Roughly six pages from more than 8,500 documents provided by Epstein’s estate to Democratic members on the House Oversight Committee include meeting schedules appearing to show appointments with Bannon and venture capitalist Peter Thiel during Donald Trump’s first term in office.

The documents also mention Musk joining a potential trip to Epstein’s island in 2014.

Prince Andrew also is listed in the documents as a passenger on Epstein’s aircraft, with financial disclosures provided to the committee suggesting evidence of payments from Epstein to an individual listed as “Andrew.”

His appointment with Bannon in 2019 was just months before Epstein was federally charged with trafficking and sexually abusing dozens of minors. Epstein pleaded not guilty and was found dead in a jail cell in New York in August 2019.

His appointment with Bannon in 2019 was just months before Epstein was federally charged with trafficking and sexually abusing dozens of minors. Epstein pleaded not guilty and was found dead in a jail cell in New York in August 2019.

  • Doomsider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    What theory!? I just said the government wasn’t telling the truth and I am open to any evidence you can provide.

    Hey, I get it. You just said all the classic shit to dismiss someone and I dismissed you instead. You are in over your head, you don’t have answers for what I say. That is okay.

    • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Yeah this other person is clearly just arguing against thinking. They aren’t in good faith at all.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 days ago

      You’ve internalized a nobody YouTuber as evidence of some grand conspiracy. To you, that’s legit evidence and Occam’s razor can go fuck itself. Who needs a degree in forensic analysis when you can watch a video and then read the Wikipedia blood spatter page that one time?

      Not much point in pushing me for “evidence”. The evidence is public, but go ahead with your standard online arguer shit: whatever cockamamie horseshit you spout is gospel unless someone takes 47 minutes to unsuccessfully change your mind about it.

      You said you were open to evidence but somehow I doubt it. And no, at this point I won’t waste more of my time with you. You believe a conspiracy theory which sounds stupid tbh. You won’t get any validation from me or from arguing with me further.