Posted on 07/16/2025 5:20:10 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Who really had the power to protect Epstein across three states?
The first time Jeffrey Epstein was locked up, it was in a private wing of the Palm Beach Stockade with unlocked doors and a ‘work release program’ (even though sex offenders were barred from participating in work release programs) that allowed him to keep an office outside the prison, then ‘work’ from his beachfront home, hire Sheriff’s Deputies as his private security, have them refer to him as a “client” and all the records of his visitors, who reportedly included minors used for sex, were then destroyed as part of a “routine purge”.
As an example of the justifications for his special treatment, a Palm Beach officer wrote that Epstein is “poorly versed in jail routine and society and his adjustment to incarceration will most likely be atypical. For the time being, I am authorizing that his cell door be left unlocked and he be given liberal access to the attorney room where a TV will be installed”.
Both local and federal prosecutors threw the case against Epstein resulting in a light sentence. And while being a registered sex offender should have crippled his prospects when he got out, officials in three states colluded to keep him off their sex offender registries.
Florida prison officials refused to list him as a sex offender while he was in custody despite the clear evidence of his conviction. Officials in New Mexico, where Epstein owned a $17 million ‘Zorro’ ranch, took him off the sex offender registry two days after he signed up.
In New York, the Manhattan DA’s office colluded with Epstein to lower his sex offender status from Level 3 to Level 1 despite a specific recommendation from the State of New York Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders and objections...
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Thanks.
L
How does any of this stop the current FBI/DOJ from reviewing tapes and indicting those identified?
I am a little skeptical that multiple jail guards would agree to aid and abet underage sex, which is a serious, career ending, jail time, felony.
RE: Who was the CIA chief at the time?
I checked Butler’s Lives of the Saints.
Not listed.
Maybe in A Criminal History of Mankind By Colin Wilson.
The Trump transition teams knows whether or not Alex Acosta told them he was told to back off of Epstein. This would have been under Bush White House.
Let’s get Alex Acosta in a Congressional hearing and force him to tell the truth or plead the 5th. Add in the transition team to get full transparency.
Someone ask Bondi and get it on the record if Alexa Acosta made the claim.
Nothing Ghislaine has to say can be trusted. Her focus now is how to reduce her sentence if that is at all possible.
Hard evidence would be helpful here ... not words from Ghislaine.
When you really get down to it, Daniel Greenfield’s explanation is the only one that makes sense.
Ghislaine might well lie—but Congress would have the chance to cross examine her.
Some useful information might come out of that—some of those Congressional staffers are super bright.
You’re probably right, but nothing in this case makes sense.
Alan Dershowitz said he could surmise what individuals were in the files he viewed but said the Mossad wasn’t involved.
Then Pam Bondi said there is no list but Speaker Johnson wants it published.
Now we have an article about it being a Democrat operation but Republicans in Congress blocked release of information.
Last year I listened to Mike Benz describe what was going on in Washington and I couldn’t believe how much they’ve mommocked things up.
Now they’ve gone and made a complete hash of things, all of them.
I listened to Speaker Johnson speak (in one interview) to figure out if he knew anything about the Epstein matter.
He clearly stated he knew nothing about it—said it was not “in my lane”.
Then he asked for all documents to be disclosed.
He violated the same rule Pam Bondi violated—never talk about documents you have not seen.
What a mess.
THE EPSTEIN FILES
Why doesn’t President Trump and Pam Bondi offer a reasonable explanation why they are withholding the information instead of beating around the bush. I believe the following is about as good an explanation as any. Personally I don’t care if I ever find out.
1) the accusers were all minors so they can’t release their names.
2) the accused were never tried and convicted so they can’t release their names. Innocent until proven guilty.
3) the judge (at the time Epstein was tried) put a block on releasing the suspect’s names.
4) the accusers (who are now adults) won’t come forward to name names because they will lose their anonymity. The one accuser who did come forward has subsequently died.
5) unless the judge (name?) who put a block on those name drops his block we a stuck between a rock and a hard place.
it was CIA
Epstein was the Iran Contra financer for CIA.
CIA is still pimping childern for pedos for leverage on targets
He is kinda busy with more pressing matters.
But wasn’t the Iran/contra thing just a hoax?
“Ghislaine might well lie—but Congress would have the chance to cross examine her.”
Well that’s reassuring. :-)
“Then Pam Bondi said there is no list but Speaker Johnson wants it published.”
He did not. He even went public to refute idiots that misquote him.
In Congress cross examining liars is often as good as it gets.
Lol.
Please add me to the Daniel Greenfield list
If you please
The FIB has 10s of thousands of minions who can conceptually perform in parallel.
The FIB should cough up the J6 “bomber” next week if they are any good.
An analysis about Epstein’s connections to the CIA/Mossad over the decades? Another week.
“The question is Who?”
Don’t ask Trump these days....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.