I just saw a post that discusses regarding "What's going on with China, Biden and Trump fiasco." It's interesting and all but to me,
in order for "the hypothesis about Trump having had worked with Epstein" to make any sense, the following needs to be answered:
Why did he allow himself to get arrested?
Considering its nature, I would never expect it to be fully answered and proved. But we should try to connect the dots at least partially to build any credibility in said hypothesis.
·
1
Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on the night of Saturday July 6, 2019:
He was said to know about his upcoming arrest well beforehand, but still decided to fly from Paris to Teterboro Airport on that Saturday. Then, he was arrested at said Airport.
He's not just your run-of-the-mill billionaire:
He was a politically superx100-well-connected billionaire, and was described as one of the architects of the famed Clinton Global Initiative, ffs.
Before the arrest, did he make some kind of deal with the decision makers at the US Justice Department at that time?
·
2
Reportedly, he shipped a $100K cement truck to his island [LINK], three weeks later the Miami Herald published its expose about him (published on Nov 28, 2018). And he had the contractors pour cement into the precious tunnels. It was said to be just before the Christmas.
So, it's a safe bet that he knew about his imminent arrest after the expose. Or for some reason, he chose to abolish the evidence or the DNA traces of who have been to said tunnel.
Miami Herald's expose about him, was it really an expose? Or merely a part of laying down the groundwork, so to speak. If it was, then groundwork for what exactly?
·
3
Within less than 90 days after the expose; on Feb 21, 2019,
the US District Court Judge named Kenneth Marra ruled that, during Epstein's non-prosecution agreement (2006–2008), the federal prosecutors violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA).
From this moment on, the US media started to build up the narrative of "Epstein = Acosta = Trump."
Look at this scandalous title of the Daily Beast article's: Alexander Acosta, Trump's Labor Secretary, Broke the Law in Jeffrey Epstein Case: Judge [LINK]
·
·
So, what was going on when he died?
My hypothesis is
a group of people behind Trump administration made a deal with Jeffrey Epstein before the expose published: They planned for having brought Epstein in to have him to stand trial.
His testimony would include evidence that indicates Clinton Foundation being involved in international human trafficking. Of course they wanted to get ready for the upcoming Presidential election campaign. If someone related to Clinton clique becomes a Democratic presidential candidate, they would use the evidence publicly or not.
But the guy in this picture happened. For the record, Mr. Barr started his stint as the 85th US Attorney General on February 14, 2019.
To me, bring him in just to kill him doesn't make any sense. Besides, his suspicious death while in jail would only make the administration look bad. And if you want to kill him, why wouldn't you do it at a remote area, so so nobody would know? Why cause the ruckus?
·
·
What are you guys' assessments?
Election was stolen, plain as the nose on your face. That said....
You think that Trump had control over low level union employees in federal prisons? lol
No. It wasn’t. And if you have actually have hard verifiable evidence that it was. Then by all means preset it.
Someone had control obviously, and I think the president is a likely candidate given all of the other facts that were laid out
The evidence is all hard and verifiable about the election theft, and if you have evidence it was free and fair, by all means present it.
If you think the president orders some low level guards about through like 15 layers of bureaucracy, that's just silly. If you do have evidence that Trump, say, gave an order, then by all means present it.
I think the President can absolutely order sympathetic guards, through his people. How is that any less laudable than “the Clintons ordered it”?
Obviously I have no evidence he did, as I laid out above: nor am I necessarily claiming he did. But add that to the string of facts linking him to Epstein and child rape snd sexual assault for decades, and it certainly becomes suspicious.
Well, there is a distinct and utterly large numbers of people that have wronged the Clintons committing suicide, and sometimes with two bullet wounds to the back of the head. But I see your point, which is that you're ascribing guilt by association, which is to say in more archaic terms, committing slander.
Carry on then.