Virginia Giuffre ‘Quiteted’

April 26, 2025

Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli agent tasked with blackmailing U.S. politicians and business people by providing them with under-age girls. Virginia Giuffre, then 17, was on of those victims.

Epstein was jailed and, on August 10 2019, found dead in his cell. I headlined:

Epstein Suicided

Unsurprisingly Jeffrey Epstein was found dead, presumably by suicide, as that is what 'officials' claim:

Jailed multimillionaire financier and accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein has died by suicide, according to two law enforcement sources. …

Just yesterday a court released the first 2,000 pages of a civil case against Epstein's madame, Ghislaine Maxwell:

[Epstein victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre], who turned 36 on Friday, names a number of other men in politics, academia and business that she says she was directed to have sex with. In a 2017 interview with the Miami Herald, Giuffre said that Epstein wanted her to please various influential people then so that he could learn about their sexual peccadilloes and use them as leverage if he needed to.

While there’s no direct evidence contained in the court record substantiating her accounts with prominent men, Giuffre did provide testimony and evidence to corroborate her claims of exploitation at the hands of Epstein and Maxwell through photographs, plane logs and even a medical record from Presbyterian Hospital in New York where Giuffre was taken by Epstein after a particularly abusive sex episode.

I concluded the post with this:

Some of those influential people who Epstein, or the organization behind him, blackmailed, will be quite happy that he is gone. They will now try to bury the rest of the case. Giuffre and other witnesses better watch their backs.

Today we learn that Virginia Giuffre is dead (archived):

Ms. Giuffre (pronounced JIFF-ree) died by suicide, according to a statement by the family. She wrote in an Instagram post in March that she was days away from dying of renal failure after being injured in an automobile crash with a school bus that she said was traveling at nearly 70 miles per hour.

This is curious.

Potential renal failure in March is supposed to be the cause for a suicide in late April? Why is the NY Times insinuating this?

We have dialysis to counter renal failure and hundreds of thousands survive with it. Then there are kidney transplants. Giuffre was 40 years old. One does not die of kidney failure at that age. It is not a reason to suicide oneself.

Consider this:

Virginia Giuffre @VRSVirginia – 3:32 UTC · Dec 11, 2019

I am making it publicy known that in no way, shape or form am I sucidal. I have made this known to my therapist and GP- If something happens to me- in the sake of my family do not let this go away and help me to protect them. Too many evil people want to see me quiteted

Posted by b on April 26, 2025 at 15:42 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Debsisdead | Apr 27 2025 3:08 utc | 94
Perhaps b will let this through, perhaps not. There has been aspects I have disagreed with you debs and other aspects that can only command respect. This internet …. what to make of people – it is in what they write over a period of time. You have posted something quite personal. What to say? You are someone who at times I, perhaps more often than not disagree with yet there is some quality that I always respect. I guess its along the lines of you walking your talk.
The walk of life Debs, the walk of life.

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Apr 27 2025 4:20 utc | 101

I never understood why Trumpers thought Trump would do anything about Epstein that was in any way revelatory. Were some of his rivals on the airplane logs? Sure, but so were plenty of his friends, and, naturally, Trump himself. Trump is pictured numerous times with Epstein, partying along with him, and publicly commented on their close relationship before he had to distance himself due to the public revelation of Epstein’s pedophilia. We all know Trump is a venal pervert, but is his reality distortion field so good that it turns peoples minds off to this, and deflects it to others? It’s unfortunate that the enduring legacy and influence of the Clintons in the Democratic party prevented them from campaigning more on the Trump-Epstein affiliation.

Posted by: fnord | Apr 27 2025 4:23 utc | 102

Debsisdead | Apr 27 2025 3:08 utc | 94
Thanks for that personal story. Mental illness is incomprehensible to those who know nothing of it.
I think you have offered a very good explanation without the conspiracy theory.

Posted by: ZimZum | Apr 27 2025 4:24 utc | 103

When Chomsky’s name was found on one of Epstein’s lists, he did an interview (prior to Epstein’s death) in which he, Chomsky, explained that when he was a young academic on the hard-charging climb to the top he and his wife did not know a lot about their finances, so they turned those matters over to Epstein.
This was Chomsky’s way of distancing himself from the post-2008 toxicity of revelations regarding Epstein and sex-trafficking.
But how many taxpayers coincidentally engage a guy like Epstein to handle their finances-?
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Apr 26 2025 23:51 utc | 76
Mmmm, curious. Noel Chomsky lived just outside the gate of Lincoln Laboratories in Lexington Massachusetts. This is getting pretty spooky.

Posted by: ramAustralia | Apr 27 2025 4:28 utc | 104

Mine are much less harsh, but I can imagine what you talk about.
Posted by: persiflo | Apr 27 2025 3:55 utc | 98
persiflo. This view we have of the world? Left vs right. By we I mean to a small extent some here but to a much larger extent, the MSM readership the majority of the western world.
Conservative socialism. How does that grab you?
As regards my demise, Mark Twain had a good answer for that – “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated”.
In the hardest of hard times, my sister flew over. One mate stuck with me, another greatly feared death and no longer speaks to me.
To me, we are mammals of thge primate group. We are borne, we breed, we die. No different to any other living organism.
What are your thoughts?

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Apr 27 2025 4:43 utc | 105

There is an entire list of names that appeared in Epstein’s notebook including that of Donald Trump.
It’s funny that there is a focus on attacking Noam Chomsky here who I think has proved himself as a a warrior against the very system that is deep state and has documented virtually every practice that has created the corrupt mess that is the US these days. He even addressed its downfall in his “Requiem for the American Dream” which I think is a masterpiece of showing how the ultimate aim of deep state and its billionaire elite was to fragment and destroy any cohesion between ‘the people’ through deliberate division and pitting everyone against everyone (in the best manner of Thomas Hobbes).
None of us know Chomsky personally, nor his wife at the time, so it is mere conjecture and conspiracy theory gossip to pretend his motivations were indicative of his being a liar about his short relationship with Epstein many years ago.
I suggest that people regard the entire list of names and make similar comments about others (if they have any genuine facts) than simply go for one of the people that new him momentarily and someone that has demonstrated a great perception of the various sicknesses and diseases that have acted as a cancer on US society. If anyone has clear cut evidence of Chomsky being a willing accomplice of what Epstein was up to then I suggest they produce it because otherwise what I have seen so far is nothing but pure gossip and in line with “I say he is a witch because he is a witch”.
Let’s note that it would be very much acting as a convenient tool of deep state and the corrupt and richest US elites to bring down Chomsky for the sake of their purposes while neglecting many of the other names on the list and others Epstein associated with as if they were insignificant
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/epstein-list-virginia-giuffre-prince-andrew-b2739882.html

Posted by: George | Apr 27 2025 5:03 utc | 106

It is very possible, some say even probable, that Epstein was extracted by his Mossad, Shin Bet or whoever handlers and not suicided.
Similarly, the Giuffre “suicide” may be a cover story for her desire to be out of the spotlight, knowing that many rich and powerful may pay good money to have her dead.

Posted by: Fool Me Twice | Apr 27 2025 5:07 utc | 107

“None of us know Chomsky personally, nor his wife at the time, so it is mere conjecture and conspiracy theory gossip to pretend his motivations were indicative of his being a liar about his short relationship with Epstein many years ago.
Dang it. Until you said that, I thought you had a lot of good stuff to say. But no. Anyone questioning MSM and gubbmint propoganda is a “conspiracy theorist”. GTFO.

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 5:20 utc | 108

Anyone who freely uses the term “conspiracy theorist” as a cheap way to try to win points is, as far as I am concerned, just a shill for the PTB.

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 5:24 utc | 109

Posted by: Debsisdead | Apr 27 2025 3:08 utc | 94
I dunno where you got your report about Giuffre’s accident, but the police accident report states:
On 2 April, the day after, the local bus driver involved in the incident, Ross Munns stated — “The driver basically pulled out in front of me. I made sure she was alright. I dropped all the kids off and next day I went and did a police report. She was elderly (81 apparently) and I asked if she was ok, and she said, ‘Yes I’m ok’. I asked if she lived here and she said, ‘No I’m a carer’, and I told her she needs to put her indicator on when you have to turn. That’s all the conversation was, and she asked how the kids were and I said, ‘fine’. It wasn’t a major crash.”
Note, no mention of Giuffre at all.
Giuffre was clearly not driving.
Not even any mention of any other “injured” passenger.
She was not “weaving all over the road” as you said above.
And certainly no bruised, hospitalised Giuffre.
Perhaps the “carer” was Giuffre’s own minder/nurse.
As regards her root conditions as a teen, for which I have much compassion and personal experience like you– but of a benzo addict who actually got free of them, Giuffre was a family tearaway, got into trouble early. Noone truly loved her. Abused young? Probably. Easy to fall for anyone showing affection. Ya feel wanted, valued, even when exploited AND ESPECIALLY WHEN PAID WELL.
After leaving Epstein, the new rescue-husband, plus the later public celebrity victim-sympathy becomes her “lover”, her support of self worth.
Yes, she was used by the MeToo cause, by all the legal vultures, to bring down the rich and famous. But she also intentionally fabricated too much not to get caught out. She was described by even her own previous lawyers and publishers and biography writers as a blackmailer. But still the international mythos of innocent exploited heroine was played out.
And yet, all along, she always had the option of detox and honesty. The thing is, many abused young girls DO recover … but out of the limelight. Some do not, the difference being not the crime but the personality and temperament and authentic support. Public “battles” with abuse and abusers, making oneself a cause célèbre, guarantee no real healing. Never confuse righteous anger, legalist revenge, and public acclaim of your victimhood with therapy and resolution. Sadly, clearly, Virginia had no resolution in her heart. That’s the real tragedy.

Posted by: OMG | Apr 27 2025 5:34 utc | 110

“Dang it. Until you said that, I thought you had a lot of good stuff to say. But no. Anyone questioning MSM and gubbmint propoganda is a “conspiracy theorist”. GTFO.”
Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 5:20 utc | 108
Where is the evidence on Chomsky? I’ve yet to see anything presented as fact from any of the critics on these pages concerning Chomsky, or yourself, while as I have previously said many other names on Epstein’s list and others he has associated with are avoided. So the comments I refer to (not specifically yours) are accusations to spread rumours. Rumours can turn into conspiracy theories. I could not care less about what you think about me. If you can prove what you or anyone else has said about Chomsky without it being a baseless conjecture then produce it and I will fully accept it.
Trying to besmirch me by switching off the validity of what I write (in your opinion) is no argument.

Posted by: George | Apr 27 2025 5:41 utc | 111

What are your thoughts?
Posted by: Peter AU1 | Apr 27 2025 4:43 utc | 105
HE IS RISEN!

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Apr 27 2025 5:44 utc | 112

Another view point. On this specific case as a premature woman she had a good business relation with Epstein. She found her man while being on a business trip in Asia and lived happily in Australia with her 3 kids. After the Epstein case started rolling, she saw the opportunity to make a lot of money. So they moved to the US, she became a celebrity by playing the victim, bought a house of 2 million, etc.. As expected this destroyed her marriage and things got worse and worse. Ultimately she played the final act and committed suicide. A good example of how these people are used by some kind of media and ultimately destroying their own live.
Epstein very likely worked on his own. Their are other ways to blackmail influential people than sleeping with girls that look like adults.

Posted by: hubert | Apr 27 2025 5:53 utc | 113

Indeed. What we already know is bad enough to act upon. But still we do not act. We cower on obscure forums pretending how brave and smart we all are.
“You won’t fool us, we are not Chumps” is the war cry. Oh gawd what a joke it all is.
Posted by: William | Apr 27 2025 2:55 utc | 92
There is only one way to act and that requires the violent destruction of the elite core that controls the Empire.
Only those willing to bear the consequences – or those with nothing to lose – can do it.

Posted by: Arch Bungle | Apr 27 2025 5:55 utc | 114

“There is only one way to act and that requires the violent destruction of the elite core that controls the Empire.
Only those willing to bear the consequences – or those with nothing to lose – can do it.”
Posted by: Arch Bungle | Apr 27 2025 5:55 utc | 114
While that may very likely happen, and there are even some signs that it is, would you agree that it is what happened during the French Revolution of the 1790s and the Russian Revolution staring in 1917? And if it is, how do you create a governance that does not end up creating a similar system where some elites profit and others are exploited?
Or are you talking about violence and warfare between countries with the obvious new and developing geopolitical alignments. A genuine question since I have no answer for this myself.

Posted by: George | Apr 27 2025 6:13 utc | 115

Posted by: George | Apr 27 2025 5:41 utc | 111
My point was about Chomsky and his sickening besmirching of anyone questioning the “official story” of 9/11. I posted YouTube above showing him doing that. I have no opinion at all about Chomsky’s wife, or his possible association with Epstein. All that is just a bunch of speculative crap. Might as well be talking about the Kardashians or Paris Hilton.
I overstated things a bit, I am sorry. You do often write well-crafted posts that are worthwhile to read, despite my sudden burst of anger about your use of the cheap smear “conspiracy theorist”.

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 6:16 utc | 116

Well a mighty mystery to wake upto!
PeterAU1
G’day cobber!
Your sick note is short.
Thus believable.
I guess you have to explain just a little bit more… for the sake of posterity.
Not necessarily here but maybe to karlof?
Who knows your real name and brought us the initial news of your demise.
I’d appreciate some confirmation via him.
Of course you may have good reasons.
Life beyond the boards takes precedent.
I hope it’s the real you. Warts and all.
But dammit man!
Why let us stew all these months?

Posted by: DunGroanin | Apr 27 2025 6:17 utc | 117

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 6:16 utc | 116
“My point was about Chomsky and his sickening besmirching of anyone questioning the “official story” of 9/11″.
OK I was not aware of that, and I would not agree with everything Chomsky says either, but I accept that people are like a package deal and some of what they say we may agree with, and other parts not. Like both of us and our respective opinions. I guess I stand up for Chomsky because I cannot believe that someone could have spent their life writing so much excellent and perceptive material even as a linguist and be a fake at the end of the day, as some would dismiss him as here when there are others that are possibly far more unpalatable on that famous list. If he was involved with paedophilia and Epstein I would denounce him, but I’m exceedingly cautious concerning gossip, probably the worst form of anything that could ever resemble the truth
I have my doubts about 9/11 too especially the collapse of the third building that has never made sense to me. Unfortunately in the day and age of disinformation and misinformation we are all scrambling to know the truth. This is truly terrible. I think we need and want some truth, its in our nature.
I take heart in your apology, because it takes a courageous, honest, and honourable man to do that, greater than many, and I equally apologise to you if I may have caused you any harm or reacted in unpleasant ways myself in your experience. This is a rare thing on these pages. Our moment of conflict here has led to knowing each other better and having more respect for each other and that is a very positive thing.
I guess one thing that is important to me, is that I am well aware of the efforts going on to create division among ‘the people’ as I call them. It’s like throwing a bone into a pack of dogs: none of them notice who threw the bone while they are fighting. In times like these I prefer to unite with other people (as you probably do like to do as well) otherwise we all are destroyed by Philip II of Macedon’s ‘divide and conquer’ theory when we’d be better off uniting against he people who are really trying to destroy us.

Posted by: George | Apr 27 2025 6:49 utc | 118

In most US juridictions, being 17 or older is not legally “under age”. Age of consent varies according to state, however. Most Latin American countries have lower legal ages of consent than do US juridictions. For example, in Mexico, the age of consent is 15.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_in_the_United_States

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 6:52 utc | 119

@Peter AU1 || 105

What are your thoughts?

Respect.
I’m not ready to believe in mind rays yet, but the ‘conservative socialist’ has been in my head for a while. Never spoken out.

Posted by: persiflo | Apr 27 2025 7:01 utc | 120

FYI, the age of consent in Russia is 16. According to default AI on Google.
“In Russia, the age of consent is 16 years old, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.”

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 7:05 utc | 121

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 26 2025 17:35 utc | 22
Historically speaking some people – like you – are heartless morons that like to moralize because generally speaking without that empty moralizing stick they would basically have nothing wise to say, so they sell out platitudes that calm their “conscience” as wisdom.
I hope I helped!

Posted by: Marija | Apr 27 2025 7:11 utc | 122

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Apr 26 2025 17:35 utc | 22
Historically speaking some people – like you – are heartless mo rons that like to moralize because generally speaking without that empty moralizing stick they would basically have nothing to say, so they sell out platitudes that calm their “conscience” as wisdom.
I hope I helped!

Posted by: Marija | Apr 27 2025 7:12 utc | 123

Hoarse whisperer @ 22, 100:
I can see you’ll never make the ranks of the few and far between compassionate and decent Good Samaritans in the way you’ve carried on so far.

Posted by: Refinnejenna | Apr 27 2025 7:41 utc | 124

Strange how the legal age of consent has risen over the years. Check out this snippet from the previously linked Wiki page:
“In 1880, the ages of consent were set at 10 or 12 in most states, with the exception of Delaware where it was 7.”
(Joe Biden is from Delaware, shocking).

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 7:46 utc | 125

Much emotion on this thread.
Very little critical thinking.

Posted by: necromancer | Apr 27 2025 7:55 utc | 126

My point was about Chomsky and his sickening besmirching of anyone questioning the “official story” of 9/11. I posted YouTube above showing him doing that. I have no opinion at all about Chomsky’s wife, or his possible association with Epstein. All that is just a bunch of speculative crap. Might as well be talking about the Kardashians or Paris Hilton.
I overstated things a bit, I am sorry. You do often write well-crafted posts that are worthwhile to read, despite my sudden burst of anger about your use of the cheap smear “conspiracy theorist”.
Posted by: Spectator | Apr 27 2025 6:16 utc
I’ve yet to see any evidence of Chomsky been in any of Epstein’s lists. If you say this is the case why don’t you provide it.
Sounds like you’re dismissing everything Chomsky has written because you don’t agree with his views on 9/11.
Logically I could never understand 9/11 truthers, as logically, if the US wanted a false flag attack they didn’t have to destroy multi billion dollar buildings to do it. A single plane or even a few people killed would do the trick, as the bar for the US to attack another country is very low.

Posted by: Silent Waves | Apr 27 2025 9:28 utc | 127

What a damm shame. I am surprised she lived that long. Going public helped her survive but those organizations have long memories and abundant resources to ruin lives with a long track record of doing so.
What is one more dead person to that crew she was dealing with?

‘Public demands for transparency under law’: DOJ violating FOIA by refusing to release Jeffrey Epstein files, conservative watchdog says

Posted by: cirrcumspect | Apr 27 2025 9:41 utc | 128

The Resonance
@Partisan_12
Whitney Webb explains the connection between Epstein & 1$rael.
She is an outstanding investigative journalist, renowned for her in-depth coverage, especially when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein.
https://x.com/Partisan_12/status/1916345022192185728

Posted by: Menz | Apr 27 2025 10:05 utc | 129

But how many taxpayers coincidentally engage a guy like Epstein to handle their finances-?
Posted by: steel_porcupine | Apr 26 2025 23:51 utc | 76

At that time (when Chomsky was young) Epstein wasn’t controversial. He probably sold his product very professionally, the product being financial advice. So there is no reason not to believe Chomsky here.

Posted by: Avtonom | Apr 27 2025 10:45 utc | 130

@necromancer || 126

Much emotion on this thread.
Very little critical thinking.

Sadly, that’s true, and it might have been a critical moment. A friend came over yesterday, who had hosted a buddy over a few days whom we now must expect to have done a really, really bad thing. Worse even than Raskolnikov. My friend didn’t forewarn me, just came in when he had to tell his story, and this led to me having the one drink too much which then gave me this unresolvable paranoid touch when Peter’s ghost showed up. I felt threatened, but I also instantly knew not everyone can read me that well.
Mistakes tend to happen in chains of them.

Posted by: persiflo | Apr 27 2025 10:56 utc | 131

Tom_Q_Collins, Aleph_Null, Naive, and all the others who chimed in against that cynical post by Hoarsewhisperer:
Thanks a lot. You improve the atmosphere in here.

Posted by: Avtonom | Apr 27 2025 10:59 utc | 132

Again the synchronicity is striking. This fellow, whom I luckily never met, was a benzo abuser, too. In relapse, and on withdrawal. …. his own mother …
Sorry Pete, I wasn’t up to it at that moment. I shouldn’t have been here.

Posted by: persiflo | Apr 27 2025 11:08 utc | 133

@George | Apr 27 2025 6:49 utc | 118

I have my doubts about 9/11 too especially the collapse of the third building that has never made sense to me.

The “third building” was WTC7 and it was hit by nothing, but the steel frame building still fell flat into its own footprint. If you have any remote engineering background you know it is not physically possible.
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/

This is a study of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) — a 47-story building that suffered a total collapse at 5:20 PM on September 11, 2001, following the horrible events of that morning. The objective of the study was threefold: (1) Examine the structural response of WTC 7 to fire loads that may have occurred on September 11, 2001; (2) Rule out scenarios that could not have caused the observed collapse; and (3) Identify types of failures and their locations that may have caused the total collapse to occur as observed

Posted by: Norwegian | Apr 27 2025 11:29 utc | 134

Re: 9/11
As a PE with decades in the construction business; and a eyewitness to the events on 9/11 – I can tell you with 100% certainty ….
Buildings just don‘t fall down like that

Posted by: Exile | Apr 27 2025 11:49 utc | 135

DOES ANYONE KNOW WHERE TO FIND THE New York Presbyterian hospital report of Giufre’s sexual abuse injuries? Can’t find it anywhere, just reports that she died by suicide. Proof to me she was murdered by some powerful people.

Posted by: Fortuna | Apr 27 2025 12:09 utc | 136

Testimony: the kingdom was involved.
https://t.me/Camille_Moscow/6975

Posted by: Naive | Apr 27 2025 12:30 utc | 137

The Epstein saga helped solidify the criminal relationship between Israel and the US. The depraved actions we’re seeing by those 2 countries in Gaza, Yemen and Syria is a continuation of this. It is also a powerful exposure of this depravity.

Posted by: financial matters | Apr 27 2025 12:33 utc | 138

The gullibility of everyone on this thread is extreme. Events are manipulated. We do not see the hidden hand. Speculation is fine. Certainty about any of this is nonsense.
Some speculation is foolish. Epstein was not a blackmail operation. Has anyone read the known list of patrons? Or do you just read glosses of the lists? It is not possible to blackmail Evelyn de Rothschild. It is not possible to blackmail David Rockefeller. It is not possible to blackmail Lord Stanley, Earl of Derby. It is not possible to blackmail Ehud Barak. It is not possible to blackmail Hillary Clinton.
Epstein ran an entertainment service. Hardly the only one. The girls you have seen are the ones they want you to see.

Posted by: oldhippie | Apr 27 2025 13:09 utc | 139

She was probably already dead in those bus crash photos.

Posted by: Stephanie | Apr 27 2025 13:18 utc | 140

Whitney Webb’s 2 volume set One Nation Under Blackmail is a useful read. Epstein had many accomplices as well as targets.

Posted by: financial matters | Apr 27 2025 13:23 utc | 141

from #104
Chomsky, explained that when he was a young academic on the hard-charging climb to the top…
>>Noam Chomsky… Sometimes called “the father of modern linguistics”
Reading through Chomsky’s work in linguistics, the impression I got is that it really shouldn’t be called science because it is unverifyable theory. String Theory over in the physics department has that same feature. I see both as a kind of academic churning. They have to keep coming up with something new to retain their status as theoreticians.

Posted by: Jmaas | Apr 27 2025 14:44 utc | 142

The concept of organized crime is that it is a group of people who conspire to commit a crime. That is why you can’t leave the group. Anyone of them could rat out the rest, usually for favorable legal treatment. Thus if you leave the group you are no longer useful, but still a potential hazard to the rest. So, they are better off if the defector is dead, putting anybody who drops out at considerable risk. For Epstein it was the same thing: he was no longer useful but a hazard for the rest. The curious thing is that Maxwell is still alive. I’m guessing that killing her along with Epstein would be too obvious, too strong a tell for what is going on, and thus for now she gets to live.

Posted by: Jmaas | Apr 27 2025 14:58 utc | 143

Jmaas 144,
I agree, killing Ghislaine Maxwell this soon would be much too obvious, although her father was off’d back in the day so Ghislaine’s end has not been forestalled due to a feared notoriety. My guess is she will eventually be released on the promise of silience, fade into obscurity, then murdered to tie up loose ends. To the assets touting, “nothing to see here” once again I remind folks Ghislaine Maxwell was given a political trial by Maurene Comey. And who is Maurene Comey?
“Maurene Comey is James Comey’s Daughter and she was the Lead Prosecutor in Ghislaine Maxwell’s Trial. So, a Hillary/Obama apparatchiks daughter was handed the case to silence Ghislaine Maxwell…
– Posted by: S Brennan-19
Only a witting/unwitting servant of the 3LAs would say that all of this “suiciding” of people who have blackmail material on the ultra rich/powerful is normal stuff related to drug-use or, as in one case, an attempt at slut-shaming…sheesh.

Posted by: S Brennan | Apr 27 2025 15:40 utc | 144

“Lol at all you conspiracy fantasists and disingenuous victim-supporters.
Posted by: OMG | Apr 27 2025 0:45 utc | 80”
the people here are “conspiracy theorists” ad-hominem… solid argument. im convinced!

Posted by: anob | Apr 27 2025 16:00 utc | 145

Giuffre didn’t kill herself

Posted by: goldhoarder | Apr 27 2025 16:04 utc | 146

“Epstein very likely worked on his own. Their are other ways to blackmail influential people than sleeping with girls that look like adults.
Posted by: hubert | Apr 27 2025 5:53 utc | 113”
solid logic, complete with a defense of pedophilia because they supposedly “looked like adults”… im convinced!

Posted by: anob | Apr 27 2025 16:06 utc | 147

oldhippie | Apr 27 2025 13:09 utc | 140
*** It is not possible to blackmail Evelyn de Rothschild. It is not possible to blackmail David Rockefeller. It is not possible to blackmail Lord Stanley, Earl of Derby. It is not possible to blackmail Ehud Barak. It is not possible to blackmail Hillary Clinton.***
Unless what any of them (and associates) was up to was outstandingly bad, far more so than usual potential ‘blackmail’ things?
They may well bypass all legal constraints, but what about positive personal historical “reputation” (no matter how fake) which does seem to matter quite a lot to some “top” people?

Posted by: Cynic | Apr 27 2025 16:16 utc | 148

persiflo@95 As written, this is an expose of the buffoon who can’t tell the difference between the militant anti-Communist Proyect—who admittedly called it anti-Stalinism—and me, who Proyect would have hated as a Stalinist. But this is a good occasion to note that assassination is not the goal, but the method. The question is what goal there is in assassinating Giuffre after she’s testified. Every thriller that hinges on protecting a witness so that they can testify knows this. (Latest example I’ve seen, the recent Flight Risk.) After the testimony the damage is done and the witness is now safe and the perps in jail/dead, just like Maxwell. But every thriller that has the jailed convict sending his friends to kill for personal revenge is less plausible. The idea that someone in jail still has agents willing to risk getting caught for their bosses’ revenge is a big ask for willing suspension of disbelief. That’s why the usual variation is, the prisoner escapes or gets out some way and is a maniac. And that’s why there are fewer thrillers with this premise too.
Stepping back, there are thrillers that are premised on victims assassinating or trying to assassinate their blackmailers. (Latest example I’ve seen, the recent Drop.) Given the resources and connections of the people assumed to have been blackmailed, even if their attempts to get Epstein convicted on another case, leaving them out of it, failed, the question becomes: Why didn’t Epstein have a fatal accident long before? A plane crash on the way to that island for instance?

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 27 2025 16:21 utc | 149

You may think the WTC1 and WTC2 make sense, but it is equally absurd. You cannot turn steel frame highrises into dust by flying aluminium tubes into them. Those planes were just masking the real cause of the buildings turning to dust and blowing away with the wind. The real cause was nuclear devices in the basements causing steel to disintegrate on an atomic level.
Posted by: Norwegian | Apr 27 2025 11:29 utc
You can’t turn them into dust but large fires can heat up and weaken steel frames. Steel frames weakened will cause floors to collapse and on a skyscraper successive floors collapsing will pancake floors below which in turn would collapse the building.
I’ll ignore the nuclear devices in the basement part as that sounds pretty ridiculous. There are no such thing as a nuclear building demolition device.
Moreover rather than a question of HOW they did it, the strongest argument against what you’re saying is WHY they did it. There’s no need for such a costly and expensive false flag when history shows they can just make it up (WMDs, baby thrown from incubators, Gulf of Tonkin, etc).
Can the 9/11 truthers here provide a good explanation of why they’d go with something so complicated when simpler paths can achieve the same thing?

Posted by: Silent Waves | Apr 27 2025 16:39 utc | 150

On Chomsky’s short-lived work with Epstein on money-handling, it’s worth remembering that when Chomsky had dinner with Epstein, there was another guy there, none other than Woody Allen. I’m not trying to be anti-Semitic, but I think, culturally, US-born and raised Jews seem to have less of a problem dining with scumbags. There’s no evidence of any impropriety on Chomsky’s part, which is astounding for any man. As far as I can tell, Chomsky was never a lecherous womanizer like, say, Donald Trump, or another scientific figure like Stephen Hawking, who despite his immobility still managed to cheat on his wife. And unlike figures like Steven Pinker or Marvin Minsky, other MIT faculty who had a close relationship with Epstein, Chomsky never appeared to have any relationship with Epstein beyond an attempt to use his financial expertise to get some money on a book deal.

Posted by: fnord | Apr 27 2025 17:40 utc | 151

“Epstein ran an entertainment service. Hardly the only one. The girls you have seen are the ones they want you to see.
Posted by: oldhippie | Apr 27 2025 13:09 utc | 140”
solid argument, your point about… oh wait you never provided an argument. im convinced!

Posted by: anob | Apr 27 2025 18:20 utc | 152

oldhippie @140: “Epstein was not a blackmail operation.”
Quite true. More accurate to say “Epstein’s pedo playground was not solely a blackmail operation.” Oligarchs don’t need to be blackmailed to serve the oligarchy. The oligarchy also has numerous trusted lackeys who will serve the alpha dogs of the Empire with their very lives if asked, and the oligarchs compassionately feel those lackeys (the Clintons, for example) deserve to be rewarded.
But there are individuals who rise to influence without having first pledged fealty to the Empire and its principals. If there were any doubt about their loyalty, they would get the invite to one of the big social events on Epstein Island, or one of the other such exclusive resorts for the elites. Or they would just get eliminated. Can’t have untrusted vassals on the loose who’ve been boosted to influence by the machinery of empire.
By the way, dear reader, do make note of the posters here who are sliming the victim to get the Empire off the hook. They are hoping to earn a pat on the head from the Empire. The low budget Louis Proyect, for instance, dreams of getting an invite to the version of Epstein Island that is supplied with little boys.
No, you cannot blackmail a faithful servant. What would be the point? But you can give them a reward.

Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 27 2025 18:27 utc | 153

Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 27 2025 18:27 utc | 154 There are very few comments here sliming the victim, and the few that might be/uncharitably read as such have received much pushback. My own comments slime no one, unlike this commenter who slimes everyone, as it oozes from his pores.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 27 2025 18:34 utc | 154

@153 anob
With sarcasm, posters tend to include the /s tag, so that they are not taken for confused.

Posted by: Ornot | Apr 27 2025 18:49 utc | 155

“With sarcasm, posters tend to include the /s tag, so that they are not taken for confused.
Posted by: Ornot | Apr 27 2025 18:49 utc | 156”
i wasn’t being sarcastic, i was serious, the lack of argument was very convincing!

Posted by: anob | Apr 27 2025 19:09 utc | 156

Cynic @ 149
You really think there is a question that David Rockefeller (in life) was up to things “outstandingly bad”?
Oh, he was a Boy Scout. A good Boy Scout.
We are talking about people who start wars for profit. And for control. Not ordinary mercenaries who kill for pay. People who hire armies to fight conjured wars. You think boinking slightly underage girls is the bad act?

Posted by: oldhippie | Apr 27 2025 20:06 utc | 157

@Spectator | Apr 26 2025 23:09 utc | 68
About Chomskys supposedly logical argument about the Bush government not being involved in the 9/11 plot
I have a recollection about Chomskys wife having health issues during one period when I was thinking that Chomsky might be especially willing to be polite to authority. I was some years after 9/11
But in my view a large proportion of the western elites were given a special version of what actually happened at 9/11 that would make it easy for them to avoid mentioning it and thus to keep the secret way from the masses. That secret was in my view related to atomic terrorism. And was considered to cause unneeded panic among the public.
For example the doomsday planes were circulating in the sky above Washington.
There are dífferent versions but it is an interesting point that former nuclear security officer Dmitri Khalezov claimed to know about a document about an emergency nuclear demolition plan for wtc that emerged in 1973 for the Rockefellers to get the approval for building the WTC. I believe in those versions describing the use of portable nuclear reactors deliberately undergoing a meltdown so the fuel would emit its energy content in minutes rather than in microseconds as would have been the case with nuclear bombs. Several of the wtc buildings looked their insides had stood in the way for such a torch

Posted by: petergrfstrm | Apr 27 2025 20:07 utc | 158

Posted by: Menz | Apr 27 2025 10:05 utc
I saw Whitney Webb on a Patrick Bet David podcast, it wasn’t impressive
Her takeaway seemed to be Bill Clinton was the main offender and Trump was just caught in the crossfire lol
This is odd in view of her writing extensively on Trump’s mentor, Roy Cohn
Maybe she was just trying to market her book to trump devotees

Posted by: will moon | Apr 27 2025 20:42 utc | 159

oldhippie | Apr 27 2025 20:06 utc | 158
*** You think boinking slightly underage girls is the bad act?***
Well, that’s the bit the public might just occasionally get to hear about.
Long suspected it is information about what happens to many others — no longer around — that could be serious potential damage to top people in politics, finance, administration, law, media and big business.
Interesting NATO still seem keen to capture the children rescued from eastern Ukraine by Russia…
Anonymity, then shipment of such disposables to entertainment sites of the Bohemia Grove variety?

Posted by: Cynic | Apr 27 2025 22:02 utc | 160

“Whitney Webb…wasn’t impressive” – Will Moon – 160
No she’s definitely not “impressive” but, that’s not because she’s not exhibiting the level of TDS seen regularly on Rachel Maddow…what you so fervently seek. No, she’s not “impressive” because Whitney’s another in a long line of Utube/Google/Alphabet’s highly-promoted and mysteriously financed north Virginia minions…go figure?
Let me help, back in the day, Langley had an identifiable office inside Google. Utube was purchased by Google in late 2006. That’s why it’s so highly censored. That’s how a “nobody” is suddenly top billed on Utube’s line-up. Why a “nobody” has a staff of researchers, a slick production studio and the ability to move from one place on the globe to another…with no apparent contacts…and…a bullet proof, carefully curated online presence.

Posted by: S Brennan | Apr 27 2025 22:51 utc | 161

It always struck me that Prince Andrew was very badly advised legally. Giuffre was above the age of consent in the UK and much of the US and he was unmarried. Given undoubted legal precedents, if his lawyers couldn’t get him off given that they didn’t deserve to practice.

Posted by: JohninMK | Apr 27 2025 22:59 utc | 162

Posted by: Ahenobarbus | Apr 27 2025 23:12 utc | 163

Posted by: William Gruff | Apr 27 2025 18:27 utc | 154 For some reason I’m reminded Trotskyite wreckers often work with or for one of those three letter agencies. Our host should be peeved his alleged friends can’t back him up with anything remotely resembling an argument, much less citations and quotes from MoA comments!

Posted by: steven t johnson | Apr 27 2025 23:42 utc | 164

“ what you so fervently seek”
Posted by: S Brennan | Apr 27 2025 22:51 utc
I don’t “fervently seek” anything let alone thoughts about a two-bit gangster.
I know enough about Webb but who the ckuf is Rachel Maddow? Is she Webb’s handler?
You got TDS bad Brennan

Posted by: will moon | Apr 28 2025 0:18 utc | 165

Posted by: JohninMK | Apr 27 2025 22:59 utc
John I’m not much of a legal eagle but paying many millions to Guiffre now she has been declared dead looks like good business – case closed
Andrew has just been welcomed back into the bosom of the family – case closed
And before this case was closed, Andrew was appointed deputy King.
Case closed.
“ “Death solves all problems, no [wo]man, no problem.”
Josef Stalin

Posted by: will moon | Apr 28 2025 0:49 utc | 166

Cynic @ 161
Epstein used to personally fly to Ukraine, inspect the merchandise, fly home planeloads of girls. Since the 90s. Girls means girls. Including little ones as well as Lolitas. Ukraine has been slave trade since the Tatars managed it for the Sultan.
Slave trade is big business, always has been. Why do you think there are blondes in Gaza? It is from Ukraine.

Posted by: oldhippie | Apr 28 2025 12:29 utc | 167

S Brennan @ 162
Just look at the name. Whitney Webb. Two peerage names. She has intuitive understanding of many things because she is born to The Big Club. She doles out real information but no more than the little people should see.

Posted by: oldhippie | Apr 28 2025 12:41 utc | 168

What’s noteworthy about Ms. Giuffrie’s death is a behind the scenes look at how our leaders who decide to conduct a genocide come to make those decisions. She is merely currency for those with too much money to be be paid by anything else. It is also fascinating to watch those who cling to our try to convince us that we live in a world in which that level of evil does not exist. Slowly trying to dribble doubt into the obvious, they are asking us to believe in Santa Claus.

Posted by: Deniz | Apr 28 2025 14:39 utc | 169

Chomsky is what Shiva Ayyadurrai calls the ‘not so obvious establishment’. He says enough about the system to gain adherents from the contrarians but keeps them in the system like Bernie sanders. Notice which two events that he does not criticize the system about and loses his dry exposition calling JFK and 9/11 conspiracy adherents idiots. Notice how he down plays the power of Jewish money and the Israeli lobby on US middle east policy. The creation of Israel was allowed to happen by the British Empire types in the deep state. Then used to create chaos in the Middle East using the Israelis as useful idiots. The Israelis had different ideas – Eretz Israel and the takeover of the US empire using money and blackmail in the election system of the US. China used a different way to get free of being the low wage manufacturer of the world once it gained the necessary technology and investment. Notice how Chomsky kept his day job at MIT while those academics saying 9/11 was a false flag were ostracized and lost their jobs.

Posted by: James Payette | Apr 28 2025 16:02 utc | 170

Oldhippie on ‘blonds in Gaza’
Where did you get that from? There were enough crusaders in the Levant, not to mention the circulation of people from the Caucasus and Georgia all the way down to Palestine and Egypt on various pilgrimages…

Posted by: Tom | Apr 28 2025 17:07 utc | 171

Lutnick and Epstein were next door neighbors. Each living in mansions purchased for them by Wexner, the Victoria’s Secret owner.
Girls were plied with the promise of modelling careers.
Ghizlaine cruised neighborhoods near schools for girls and instructed other girls to recruit.

Posted by: Chaka Khagan | Apr 28 2025 17:07 utc | 172

“Whitney Webb. Two peerage names. She has intuitive understanding of many things because she is born to The Big Club. She doles out real information but no more than the little people should see.”
Posted by: oldhippie | Apr 28 2025 12:41 utc | 169
This sounds like more “No True Scotsman” stuff. Or is it more accurately called “purity spiral”?
Just think how much less trust the alt-media world would have if her name was “Miriam Shapiro” instead of Whitney Webb. What names should people have if they are to be taken seriously? Can you suggest a good list? I bet it is a small list.

Posted by: Spectator | Apr 28 2025 23:31 utc | 173

This a mafia run country from day one don’t expect much

Posted by: Kooshy | Apr 28 2025 23:45 utc | 174

Posted by: Peter AU1 | Apr 27 2025 4:43 utc | 105
“Reports of my demise…”
How heartening. Truly.

Posted by: osi not ossi | Apr 29 2025 11:51 utc | 175

I dont understand why Judge Nap has a clip these days of Dershowitz talking about the two states solution, knowing who this guy is.

Posted by: Tom | Apr 30 2025 5:20 utc | 176

I drive a school bus and every day I drive 110 KM per hour. . I was thinking though, is Virginia really dead? Could she have faked her own death just to get the jackals off her back?

Posted by: Absurdio | Apr 30 2025 11:31 utc | 177

This young woman was retired and living in the middle of nowhere, married and raising children. If she wasn’t preparing to issue a memoir, what possible reason could there be to assassinate her? Just revenge? Or just how sick is this Tramp?
I hope to god that her death was due to natural causes, which would be more than depressing enough. I grieve for her.

Posted by: ACitizen | May 2 2025 16:04 utc | 178

Peter b wrote in 1
A spokesperson for the royal family said: “Prince Andrew is saddened by Giuffre’s death, but confident her suicide means no more witnesses will dare come forward”. I trust you find this satisfactory and agree there is definitely nothing to see here. You can get on with your day now x
Is this your idea of satire? Thanks, but no thanks

Posted by: ACitizen | May 2 2025 16:56 utc | 179

Bernhard,
I spent all of Friday morning reading through this thread. While most posts were off-topic, some were germane, but only a few of those had any heart. The notable exceptions were from Woman, Tom Q Collins, and one or two others who appeared, like Woman, to be women.
This is bothering me because the memory of Virginia is demanding justice. May her ghost not cease to torment all of us until we learn the truth. As a journalist, you will need to be walking a tightrope.
The first remedial step, as I see it, is to protect the dead woman’s privacy, from the scum Clintons, Alan Douche-bag, and even from the royal family: seemingly contradictory to accepted practices of confidentiality. This will require the participation of some inhabitants of Perth, Virginia’s adopted home.
There must be an autopsy. Did her internal organs indeed succumb to years of over-medication? The family court’s evaluations must be known. What demons were afflicting her? And her loved ones must be heard. Not every single medic, jurist and offspring can be bought off or intimidated indefinitely.
Bernhard, I want your solemn word as a Bundeswehr officer to stay on top of this and to defend Virginia’s honor. Swear it.

Posted by: ACitizen | May 3 2025 3:44 utc | 180

Fellow Barflies,
I want to apologize for being less generous with you, There are more than three or four who displayed humanity and decency in the discussion about Virginia – as many as twice that number.
Debsisdead, in particular: your testimony is authentic and soulful, IMO.
i

Posted by: ACitizen | May 3 2025 15:36 utc | 181

Back to Main