www.Tobold.com
Tobold@GMail.com
A blog with my thoughts regarding games I am playing and other stuff in life. Please read my Terms of Service
RSS Feed
Monday, July 21, 2025
The Epstein Files, reasonably
Like to many people with left-of-center opinions, to me it feels like karmic justice when Donald Trump gets in trouble over the Epstein files. Trump has frequently used conspiracy theories to further his politics, and now he is in trouble with the sort of conspiracy theorist loonies that he encouraged in his base. Having said that, to me it appears that the Department of Justice is doing the only thing that is both reasonable and legal, and it feels strange to criticize them and the administration for that.
The fundamental problem of the "Epstein Files" is that it is very, very unlikely that a document exists in which an important person is a) named as a "client", b) the illegal sexual services provided to that "client" are described, and c) it is described for what that "client" was then blackmailed. That is not to say that there were no important people who got invited to Epstein's private island, had sex with minors there, and were later asked to do something for him. It is just that no criminal in his right mind would make a list of these things and document them in a was that would be valid evidence in a court. Because obviously these things incriminate the provider of underage sexual services and blackmailer even more than it incriminates his clients.
It is also extremely likely that there are a number of important people who received invitations to Epstein's private island, without "underage sex" being advertised beforehand on the invitation card. There are a number of likely scenarios where somebody rich or influential accepted an invitation of "hey, do you want to hang out on my private island this weekend", and then there turned down any offer of sex. Some people probably simply weren't into sex with minors, others probably smelled a rat. Thus even if the DOJ has a list of all contacts of Jeffrey Epstein, or flight logs to and from the private island, that doesn't constitute proof of sexual misdeeds, and even less of these contacts having subsequently done illegal things to help Epstein.
All of this makes documents like the "little black book" dubious. Most of us have one or more of various forms of lists of contacts, without necessarily specifying the nature of that contact. If I go through the contacts on my own phone, I find friends there, family, but also my plumber. If Jeffrey Epstein ever had plumbing problems in the mansion on his private island and had a plumber come in, that plumber's name might be on his contacts list, and even on flight logs if there is no local plumber there. That plumber might then reasonably object to his name being released as part of the Epstein files.
Even conspiracy theorists would hate it if there was clear cut evidence of "the truth". If "the truth" is out, and nothing is left to imagination, the very activity of the conspiracy theorist disappears. What these people want is ambiguous raw data, e.g. all the flight logs, where you can then spend years speculating what exactly this or that important person that visited the island might or might not have done there, and how that might or might not have affected his later relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. If they can't get that, they'll probably prefer the absence of proof, which can be milked for speculation, to the presence of proof.
With any given criminal, it is extremely likely that images exist of that criminal on the same photo with somebody else who was *not* actually involved in any criminal activity. I am pretty certain that Donald Trump did a lot of horrible, even illegal, things during his lifetime. Him being on a photo with Jeffrey Epstein or writing the guy a salacious birthday card for me doesn't constitute proof of Donald Trump a) having had sex with minors on Epstein's private island, or b) having somehow used his influence to protect Jeffrey Epstein, or c) having had Jeffrey Epstein killed in jail. It only proves that rich people are chummy with each other, which shouldn't actually surprise anybody.
Of course, if there had been any photo of Epstein with Biden, Donald Trump would have used those for his political ends (and some of his followers actually used artificially created ones). So we are back to karmic justice. But this definitely isn't Michelle Obama's "If they go low, we go high". Instead, we are in a race to the political bottom, where it turns out that innuendo and conspiracy theories are more harmful to Trump than proven truths of actual misdeeds.
- posted by Tobold @ 8:53 AM Permanent Link
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
Tobold: "[...] the DOJ is doing the only thing that is both reasonable and legal"
Pretty sure that it's reasonable and legal but far from the only way to play this. Administration isn't free from bias and there are likely ways to "investigate" this further to delay the release if someone thought it would help.
A lot of politically reveals happen for a reason at times before important decision when the impact is high instead of after when it will barely matter.
"[...] that doesn't constitute proof of sexual misdeeds[...]"
True, but proof doesn't matter in the court of public opinion. You only need to #metoo and someone is on the back foot. The impact of the moral implication is enough to cause severe damage.
"Even conspiracy theorists would hate it if there was clear cut evidence of "the truth"."
You cannot give the truth to a conspiracy theorist.
Their mindset is that there IS a conspiracy. If you release the "truth", how do you prove that it is the truth and not just planted because you are part of the conspiracy?
The goalposts can be rearranged to accommodate any new information to fit into the conspiracy.
Even if they were live at the scene, then those would be actors. There would be mind control drugs. Hell, maybe they were drugged and the memories planted in their own brain.
All because YOU want to hide the real truth.
PS: pretty sure the plumber would have laid pipe.
Pretty sure that it's reasonable and legal but far from the only way to play this. Administration isn't free from bias and there are likely ways to "investigate" this further to delay the release if someone thought it would help.
A lot of politically reveals happen for a reason at times before important decision when the impact is high instead of after when it will barely matter.
"[...] that doesn't constitute proof of sexual misdeeds[...]"
True, but proof doesn't matter in the court of public opinion. You only need to #metoo and someone is on the back foot. The impact of the moral implication is enough to cause severe damage.
"Even conspiracy theorists would hate it if there was clear cut evidence of "the truth"."
You cannot give the truth to a conspiracy theorist.
Their mindset is that there IS a conspiracy. If you release the "truth", how do you prove that it is the truth and not just planted because you are part of the conspiracy?
The goalposts can be rearranged to accommodate any new information to fit into the conspiracy.
Even if they were live at the scene, then those would be actors. There would be mind control drugs. Hell, maybe they were drugged and the memories planted in their own brain.
All because YOU want to hide the real truth.
PS: pretty sure the plumber would have laid pipe.
If someone is killed by the monster that they knowingly and willingly created then I think that is fitting. However, I think that this will just end up fading away or that repeated misdirection and misinformation will work. Teflon Don has a new meaning nowadays.
I have not followed what is behing the Epstein Files, apart that there was pedophilia. I just learn through your post that it was used to blackmail.
But to comment on the absence of the blacklist: in multiple affairs in France, I was surprised on the number of note people take about shady business. the 'black notebook' from Nicolas Sarkozy, the detailed note from a General, notes from the accountant in Monaco, etc...
So I would not discount the possibility of such a list so easily. If he was fully confident he will never be catched, it is possible that he has created an excel file with his assistant, with the path to the folder of proof, simply to make his life easier.
I have no information, so it is also possible that the list does not exist. Just that this rational has been proven false in other occasions.
But to comment on the absence of the blacklist: in multiple affairs in France, I was surprised on the number of note people take about shady business. the 'black notebook' from Nicolas Sarkozy, the detailed note from a General, notes from the accountant in Monaco, etc...
So I would not discount the possibility of such a list so easily. If he was fully confident he will never be catched, it is possible that he has created an excel file with his assistant, with the path to the folder of proof, simply to make his life easier.
I have no information, so it is also possible that the list does not exist. Just that this rational has been proven false in other occasions.
My first reaction was similar, that the FBI never said they lacked "names" but they just implied there was nobody they could prosecute, and that they're just trying to avoid backlash rather than protect criminals. I still think that's true to some extent.
However, my views evolved later when people pointed out and I realized:
- Even if there's not enough evidence to 100% convict a person, that doesn't mean there can't be enough evidence for most people to be 98% sure, and rightly cancel that person, as the other commenter Camo alluded to with #MeToo. Nobody was able to convict Henry Kissinger either, but does that mean that people shouldn't have been allowed to disparage him for decades as a "war criminal" and let his reputation among the public sink into the mud? Do you want people who engage in morally dubious actions (I've seen some photos... the girls don't look mistakable for adults to me) to retain positions of power and influence? Trump's own comments about not wanting to "ruin lives" with full document releases have been shown to actually refer to the accusers, not the accused, and this is the heart of the issue: maybe you can argue that these unnamed elites aren't afraid of prosecution, but they're at least afraid of cancellation. They're afraid of the reputation/financial loss like what happened to Bill Gates or Prince Andrew.
- From what I've seen, it's likely that directly incriminating evidence did exist at some point, and may even still exist off the books somewhere, such as possessed by various intelligence agencies. The main reason is that the Epstein trial presented as evidence black binders full of nude photos with the names on each binder referring to "third parties not directly involved in the case". Bill Gates was also allegedly blackmailed by Epstein according to the Wall Street Journal. Now, I think it's likely much of this evidence has been destroyed, but that's not certain.
- Releasing further info about the case, even if it isn't enough to convict, may be enough for reporters and individuals to find people and uncover old evidence. Because there were allegedly over 1000 victims of Epstein, those witnesses are still alive and their testimony could lead to further evidence being unearthed.
It's possible some of my facts are wrong or overstated--I'm just a guy who watched a lot of YouTube videos on this subject like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPTKDqdTiSo from coffeezilla--but I feel like saying that no further justice can be served and that people who want names are just conspiracy theorists who will never be satisfied might be oversimplifying the reason many people still care about the Epstein case and want more documents released.
However, my views evolved later when people pointed out and I realized:
- Even if there's not enough evidence to 100% convict a person, that doesn't mean there can't be enough evidence for most people to be 98% sure, and rightly cancel that person, as the other commenter Camo alluded to with #MeToo. Nobody was able to convict Henry Kissinger either, but does that mean that people shouldn't have been allowed to disparage him for decades as a "war criminal" and let his reputation among the public sink into the mud? Do you want people who engage in morally dubious actions (I've seen some photos... the girls don't look mistakable for adults to me) to retain positions of power and influence? Trump's own comments about not wanting to "ruin lives" with full document releases have been shown to actually refer to the accusers, not the accused, and this is the heart of the issue: maybe you can argue that these unnamed elites aren't afraid of prosecution, but they're at least afraid of cancellation. They're afraid of the reputation/financial loss like what happened to Bill Gates or Prince Andrew.
- From what I've seen, it's likely that directly incriminating evidence did exist at some point, and may even still exist off the books somewhere, such as possessed by various intelligence agencies. The main reason is that the Epstein trial presented as evidence black binders full of nude photos with the names on each binder referring to "third parties not directly involved in the case". Bill Gates was also allegedly blackmailed by Epstein according to the Wall Street Journal. Now, I think it's likely much of this evidence has been destroyed, but that's not certain.
- Releasing further info about the case, even if it isn't enough to convict, may be enough for reporters and individuals to find people and uncover old evidence. Because there were allegedly over 1000 victims of Epstein, those witnesses are still alive and their testimony could lead to further evidence being unearthed.
It's possible some of my facts are wrong or overstated--I'm just a guy who watched a lot of YouTube videos on this subject like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPTKDqdTiSo from coffeezilla--but I feel like saying that no further justice can be served and that people who want names are just conspiracy theorists who will never be satisfied might be oversimplifying the reason many people still care about the Epstein case and want more documents released.
# posted by 
: 21/7/25 17:32
: 21/7/25 17:32
Oops, just saw I typed "the accusers, not the accused" when I meant to type "the island guests, not the victims".
# posted by : 21/7/25 17:35
: 21/7/25 17:35
So I think most rational people are aware that there is not a literal list that Epstien created with people's names next to the names and ages of women who were sex trafficked.
But Trump and the right wing social media sphere have been promising for years that such a thing exists and that they will expose everyone on it and lock up alo the sick pedophiles.
Just a few weeks ago his attorney general claimed the list was on her desk pending review.
And now he says its all a hoax and the right wing machine is pushing that line.
I dont blame the left for jumping on the bandwagon and piling onto what's an obvious weakness of his right now.
I do already see right wingers more or less coalescing behind Trump and the new party line on social media so this too will fade just like everything else will. When you're in a cult of personality you can excuse whatever the leader does no matter if it contradicts what he said for years.
Post a Comment
But Trump and the right wing social media sphere have been promising for years that such a thing exists and that they will expose everyone on it and lock up alo the sick pedophiles.
Just a few weeks ago his attorney general claimed the list was on her desk pending review.
And now he says its all a hoax and the right wing machine is pushing that line.
I dont blame the left for jumping on the bandwagon and piling onto what's an obvious weakness of his right now.
I do already see right wingers more or less coalescing behind Trump and the new party line on social media so this too will fade just like everything else will. When you're in a cult of personality you can excuse whatever the leader does no matter if it contradicts what he said for years.
<< Home
