of this has anything to do with January 6th. If you want it to be, write your own article.
I appreciate your engagement with a reader. It’s your article, not mine. I just found it odd, as I noted above. We can agree to disagree as adults, right?
Correct, we can agree to disagree. Have a good one.
Thank you. Merry Christmas to you & yours.
Some massive Q Anon run out of a pizza store or wtf it was is stretching a lot; a honey trap for a few; and it would only be a few; would be more reasonable. Cherry on the top; you'd get plenty of horny middle-aged you could guilt-by-association. The 'Squad' showed up and the Dems rep really toileted. "No smoke without fire"; so get a smoke generator. Eric Weinstein has a strange story of meeting the guy on Chris Williamson's YouTube. Well worth a listen; he believes Epstein doesn't add up as a "real" person. That may be part of the cover: the thing looks so crazy when you scratch the surface that anyone would only look deeper when there was a background of perhaps lesser crazy to see it against. The world accelerated tech/media wise and here we are: whatever it is/was couldn't be as well curated anymore. Further effort would only risk exposure of stuff besides Epstein. I don't know a list will help or hinder owt; we already know a lot of faces already and like I said; I think most of them are opportune targets: whoever will say "Tah very much", but all the Trumps and Windsors do is muddy the waters and add to the maskirovka. They areb't the main event; just something to draw the scent for the prurient and the yellow press. They are an accidental or deliberate Body of Lies. Watch the Weinstein interview; at least his thinking might allow us to ignore distractors and try and see what is actually going on.