The Epstein Files

Leonardfan said:
The mainstream media pushing another "Russia, Russia, Russia" hoax with Epstein to run cover for the little hats.
Click to expand...
I never use the term "mainstream" when referring to them, that is a complimentary term implying that we're those who are on the fringe or are "extremists" of some kind. The corporate media are no longer remotely mainstream; if free commentary was allowed after articles and videos, what little credibility they have left would disappear completely, as illustrated by the few corporate media outlets that still do allow discussion.

Another term I dislike is "progressives" which is often (incorrectly) used by those who hate the left. Calling someone a progressive means you believe they stand for progress, when of course they stand for anything but. They're leftists, communists, even liberals, but one thing they definitely aren't are "progressives."
 
Don Wassall said:
I never use the term "mainstream" when referring to them, that is a complimentary term implying that we're those who are on the fringe or are "extremists" of some kind. The corporate media are no longer remotely mainstream; if free commentary was allowed after articles and videos, what little credibility they have left would disappear completely, as illustrated by the few corporate media outlets that still do allow discussion.

Another term I dislike is "progressives" which is often (incorrectly) used by those who hate the left. Calling someone a progressive means you believe they stand for progress, when of course they stand for anything but. They're leftists, communists, even liberals, but one thing they definitely aren't are "progressives."
Click to expand...
Damn good points. I already felt that way about the "progressive" label but never thought about the word "mainstream."

More and more thinking people seeing through these charlatens.

Which is why these phonies are working as we speak to get their claws into the internet.
 
Don Wassall said:
I never use the term "mainstream" when referring to them, that is a complimentary term implying that we're those who are on the fringe or are "extremists" of some kind. The corporate media are no longer remotely mainstream; if free commentary was allowed after articles and videos, what little credibility they have left would disappear completely, as illustrated by the few corporate media outlets that still do allow discussion.

Another term I dislike is "progressives" which is often (incorrectly) used by those who hate the left. Calling someone a progressive means you believe they stand for progress, when of course they stand for anything but. They're leftists, communists, even liberals, but one thing they definitely aren't are "progressives."
Click to expand...

That's fair. Legacy or corporate media would perhaps be a more accurate term. Most goys still get their information from the corporate media and the local affiliates.

The left labeling itself progressive. Anyone with an open free thinking mind looking back at post war America in the 50s and thinking we are a better country is retarded. Anyone who thinks all of the insanity and rejection of the natural order in the past 70 years being pushed in the West is progressive is nothing but a useful idiot. They are communists, marxists or shitlibs.
 
Don Wassall said:
I never use the term "mainstream" when referring to them, that is a complimentary term implying that we're those who are on the fringe or are "extremists" of some kind. The corporate media are no longer remotely mainstream; if free commentary was allowed after articles and videos, what little credibility they have left would disappear completely, as illustrated by the few corporate media outlets that still do allow discussion.

Another term I dislike is "progressives" which is often (incorrectly) used by those who hate the left. Calling someone a progressive means you believe they stand for progress, when of course they stand for anything but. They're leftists, communists, even liberals, but one thing they definitely aren't are "progressives."
Click to expand...

Exactly. I have noticed self-described "conservatives" use the term "progressives" when discussing their political opponents. They use leftist terminology without thinking.
 
Totally agree about the use of "progressive." Something I've always hated was using the term "we did this", no matter good or bad, but mostly bad, as "we" did this. I didn't do that and neither did you. Those that actually did these things love to hide behind that all encompassing "we", so as not to be called out. Notice the buck always stops at someone in a lower tier when one of these entities is called out for "their" wrongdoing. Always protecting those above. Call a freaking press conference and detail all the threats. That's what will keep you safe.
 
SneakyQuick said:
Wake me up when there are some actual consequences for someone in the Epstein files aside from the victims
Click to expand...
Sir you may become Rip Van Winkle 2.0. Also every month that the government drags their feet on prosecuting or even seriously investigating the perpetrators another perpetrator could be dead. Some of the names that might be rapists or rapist and pedophiles or at a minimum whore mongers with zero ethics are well into their 80's and could be dead any time.

I remember my father told me how feudalism ended in Western Europe it was due to barons demanding too much tribute from the peasants but another factor was the barons raping or forcing peasant girls to become their concubines against their wishes. The peasants revolted and stormed the castles of the barons and slit their throats and possibly killed the woman of the manor and the underage children as they could lead another coalition to take back power.

These politicians, celebrities and titans of business are acting like these feudal lords...

PS this is a case of water is wet...
 
Last edited:
white is right said:
This is what this site has been talking about for years...

I generally don't listen to these commentators but since they aren't corporate media sources they aren't bought and paid for by anybody but their viewers/listeners.
Click to expand...

Well some names have trickled out on possible fellow degenerates that rape trafficked women to raping minors and even mentally challenged females(there is a special hell for them). Les Wexner is a prominent name on this list I looked up his age and he is 88 and counting and with investigationand trial delays if there is substance to these allegations good ole "Lester the Molester" could be in a urn in Temple Beth Mount by the time the hands of justice get to him.

We also have a Sultan, an Italian politician a NYC cop who may have been a facilitator for the smuggling of Eastern European women. Similar to this scene from this cult hit...
 
Last edited:
I appreciated this twitter post summary from internet ally Second City Bureaucrat. The replies are thoughtful also and perhaps worth reviewing. Unlike many of the current crop of engagement farmers, SCB has been around since before 2016 - I can't recall him doing podcast interviews (correct if wrong please), although he's surely monetized enough by now via Twitter and Substack to have a soft fall from his original day job.



How long could it take for a team of (x) elite-clearance individuals to review the 3 million or 6 million 'Epstein Files' documents and redact exactly the right amount of sensitive names? Longer than this administration plus the previous one, by my crude estimation. Could AI generate a bunch of ****? I believe that absolutely. So I don't really accept the damning texts about pizza and goyim without a big grain of salt.

There is a subset of human resource departments at publicly traded companies that are devoted to identifying talent from within their own ranks and putting them onto accelerated tracks toward seniority. Recognizing your own strengths and weaknesses (think of a Jungian personality quadrant where you score somewhere within all four blocks, and then via coaching you learn to adapt and accept feedback from the other, less-familiar blocks)... this is just absent from any of the Epstein files. A typical CEO probably has a "life coach" on hand to do so much as pick out your tie that particular day based on your interactions.

Maybe that stuff is mundane and hasn't been content-farmed on twitter. I haven't observed that sort of outsourcing for Epstein and instead see him exchanging pith about redacted entities to supposed big-wigs he's BS'ing with via gmail. It's stinky to me as I take a step back to digest this stuff.

Peter Thiel may be the "new" Epstein successor in terms of dirt-broker. Perhaps he is working for a different team of trillionaires - but who would tell me? I do believe the Thiel conglomerate wholly owns James Bowman (bka J.D. Vance), but my suspicions aren't fully formed, and how could I gather enough intel from my laptop to prove it to anyone, anyway?
 
Phall said:
I appreciated this twitter post summary from internet ally Second City Bureaucrat. The replies are thoughtful also and perhaps worth reviewing. Unlike many of the current crop of engagement farmers, SCB has been around since before 2016 - I can't recall him doing podcast interviews (correct if wrong please), although he's surely monetized enough by now via Twitter and Substack to have a soft fall from his original day job.



How long could it take for a team of (x) elite-clearance individuals to review the 3 million or 6 million 'Epstein Files' documents and redact exactly the right amount of sensitive names? Longer than this administration plus the previous one, by my crude estimation. Could AI generate a bunch of ****? I believe that absolutely. So I don't really accept the damning texts about pizza and goyim without a big grain of salt.

There is a subset of human resource departments at publicly traded companies that are devoted to identifying talent from within their own ranks and putting them onto accelerated tracks toward seniority. Recognizing your own strengths and weaknesses (think of a Jungian personality quadrant where you score somewhere within all four blocks, and then via coaching you learn to adapt and accept feedback from the other, less-familiar blocks)... this is just absent from any of the Epstein files. A typical CEO probably has a "life coach" on hand to do so much as pick out your tie that particular day based on your interactions.

Maybe that stuff is mundane and hasn't been content-farmed on twitter. I haven't observed that sort of outsourcing for Epstein and instead see him exchanging pith about redacted entities to supposed big-wigs he's BS'ing with via gmail. It's stinky to me as I take a step back to digest this stuff.

Peter Thiel may be the "new" Epstein successor in terms of dirt-broker. Perhaps he is working for a different team of trillionaires - but who would tell me? I do believe the Thiel conglomerate wholly owns James Bowman (bka J.D. Vance), but my suspicions aren't fully formed, and how could I gather enough intel from my laptop to prove it to anyone, anyway?
Click to expand...

Guys things are taking a bizarre turn with the Epstein scandal with possible cannibalism

But we must leave on hilarious note and it seems that Boris Johnson, Maxwell and Epstein engaged in a Menage a trois in the 90[s this could explain the Johnson frazzled hair cut look....

PS Epstein also purchased acid and that could only be for disposing of bodies similar to this scene, since the sex slaves of Epstein were trafficked from countries with poor record keeping we may never have clue who some of the women are...
 
Last edited:
sport historian said:
Exactly. I have noticed self-described "conservatives" use the term "progressives" when discussing their political opponents. They use leftist terminology without thinking.
Click to expand...
It is because communists co-opted the term progress and as with many things, repeat the lie often enough and it becomes ingrained in culture.

I always point out that while they use the term, they actually stand for the opposite. Similar to how so-called anti-fascists so often exhibit fascist behavior.
 
You won't see this played over one time on the American media. My biggest complaint with this whole mess is, why now? It should have been resolved a decade ago.

 
Last edited:
Don Wassall said:
I never use the term "mainstream" when referring to them, that is a complimentary term implying that we're those who are on the fringe or are "extremists" of some kind. The corporate media are no longer remotely mainstream; if free commentary was allowed after articles and videos, what little credibility they have left would disappear completely, as illustrated by the few corporate media outlets that still do allow discussion.

Another term I dislike is "progressives" which is often (incorrectly) used by those who hate the left. Calling someone a progressive means you believe they stand for progress, when of course they stand for anything but. They're leftists, communists, even liberals, but one thing they definitely aren't are "progressives."
Click to expand...

I concur, but I wouldn't use the word "corporate" media it is more accurate to say "syndicated" media, as much of the smaller media are corporate, and I wouldn't even call them "liberals" because they busy themselves with what who others are and what others do and don't like to let others simply be and do as we others see fit.
 
Last edited:
Booth said:
You won't see this played over one time on the American media. My biggest complaint with this whole mess is, why now? It should have been resolved a decade ago.

Click to expand...

It is now because the Trump core of administrators are attempting to take down the financeers of the old hegemon and the globalists that serve them. Behind all, via back channels, Russia, China, and our America are ganging up to disconnect from the London financial plumbers that had the world all tapped in since they defeated the Axis of WW2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
American Freedom News
Back
Top