The Coronation has been now hijacked...

[DKG]

None of us commoners are a party to the full facts. Until everything is disclosed, preferably in a court of law, everything we say is

conjecture.

What are you talking About?



Which subject?

Epstein's clients

[caskur]

What are you talking About?



Which subject?

Epstein's clients

Here's Where We Found Bill Clinton's Name In Newly Unsealed Jeffrey Epstein Court Documents



AARON KELLER JUL 31, 2020 9:43 AM





Bill Clinton's name appears — almost in stealth — on several pages of a massive cache of court documents released late Thursday in cases surrounding Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and accuser Virginia Roberts Giuffre.





https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/heres-where-we-found-bill-clintons-name-in-newly-unsealed-jeffrey-epstein-court-documents/">https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/he ... documents/">https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/heres-where-we-found-bill-clintons-name-in-newly-unsealed-jeffrey-epstein-court-documents/

[Adolf Oliver Bush]

That's the point. My takeaway from Amy Robach's hot mic moment was her staff had convinced Roberts to come forward in the first place, that Roberts had taken some convincing to go public in the first place. Given what I've heard about the way Epstein and Maxwell treated their trafficked children, psychologically attacking and belittling them at every turn, the ABC staffers arguments had to have been persuasive.



ABC management spiking the story spiking the story "because royal wedding" has the ring of authenticity too, if only for the Disney connection (princess stories are Disney's bread and butter) but I also think it runs deeper than that. Considering Disney's long running fracas with the state of Florida and DeSantis's moves to outlaw the grooming of children in the classroom by teachers, at the very least I see media conglomerate carrying the now "arkancided" banker's water for him. Add to that the amount of Disney staff who have been found guilty of noncery, as well as the allegations of just how widespread Epstein's and Maxwell's sphere of influence was, it seems more than reasonable that open and transparent legal inquiry would be the logical choice to not only exonerate those accused, but also to reestablish faith, not only in them, but also the institutions they represent.



That this has not happened paints a very dark picture of the whole affair and the lack of moral fibre of its principle characters and the level of criminal disregard and contempt they hold for the rest of us. And yes, it is conjecture, but compelling enough to warrant proper deliberation of the kinds usually reserved for people like Trump and I seriously doubt we'll ever get it.



I don't doubt the sincerity of your reluctance to believe them capable of it Caskur; I imagine it akin to biting into a particularly plump and juicy strawberry to find maggots roiling under the skin. And as incredible as it may seem, this odious and repugnant affair, while serious enough to warrant the public and extended flaying of its participants if true, is far from being the ugliest of matters these people are alleged to have engaged in; it is barely a minor part of it. I don't imagine that sits too well with someone who is accustomed to holding the royal family as dear as I understand you to, but I suspect this goes far beyond simply holding the royals up for scrutiny, the rot is apparently more widespread than even that institution.



Someone like Lokmar might invoke the name of Lucifer to lay the blame at the door of. I'm agnostic and more inclined to think it a societal rot, widespread and cancerous and I would welcome excising it completely as such, that the rest of us can get on with the business of healing. Either way, it's something that reasonably should be dealt with



Court cases. That's the solution. Innocent until proven guilty (if you subscribe to the English tradition of the Magna Carta and Habeas Corpus as I do), guilty until proven innocent (if you think the French methods are better), I don't care. I would welcome it sorted and I know I am not alone in desiring that.

[Lokmar]

Its people choosing satan over God.

[caskur]

That's the point. My takeaway from Amy Robach's hot mic moment was her staff had convinced Roberts to come forward in the first place, that Roberts had taken some convincing to go public in the first place.

because fat fuck Giuffre was up to her fat fuck neck in procuring young teenagers for Epstein herself. And she would get done herself since she worked for Epstein past 18 years of age procuring young adolescents.



Are you unable to admit you've been wrongly persuaded to think a certain way due to being mislead by the media, especially the anti-monarchy far left media? You know, the far left media that promotes children learn sex via  transvestites pole dancing in front of 6 year olds.

[caskur]

Its people choosing satan over God.

When it comes to sex and breeding obviously teen girls are at the most desirable age... throughout history, girls were engaged at 15, married at 16, a child by 17. The latter generation gave girls another option, careers,..... so now humans (and rightly so) wait for girls to be fully mature before the nesting years.



They keep calling Epstein a paedo but in actual fact he was a hebephile. Paedos attack 12 year olds and under... And I am pretty sure he never had sex with those young adolescents.... he masturbated over them... (I am sorry I wrote that...I am just about hurling.)



Most of us consider this a very serious crime to the point we want to actually fry paedos, so leveling false accusations at innocent people and putting their life in danger is a very, very, very bad thing. We want bad guys dead, sure, absolutely sure but I am extremely uncomfortable frying innocent people wrongly accused.

[caskur]

Personally, if I was Andrew, I would sue 60 Minutes in Australia for misleading the public about paedophiles and false accusations and letting fat sluts voice their bulldust. I stopped watching 60 Minutes when channel 9 carried on and lied about sea levels rising and the Maldives were sinking....  I did watch the parents of Cleo talk about Cleo being rescued off the abo kidnapper in our north though so I had to break my own self imposed boycott of 9.... but channel 9 push far left woke rubbish on the general public so I don't support their station if I can help it.



I am really sensitive to false accusations because we were falsely accused by ch 9 blaming us ON THE NEWS IN FRONT OF THE WHOLE STATE in 1998 for not having insurance when boongs burned our house down.... but we did have insurance.... we had mortgage insurance. We were just under insured at the time....



The lesson I learned was, you cannot rely on the media for the entire truth.



Its funny.... my old boyfriend Phillip's father was the editor of a WA newspaper and Phillip used to say to me, only believe half of what you read, and after 40 years, it has just suddenly dawned on me. I must be slow.

[caskur]

The other thing that concerns me is how Ginger Whinger wrote about getting a girl drunk and having sex with her in his memoirs. He was 17, she was 19... No one has called him out on that.



 He never spoke to her again.



To me, that was date rape... Maybe I am oversensitive.

[Adolf Oliver Bush]

That's the point. My takeaway from Amy Robach's hot mic moment was her staff had convinced Roberts to come forward in the first place, that Roberts had taken some convincing to go public in the first place.

because fat fuck Giuffre was up to her fat fuck neck in procuring young teenagers for Epstein herself. And she would get done herself since she worked for Epstein past 18 years of age procuring young adolescents.



Are you unable to admit you've been wrongly persuaded to think a certain way due to being mislead by the media, especially the anti-monarchy far left media?

Are you?



I've said all along this matter and others need to be properly investigated to it's fullest extent and punishments meted out to all concerned. But then I've always held the idea of right to a fair and speedy trial, along with the proper provision that all evidence be considered. I'm not the one who has decided guilt before the fact, nor am I waging ad hominem attacks against various sources including selected plaintiffs and I have been at pains to avoid all strawmen arguments as I may.



I have in point of fact been doing my level best to uphold English tradition in this regard. More so than you it seems. Bread and circuses aside, your standard for acquittal for your preferred defendants appears to be quite easily met, while you would set the bar for anyone accusing them impossibly high.



I have yet to be presented with any compelling counter-narrative that fits what little I know or can reasonably infer from it. That includes any angry demands that I admit error in asking for a resolution of the matter of paedophilia in the royal court, nor the wider allegation of King Charles effectively treating the citizens and their affairs as a feudal style resource to be milked. An altogether more serious matter than whether or not Andrew engaged in improper weenie moistening.



If you want to get angry about this, go right ahead. If there is any error I might have made, it might be expressed as presuming you capable of reasonable and balanced discussion on the topics raised. I have entered into discussion in good faith. If you are not capable of meeting it, then mea culpa and no foul intended. I think you know my abilities well enough by now to know that if it's petty namecalling you wish to engage in, I can, if so inclined, meet you more than halfway.

...channel 9 push far left woke rubbish on the general public so I don't support their station if I can help it.

Australia's entire mainstream media is captured, as has a large percentage of your political landscape. Your most recent federal election was interfered with by none other than the Australian Electoral Commission when they were caught misleading voters into voting for anyone but independent representatives and I notice very little was reported regarding that affair, nor was anything said about the interminable assertions that an untested emergency use treatment was 100% safe and effective vaccine while your fittest and healthiest were dropping dead of heart attacks left and right after it was rolled out. And accusing anyone who called attention to it indulging in conspiracy theories and misinformation.

I am really sensitive to false accusations because we were falsely accused by ch 9 blaming us ON THE NEWS IN FRONT OF THE WHOLE STATE in 1998 for not having insurance when boongs burned our house down.... but we did have insurance.... we had mortgage insurance. We were just under insured at the time....



The lesson I learned was, you cannot rely on the media for the entire truth.

I put it to you that you cannot "rely" on the media for anything, other than for them to tell you what they want you to know and what they want you to think about. That does not mean you dismiss them out of hand, it means you must cast your net wider and include as many different sources as you can



It's not easy and it is quite time consuming. Also confronting, since there are many who will tell you things that offend your sensibilities. But paying attention to it all is precisely what due diligence is and you must decide for yourself what fits and what doesn't.



I don't pay as much attention to the mainstream media as I used to. I learned long ago its nature, as you learned it through your own experience. You should know that it is foolhardy to consider it an impartial authority, as it is foolhardy to take anyone's word unchallenged. Comment and favour is easily bought and this has been true for all of history; it was as old as Methuselah by the time the forerunners of yesterdays mastheads appeared, never mind the silver screen iteration.



I sincerely hope you take a deep breath and rejoin the discussion with a clearer head and open mind, as I was paying attention to you in spite of what you may think. I'm not interested in your aggro or anger; I've seen it before and it doesn't interest me.

[caskur]

Have you listened to Lady C's vid yet?

[Adolf Oliver Bush]

Have you listened to Lady C's vid yet?

No, not yet. Have you taken in any of The Lotus Eaters long form content?

[caskur]

Have you listened to Lady C's vid yet?

No, not yet. Have you taken in any of The Lotus Eaters long form content?

I try and listen to most vids put up...



There is a current court case on Giuffre atm.



https://nypost.com/2023/03/06/epstein-accuser-claims-virginia-giuffre-performed-oral-sex-on-her/">https://nypost.com/2023/03/06/epstein-a ... ex-on-her/">https://nypost.com/2023/03/06/epstein-accuser-claims-virginia-giuffre-performed-oral-sex-on-her/



Accused Epstein recruiter Rina Oh claims Virginia Giuffre performed oral sex on her



By Michael Kaplan and Priscilla DeGregory



March 6, 2023 | 5:52pm



One of Jeffrey Epstein's accused recruiters has filed new legal claims against Virginia Roberts Giuffre detailing how Giuffre allegedly performed oral sex on her to turn on the pedophile financier.



Rina Oh, 43, alleges in Manhattan Supreme Court papers filed Friday that in the early fall of 2001, while in Epstein's Upper East Side townhouse massage room, a "giggling" Giuffre "performed oral sex" on her as the twisted millionaire watched and masturbated.



Please read the rest on the link above.. it takes far too long to cut out the ads and stuff.



Oh is trying to sue Virginia Giuffre for 10 million.

[caskur]

If you don't have time to see the questions from Giuffre' lawyer and Andrews answers to them then I cannot go any further.... Lady C went to the effort of informing everyone what was going on...



What she did was monumental!!!

[caskur]

Have you listened to Lady C's vid yet?

No, not yet. Have you taken in any of The Lotus Eaters long form content?

Yes I did. I believe every word.....

[Adolf Oliver Bush]

No, not yet. Have you taken in any of The Lotus Eaters long form content?

I try and listen to most vids put up...

You should probably browse some of their content. I'd suggest starting with safer topics (their deep dives on greek philosophers can be quite interesting.



As for the Oh v Guiffre, I'm aware of the case, that's a whole other aspect to the overall mess that I didn't think pertinent to our discussion regarding Andrew. It may prove otherwise, the details aren't abundantly clear, even after reading the whole article and any relevance depends on how it shakes out. So far,  unless I am to consider it as a potentially vexatious case orchestrated either by agents of the Crown or their associates, I don't see a connection. That isn't to say that one doesn't exist of course.



I did notice that both women are accusing the other of procuring for Epstein. It wouldn't surprise me to learn definitively that both were correct to make such claims, as Maxwell herself has been alleged to have groomed hers and Epstein's harem to the task. Also noted was the presence of Oh's "friend" in the three way that Epstein was masturbating over as he directed the participants actions.



It isn't clear if Oh is suing her friend as well, no mention of it is made anywhere. I'm prepared to entertain the notion of a level of coercion, though I find it a little difficult to swallow that Guiffre's involvement was the only aspect that rendered Oh an unwilling participant of the three way. Not impossible mind you, but being okay with a sex act in front of a voyeur like Epstein until Roberts shows up... it's a bit of a stretch.



Now, you might say here "because it's a defamation case, dummy". Fine, then what possible bearing do the details of three three girls getting their freak on in front of Epstein have to do with it? Cheap window dressing perhaps? A gilding of the lily, aimed at prejudicing the reader against one of the participants? I'm getting the distinct impression that an appeal to both the prurient interest and not a little moral grandstanding is at play here. And the takewaya I am getting is that two of the three  girls are arguing over whether one or more of them were "victims" in recruiting more underagers to carry on the sordid tradition as the third remains forgotten and unremarked. Apart from whatever she was being told to do to Oh at the time their Svengali mentor was beating his meat to their antics that is.



What I'm not getting is an exoneration of any of the others involved, or their business partners. Maybe once the verdict is in perhaps?



Sorry, pure logic leads me here.



One thing though, and it's something I find useful... you might too. You mentioned carving out ads from the linked article was onerous for you, I'd invite you to make use of the services that https://archive.today">//https://archive.today offers. It's a service that takes a third party snapshot of a webpage, strips out much of the advertising content while it does it too. Additionally, if the page is edited or even outright deleted after the fact, you still have the archive of it with a handy truncated link... https://archive.ph/E7CLB">//https://archive.ph/E7CLB ...thus. It even allows you access behind a good many paywalls, so you can get the full article instead of merely a teaser AND you deprive any clickbait sites of ad revenue.



Cuts down on dead links, delivers the goods with almost none of the garbage. I used it often, particularly where the mainstream media is concerned, as many a site has been caught out rewording their content after the fact.



But you will have what they originally said to refer back to. Just plug your URL into the box at the top of their page... you may even find there is an https://archive.ph/Wo4T8">archived version of the page already.