“Accountability, action, prosecution, indictments for those who are responsible for trying to steal our democracy is essential for us to make sure that this never happens to our country again.” - DNI Tulsi Gabbard. And no, she was not referring to the Epstein imbroglio, on which matter the exact same could be said. Cover-ups and more cover-ups: remember that old workhorse John Durham? And Mueller plodding along, ignoring the entire intel angle. Same same…
"I’ve recently expressed my distress at Tulsi’s reckless use of legal terms." It's a peeve of mine as well...one in particular is the use of 'abduction' instead of 'kidnapping'. In my country, 'abduction' has a clear legal defination of unlawfully detaining or carrying off someone with the intent to marry or have sexual intercource.
Maybe Trump just doesn't want his family, which includes grandkids, to constantly be exposed to all this stuff. That is a good explanation for his suing the Wall St. Journal. For why he is trying to get MAGA off of this--he has been saying over and over that "it's all just a Democrat Op." I don't believe he means that literally, he means that the Democrats have jumped on this bigly, and are using it to damage Republicans in their propaganda--and he is right.
Michael Tracey says that since the only evidence for anything other than Epstein being with underage women is the claims of people who were seeking to get money, therefore there is no non-questionable evidence for any of the other claims, e.g., about Epstein engaging in using honey traps for whatever reasons they speculate about. Obviously true. but that is why there has been such a clamor about getting the government to release whatever data they may have. The reason the conspiracy theories thrive is because the government and or people involved have stoked the fevered imaginations of people by not proving it one way or the other.
Therefore, people can easily believe that not only are all the conspiracy theories plausible, but they are likely true because where there's smoke...
Besides Trump wanting this to end because of the above reasons there is also the possibility that Epstein's relationship with people like Ehud Barak cannot be explained away enough to get lots of influencers and media to be okay with it. That makes a lot of very rich and influential people nervous for a variety of obvious reasons, and I am sure they are pressuring the people in Trump's orbit to do something to make this all go away. But the problem is how? Dems see this as a gift from the gods so they will push this to kingdom come--unless or until they get told to drop it by their big donors--many of whom may want it dropped even though they want to damage the MAGA cause.
Theoretically Tracey is right about underage. I don't know anything about the law in these cases. Epstein was let off with a wrist slap in the federal case, but it was still a wrist slap, so that means there was some violation. He had the money and lawyers to have fought it all the way. So I think Tracey's theory goes further than the evidence will support. However ...
I see the willingness to release GJ testimony as a sign that there are other things they don't want revealed--and they're willing to try to divert attention to the sex part. Epstein was essentially a nobody who in a few short years rocketed to hobnobbing with the power elite. There's something in that that they don't want revealed and that's why Trump is doing what he can to suppress it.
I say where there's smoke there's some sort of fire. Prove me wrong. :-)
In the last 24 to 48 hours you have had two women allegedly who had been involved with Epstein as underage girls coming forward to say that Trump was involved with Epstein at this level.
One woman allegedly says that , if you can possibly believe this, Epstein, Maxwell, Trump, and his wife Ivana, we’re riding together in a car when Maxwell see some young underage girl that she wants to stop and get her phone number. Who can possibly believe stuff like this?
Then you have the other woman that has come forward who claims she was 13 years old and was tied to a bed where Trump repeatedly raped her. That also doesn’t hold any water.
My question would be were these two women part of the 240 women who participated in the settlement against Epstein’s estate and the Banks? Those cases were settled for over $800 million according to Ryan Dawson.
These two women need to be looked at very carefully to find out who’s pulling their chains and paying them to come forward like this . Does Trump sue them for libel, slander, and defamation?
The Epstein mess has put Trump in a box . Now I don’t believe Trump was involved with underage girls. I also don’t believe he sent him that outrageous birthday card that’s being touted by the Wall Street Journal. Trump and 99% of us go to the hallmark shop and get a birthday card., or more likely Trump sent his secretary out to get a birthday card for Epstein. Trump is no poet and I don’t see him writing this elaborate card and drawing a doodle of a naked woman. let’s see the Wall Street Journal produce this so-called scrapbook of birthday cards. Let’s see who else sent Epstein birthday cards for his 50th birthday, my guess is you’re gonna find a scrapbook full of Hallmark cards most of them probably funny and ridiculous or whatever.
This Epstein mess, for the most part, is a self-inflicted wound that should not have ever happened. Instead of ever promising to release certain material, especially before they came into office and they hadn’t even looked at it, Trump and other should have waited to review what was there before making promises they couldn’t keep.
Don’t forget that in Trump’s first term he backtracked on releasing the Kennedy files and they haven’t even released all of that stuff yet. What could possibly be still 60 years later that we can’t know the truth about?
Is part of Trump‘s reluctance to release the Epstein files have more to do with the fact that he knows many of the people that might be mentioned and considers him to be friends ? At this point, it’s got to be more about self preservation, transparency and saving his reputation as president as anything else.
I think too much is being made to the fact that Trump knew Epstein for 10 or 15 years as did many others , knew him socially for the most part, not in a business relationship. so when it comes out, what kind of person Epstein is and the kind of operations he was up to most people want to say they didn’t know him that well and it turns out they really didn’t know him that well. Just because you were somebody’s friend doesn’t mean you know their secrets particularly somebody like Epstein, who had a lot of dark secrets that he would keep from anyone and everyone.
The only real person who knows the truth is Maxwell and of course she’s using that for leverage to get out of prison , does anyone blame her? But the stories about her and underage girls are just as damming as the ones with Epstein. Allegedly they would have some underage girl in bed with the both of them, does it get more kinkier then that?
Also, does Maxwell have some stuff that she’s been keeping as an insurance policy for herself? If Maxwell wants to get out of jail for time served, or whatever deal she can make, then she’s going to have to go public and tell the truth about Epstein to the extent of her own knowledge. It’s certainly possible that even Maxwell doesn’t know everything.
This cauldron is going to keep bubbling up until somebody finally folds. I think it would be ironic if this is the thing that ends up forcing Trump from office.
Who rules? Old and perpetual questions. Epstein “reflects,” “reveals,” “unconceals,” the way it used to be, under the post WWII psycho conditions: television in the West created fantasies about humans and what was possible. Epstein and all of those that he worked for, and brought in to “invest,” were very much that psycho environment: get around “democracy.”
It was a world without true elites, who lost their influence by the end of the 60s. Free for all. Psy-ops. Social Science. Hard Sciences. None of it worked, thus where the West is today.
Epstein threw parties to bring people with influence and money together from throughout the West: perpetuating the myths. Women are always are high end parties, that is how to get people to show up. It was all about pushing fantasy views about how the world had to function.
It is not the world of today: no more narratives. NOW it is about what do you actually know, not about your opinions. There is no establishment class in the West. It’s dead. Thus why entities like the intel agencies are front and center, with no guidance. They see themselves as the ultimate backstop to the fantasies of the last 80 years.
Now the tech bros have locked arms with them: they have the $, influence and the tech to do stuff, and they still have a lot of the old fantasy narratives about the West and humans as their “context.”
Written a lot about this at our Digital Bomb! substack
ISR: satellites. Is this a mirage? A real war against an enemy that can fight back and project power, at least Russia and China, the ability to see the battlefield would be turned off by them. There have been rumblings about bringing back and training guys in old/low tech, as in before GPS, etc. Low tech is the only way for pilots to be effective, the speeds are too high for the human body: see Eric Schmidt’s many talks about the present and future of weapons. See also Henry Kissinger’s very late life turn around in light of technology on the battlefield. See Musk and others putting so many satellites into orbit.
Patriots were never designed for the advanced missiles of today, that can travel at Mach 10 and well above.
A real war…which we avoid…will really scare Americans because life as we live it would stop. Israel only experienced a small amount of this and half (more?) of the Jewish population has left the country.
Nuclear is old tech/news/psycho war. The reality today would be more practically devastating.
My understanding is that the Epstein plea agreement from his 2009 criminal case included a clause that provided protection to Ghislane (and other Epstein associates) from prosecution on related matters. As such, Maxwell's attorneys have been trying to get her freed on this basis and the matter is currently before the US Supreme Court for a ruling. If they rule against her, she is out of appeals and can expect to serve the remainder of her sentence. Her only other potential option might be to seek a sentence reduction or commutation via providing testimony in related trials of other individuals who may have engaged in sexual acts with a minor. Her testimony would be devastating and open Pandora's box. She is now offering to publicly testify before Congress and this would likely put enormous pressure on Pam Bondi if she reveals details of criminal acts by others. Clearly Ghislane does not want to rot in prison for the rest of her life and is motivated to use whatever means is necessary to secure her release. And they can't kill her in prison like Epstein because she is housed in dorm style detention facility and there would be witnesses. Bondi is on the hot seat now and at the mercy of any public statements forthcoming from Ghislane. No, this story is not going away.
What Prosecutors Had to Prove for Maxwell’s Charges
Strategic Choice: Prosecuting Maxwell as Epstein’s proxy avoided complexity it was very simple, they had One Person and they needed One Person
Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted on December 29, 2021, following a month-long trial in the Southern District of New York. She faced six federal charges, with the jury finding her guilty on five counts, including:
Conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts
Conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts
Transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts
Sex trafficking conspiracy
Sex trafficking of a minor
Prosecution’s Strategy: The DOJ’s case (per the June 2022 sentencing statement) framed Maxwell’s crimes as assisting Epstein in abusing minors, with specific acts tied to his residences.
The indictment and trial evidence focused on her role in grooming victims for Epstein, not necessarily for a broader network. The legal burden was met by showing Maxwell’s intent to facilitate Epstein’s abuse, not to identify every possible participant.
Legal Sufficiency: Under U.S. law (e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 1591 for sex trafficking), the prosecution must prove the defendant knowingly benefited from participating in a venture involving a minor’s abuse. Maxwell’s benefit was tied to her relationship with Epstein (financially and otherwise), and his role as the abuser fulfilled the statute.
Naming additional recipients wasn’t legally necessary unless they were co-conspirators with direct evidence linking them to Maxwell’s actions.
Was It Enough?: Yes, naming Epstein as the sole recipient was legally sufficient for Maxwell’s conviction. The charges were tailored to her partnership with him, and the evidence met the threshold without needing to expand the scope.
While Maxwell’s trial focused on Epstein as "enabler-in-chief,"
MAXWELL prosecutors must have investigated and were aware of allegations or names of other potential recipients beyond Epstein, given the extensive Epstein investigation, victim statements, and evidence like flight logs.
Maxwell’s prosecution of Epstein as the recipient, was merely a strategic decision to secure a conviction. It was short and simple - they do that, strategic decision to pick one clear and convincing target - you may have others but why muddy the waters if you have one Epstein and it makes your case
Failing to investigate other recipients would be legal malpractice; and there’s no evidence they neglected this. They have the names of alleged recipients; they never would have investigated only Epstein as a recipient
if prosecutors knowingly ignored investigation of other individuals who may have been involved with Epstein’s crimes (e.g., as "recipients" of trafficking or abuse), it could constitute a serious ethical and legal breach. Legal malpractice In the context of a high-profile case like Epstein’s, failing to pursue all credible leads could undermine public trust and the integrity of the justice system.
.
There is no possible way they do not have known other recipients - it's impossible.
As far as Bannon, he now has leverage. 15 hours of leverage. Leverage is the currency of DC and the world if the elite. It’s not about truth with these guys. It’s about leverage.
“Accountability, action, prosecution, indictments for those who are responsible for trying to steal our democracy is essential for us to make sure that this never happens to our country again.” - DNI Tulsi Gabbard. And no, she was not referring to the Epstein imbroglio, on which matter the exact same could be said. Cover-ups and more cover-ups: remember that old workhorse John Durham? And Mueller plodding along, ignoring the entire intel angle. Same same…
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/gabbard-release-more-obama-russiagate-files-cannot-fathom-how-durham-mueller-missed
Coney weighs in on his Substack about the termination of his daughter.
https://substack.com/inbox/post/168784149?triedRedirect=true
"I’ve recently expressed my distress at Tulsi’s reckless use of legal terms." It's a peeve of mine as well...one in particular is the use of 'abduction' instead of 'kidnapping'. In my country, 'abduction' has a clear legal defination of unlawfully detaining or carrying off someone with the intent to marry or have sexual intercource.
Maybe Trump just doesn't want his family, which includes grandkids, to constantly be exposed to all this stuff. That is a good explanation for his suing the Wall St. Journal. For why he is trying to get MAGA off of this--he has been saying over and over that "it's all just a Democrat Op." I don't believe he means that literally, he means that the Democrats have jumped on this bigly, and are using it to damage Republicans in their propaganda--and he is right.
Michael Tracey says that since the only evidence for anything other than Epstein being with underage women is the claims of people who were seeking to get money, therefore there is no non-questionable evidence for any of the other claims, e.g., about Epstein engaging in using honey traps for whatever reasons they speculate about. Obviously true. but that is why there has been such a clamor about getting the government to release whatever data they may have. The reason the conspiracy theories thrive is because the government and or people involved have stoked the fevered imaginations of people by not proving it one way or the other.
Therefore, people can easily believe that not only are all the conspiracy theories plausible, but they are likely true because where there's smoke...
Besides Trump wanting this to end because of the above reasons there is also the possibility that Epstein's relationship with people like Ehud Barak cannot be explained away enough to get lots of influencers and media to be okay with it. That makes a lot of very rich and influential people nervous for a variety of obvious reasons, and I am sure they are pressuring the people in Trump's orbit to do something to make this all go away. But the problem is how? Dems see this as a gift from the gods so they will push this to kingdom come--unless or until they get told to drop it by their big donors--many of whom may want it dropped even though they want to damage the MAGA cause.
I think Trump needs to give MAGA a big win to get them off of this, the revelations by Tulsi Gabbard are a good start but he needs to do something that the base really wants, like being honest then doing the right thing about this: "Elite Desperation: There Must be Some Way Out of Here — said The Joker to The Thief" at https://pamho.medium.com/zelenskyy-begs-for-nato-entrance-after-destruction-of-nordstream-or-there-must-be-some-way-out-of-e1ddf1a959f0
Theoretically Tracey is right about underage. I don't know anything about the law in these cases. Epstein was let off with a wrist slap in the federal case, but it was still a wrist slap, so that means there was some violation. He had the money and lawyers to have fought it all the way. So I think Tracey's theory goes further than the evidence will support. However ...
I see the willingness to release GJ testimony as a sign that there are other things they don't want revealed--and they're willing to try to divert attention to the sex part. Epstein was essentially a nobody who in a few short years rocketed to hobnobbing with the power elite. There's something in that that they don't want revealed and that's why Trump is doing what he can to suppress it.
I say where there's smoke there's some sort of fire. Prove me wrong. :-)
Seems odd that a person of Epstein’s ilk would be directly procuring underage girls for prostitution, what did he do, troll malls?
Ghislaine is the daughter of a very heavy hitter in the espionage world and the Promis software saga.
Real question is what are the factions and which side wanted to take them out.
Naomi Wolfe explains the Epstein network. Not the pedophiles, the whole network of elites, the innocent ones. You guys ought to read it.
https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/the-network-in-the-worlds-of-the
In the last 24 to 48 hours you have had two women allegedly who had been involved with Epstein as underage girls coming forward to say that Trump was involved with Epstein at this level.
One woman allegedly says that , if you can possibly believe this, Epstein, Maxwell, Trump, and his wife Ivana, we’re riding together in a car when Maxwell see some young underage girl that she wants to stop and get her phone number. Who can possibly believe stuff like this?
Then you have the other woman that has come forward who claims she was 13 years old and was tied to a bed where Trump repeatedly raped her. That also doesn’t hold any water.
My question would be were these two women part of the 240 women who participated in the settlement against Epstein’s estate and the Banks? Those cases were settled for over $800 million according to Ryan Dawson.
These two women need to be looked at very carefully to find out who’s pulling their chains and paying them to come forward like this . Does Trump sue them for libel, slander, and defamation?
The Epstein mess has put Trump in a box . Now I don’t believe Trump was involved with underage girls. I also don’t believe he sent him that outrageous birthday card that’s being touted by the Wall Street Journal. Trump and 99% of us go to the hallmark shop and get a birthday card., or more likely Trump sent his secretary out to get a birthday card for Epstein. Trump is no poet and I don’t see him writing this elaborate card and drawing a doodle of a naked woman. let’s see the Wall Street Journal produce this so-called scrapbook of birthday cards. Let’s see who else sent Epstein birthday cards for his 50th birthday, my guess is you’re gonna find a scrapbook full of Hallmark cards most of them probably funny and ridiculous or whatever.
This Epstein mess, for the most part, is a self-inflicted wound that should not have ever happened. Instead of ever promising to release certain material, especially before they came into office and they hadn’t even looked at it, Trump and other should have waited to review what was there before making promises they couldn’t keep.
Don’t forget that in Trump’s first term he backtracked on releasing the Kennedy files and they haven’t even released all of that stuff yet. What could possibly be still 60 years later that we can’t know the truth about?
Is part of Trump‘s reluctance to release the Epstein files have more to do with the fact that he knows many of the people that might be mentioned and considers him to be friends ? At this point, it’s got to be more about self preservation, transparency and saving his reputation as president as anything else.
I think too much is being made to the fact that Trump knew Epstein for 10 or 15 years as did many others , knew him socially for the most part, not in a business relationship. so when it comes out, what kind of person Epstein is and the kind of operations he was up to most people want to say they didn’t know him that well and it turns out they really didn’t know him that well. Just because you were somebody’s friend doesn’t mean you know their secrets particularly somebody like Epstein, who had a lot of dark secrets that he would keep from anyone and everyone.
The only real person who knows the truth is Maxwell and of course she’s using that for leverage to get out of prison , does anyone blame her? But the stories about her and underage girls are just as damming as the ones with Epstein. Allegedly they would have some underage girl in bed with the both of them, does it get more kinkier then that?
Also, does Maxwell have some stuff that she’s been keeping as an insurance policy for herself? If Maxwell wants to get out of jail for time served, or whatever deal she can make, then she’s going to have to go public and tell the truth about Epstein to the extent of her own knowledge. It’s certainly possible that even Maxwell doesn’t know everything.
This cauldron is going to keep bubbling up until somebody finally folds. I think it would be ironic if this is the thing that ends up forcing Trump from office.
Who rules? Old and perpetual questions. Epstein “reflects,” “reveals,” “unconceals,” the way it used to be, under the post WWII psycho conditions: television in the West created fantasies about humans and what was possible. Epstein and all of those that he worked for, and brought in to “invest,” were very much that psycho environment: get around “democracy.”
It was a world without true elites, who lost their influence by the end of the 60s. Free for all. Psy-ops. Social Science. Hard Sciences. None of it worked, thus where the West is today.
Epstein threw parties to bring people with influence and money together from throughout the West: perpetuating the myths. Women are always are high end parties, that is how to get people to show up. It was all about pushing fantasy views about how the world had to function.
It is not the world of today: no more narratives. NOW it is about what do you actually know, not about your opinions. There is no establishment class in the West. It’s dead. Thus why entities like the intel agencies are front and center, with no guidance. They see themselves as the ultimate backstop to the fantasies of the last 80 years.
Now the tech bros have locked arms with them: they have the $, influence and the tech to do stuff, and they still have a lot of the old fantasy narratives about the West and humans as their “context.”
Written a lot about this at our Digital Bomb! substack
ISR: satellites. Is this a mirage? A real war against an enemy that can fight back and project power, at least Russia and China, the ability to see the battlefield would be turned off by them. There have been rumblings about bringing back and training guys in old/low tech, as in before GPS, etc. Low tech is the only way for pilots to be effective, the speeds are too high for the human body: see Eric Schmidt’s many talks about the present and future of weapons. See also Henry Kissinger’s very late life turn around in light of technology on the battlefield. See Musk and others putting so many satellites into orbit.
Patriots were never designed for the advanced missiles of today, that can travel at Mach 10 and well above.
A real war…which we avoid…will really scare Americans because life as we live it would stop. Israel only experienced a small amount of this and half (more?) of the Jewish population has left the country.
Nuclear is old tech/news/psycho war. The reality today would be more practically devastating.
The doctrine establishes the U.S.'s leadership role within the new world order.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine
My understanding is that the Epstein plea agreement from his 2009 criminal case included a clause that provided protection to Ghislane (and other Epstein associates) from prosecution on related matters. As such, Maxwell's attorneys have been trying to get her freed on this basis and the matter is currently before the US Supreme Court for a ruling. If they rule against her, she is out of appeals and can expect to serve the remainder of her sentence. Her only other potential option might be to seek a sentence reduction or commutation via providing testimony in related trials of other individuals who may have engaged in sexual acts with a minor. Her testimony would be devastating and open Pandora's box. She is now offering to publicly testify before Congress and this would likely put enormous pressure on Pam Bondi if she reveals details of criminal acts by others. Clearly Ghislane does not want to rot in prison for the rest of her life and is motivated to use whatever means is necessary to secure her release. And they can't kill her in prison like Epstein because she is housed in dorm style detention facility and there would be witnesses. Bondi is on the hot seat now and at the mercy of any public statements forthcoming from Ghislane. No, this story is not going away.
RE: Maxwell's Prosecutors
and the Strategic Choice to Use Epstein as the Sole Recipient in the Trial
a purely strategic decision to avoid complexity and confusion
.
I am not saying impossible that they have a list of Epstein's clients, there is probably no " client list " per se
Not saying it is possible or impossible that Trump was a recipient
But am saying it is IMPOSSIBLE - 1000% impossible
that they do not have at least One (1) if not at least three (3) or more other recipients
recipients other than Epstein.
That is Impossible
.
.
What Prosecutors Had to Prove for Maxwell’s Charges
Strategic Choice: Prosecuting Maxwell as Epstein’s proxy avoided complexity it was very simple, they had One Person and they needed One Person
Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted on December 29, 2021, following a month-long trial in the Southern District of New York. She faced six federal charges, with the jury finding her guilty on five counts, including:
Conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts
Conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts
Transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts
Sex trafficking conspiracy
Sex trafficking of a minor
Prosecution’s Strategy: The DOJ’s case (per the June 2022 sentencing statement) framed Maxwell’s crimes as assisting Epstein in abusing minors, with specific acts tied to his residences.
The indictment and trial evidence focused on her role in grooming victims for Epstein, not necessarily for a broader network. The legal burden was met by showing Maxwell’s intent to facilitate Epstein’s abuse, not to identify every possible participant.
Legal Sufficiency: Under U.S. law (e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 1591 for sex trafficking), the prosecution must prove the defendant knowingly benefited from participating in a venture involving a minor’s abuse. Maxwell’s benefit was tied to her relationship with Epstein (financially and otherwise), and his role as the abuser fulfilled the statute.
Naming additional recipients wasn’t legally necessary unless they were co-conspirators with direct evidence linking them to Maxwell’s actions.
Was It Enough?: Yes, naming Epstein as the sole recipient was legally sufficient for Maxwell’s conviction. The charges were tailored to her partnership with him, and the evidence met the threshold without needing to expand the scope.
The Streisand effect is increasing on Epstein, despite Trumps actions.
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky"
.
As a former FBI agent I believe you may agree
EPSTEIN CLIENTS [ Plural ] ARE KNOWN
While Maxwell’s trial focused on Epstein as "enabler-in-chief,"
MAXWELL prosecutors must have investigated and were aware of allegations or names of other potential recipients beyond Epstein, given the extensive Epstein investigation, victim statements, and evidence like flight logs.
Maxwell’s prosecution of Epstein as the recipient, was merely a strategic decision to secure a conviction. It was short and simple - they do that, strategic decision to pick one clear and convincing target - you may have others but why muddy the waters if you have one Epstein and it makes your case
Failing to investigate other recipients would be legal malpractice; and there’s no evidence they neglected this. They have the names of alleged recipients; they never would have investigated only Epstein as a recipient
if prosecutors knowingly ignored investigation of other individuals who may have been involved with Epstein’s crimes (e.g., as "recipients" of trafficking or abuse), it could constitute a serious ethical and legal breach. Legal malpractice In the context of a high-profile case like Epstein’s, failing to pursue all credible leads could undermine public trust and the integrity of the justice system.
.
There is no possible way they do not have known other recipients - it's impossible.
.
I assume that's correct. That's simply the way investigations work.
Who killed Hoffa?
Who killed Epstein?
How many licks to the center of a Tootsie Pop?
The world may never know.
As far as Bannon, he now has leverage. 15 hours of leverage. Leverage is the currency of DC and the world if the elite. It’s not about truth with these guys. It’s about leverage.
More mysteries:
- Seth Rich?
- Jan 6 pipe bomber?
- Why the delay on the jfk files?
- Israel and 9-11
- USS Liberty
- big pharma, food, and medicine. More is being exposed by RFK, but it’s slow.
At least Tulsi Gabbard is releasing some Russiagate stuff.