Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.
Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!
A federal judge has ordered the public disclosure of the identities of more than 150 people mentioned in a mountain of court documents related to the late-financier Jeffrey Epstein, saying that most of the names were already public and that many had not objected to the release.
The people whose names are to be disclosed, including sex abuse victims, litigation witnesses, Epstein’s employees — and even some people with only a passing connection to the scandal — have until Jan. 1 to appeal the order, signed Monday by Judge Loretta A. Preska.
For several years, Preska has reviewed documents sought by the Miami Herald from a civil case, filed by one of Epstein’s victims, that eventually was settled.
Many of the records related to that lawsuit were publicly released in past years, but on Monday the judge made determinations about some portions of the records that were initially withheld on potential privacy grounds and what can be made public about certain people mentioned in the records.
In many instances, she noted that individuals had given media interviews or that their names had previously emerged publicly in various ways, including at a trial two years ago of Epstein’s associate and former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell.
...
... We’ve analyzed the prior John Doe lists and compared it to today’s order. Here’s the summary of our findings:
...
Victims, witnesses and employees. But not Epstein's customers. The ones we need to know about will not be released.
I wonder how many of these 150 people have arrest warrants issued in their names.Starting on Wednesday night, the names of over 150 people tied to an Epstein lawsuit first filed back in 2015 are being unsealed in batches.
I wonder how many of these 150 people have arrest warrants issued in their names.
I think I know the answer.
And it's just a shame that Epstein killed himself before he had the opportunity to divulge any information of any real substance.
Rachel Chandler
Had no clue so I looked her up.
- https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/young-woman-clinton-epstein/
- https://www.dailydot.com/debug/qanon-rachel-chandler/
They'll get disappeared. Maybe get a mean tweet from a Republican.It's the societal norms that we have today that makes this seem outrageous. Go back 100, 1000, 2000 years or more and people were getting married at 12 and 13 years old. Kinds in their 40's and 50's were marrying queens in their early teens. 14-16. Even Trumps Hud secretary Ben Carsons Momma married at 13 and had a bunch of kids.
Nowadays we don't want 12 and 13 year olds getting married and having kids and IMO, rightly so, but it wasn't long ago that this was a thing.
These powerful people won't be prosecuted because they are controlled by the deep state. DS isn't giving up that control.
One thing I find odd is that with millions of dollars at stake here, very few women have come forward to make claims.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?