IF THERE IS NO EPSTEIN CLIENT LIST, THEN WHO DID GHISLAINE MAXWELL TRAFFIC THE CHILDREN TO?

First, the report that there is no Epstein client list undermines certain parts of the narrative surrounding the conviction and arrest of Ghislaine Maxwell’s arrest and the testimony of some of the victims. Now for some context, and according to the allegations in the indictment, court documents, and evidence presented at trial against Ghislaine Maxwell, all published in a press briefing by the US Attorney’s Office of the Southern District of New York: From at least 1994, up to and including in or about 2004, GHISLAINE MAXWELL assisted, facilitated, and participated in Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of minor girls by, among other things, helping Epstein to recruit, groom, and ultimately abuse victims known to MAXWELL and Epstein to be under the age of 18.  The victims were as young as 14 years old when they were groomed and abused by MAXWELL and Epstein, both of whom knew that their victims were in fact minors.  As a part and in furtherance of their scheme to abuse minor victims, MAXWELL and Epstein enticed and caused minor victims to travel to Epstein’s residences in different states, which MAXWELL knew and intended would result in their grooming for and subjection to sexual abuse.

MAXWELL enticed and groomed minor girls to be abused in multiple ways.  For example, MAXWELL attempted to befriend certain victims by asking them about their lives, their schools, and their families, and taking them to the movies or on shopping trips.  MAXWELL also acclimated victims to Epstein’s conduct simply by being present for victim interactions with Epstein, which put victims at ease by providing the assurance and comfort of an adult woman who seemingly approved of Epstein’s behavior.  Additionally, Epstein offered to help some victims by paying for travel and/or educational opportunities, and MAXWELL encouraged certain victims to accept Epstein’s assistance.  As a result, victims were made to feel indebted and believed that MAXWELL and Epstein were trying to help them.  MAXWELL also normalized and facilitated sexual abuse for a victim by discussing sexual topics, undressing in front of the victim, being present when the victim was undressed, and encouraging the victim to massage Epstein.

In the earlier phase of the conspiracy, from at least approximately 1994 through approximately 2001, MAXWELL and Epstein identified vulnerable girls, typically from single-mother households and difficult financial circumstances.  This earlier phase required the defendant and Epstein to identify one girl at a time to target for grooming and abuse.  In the later phase, from approximately 2001 until at least approximately 2004, MAXWELL and Epstein enticed and recruited, and caused to be enticed and recruited, minor girls to visit Epstein’s Palm Beach Residence to engage in sex acts with Epstein, after which Epstein, MAXWELL, or another employee of Epstein’s would give the victims hundreds of dollars in cash. MAXWELL and Epstein encouraged one or more of those victims to travel with Epstein with the intention that the victim engage in sex acts with Epstein.  Moreover, and in order to maintain and increase his supply of victims, MAXWELL and Epstein also paid certain victims to recruit additional girls to be similarly abused by Epstein.  In this way, MAXWELL and Epstein created a network of underage victims for Epstein to sexually exploit.

But, while this is an official statement from the US Attorney’s Office of the Southern District of New York, it does not appear to contain all details as were revealed by victims. Details that expose the fact that Ghislaine Maxwell was NOT just trafficking young girls for Epstein. One of the most notorious cases that exposed this was the case of the now late Virginia Giuffre – who was one of the victims of Epstein; and allegedly died by suicide, after releasing communication stating that if anything happens, she would not have committed suicide.

Now, perhaps… Perhaps it is factually accurate that Jeffrey Epstein was THE sexual trafficker and abuser, who worked with Ghislaine Maxwell to lure and traffick young girls whom he exclusively abused without clients. But, then, why did AG Pam Bondi state otherwise on different platforms and occasions? She stated previously that she had the files, and then they released the binders that had no new revelatory information (which upset the journalists who were given those binders), and then her office reported that some information was kept from her, then they also reported that they had to conceal the names of victims (who were children) before ever releasing the files, and then… now the files just plainly do not exist. So, if indeed there were no Epstein files: meaning no client list and no blackmail material, then why the run-around? This is a question that many are (I think, validly) asking about the AG, Pam Bondi.

THE JEFFREY EPSTEIN DEATH NARRATIVE ALSO APPEARS QUESTIONABLE

Now, that covers the first concern with the narrative from the DOJ and the FBI – which is that of the lack of a client list. The second issue pertains to the death of Jefrey Epstein. There is a reported full 11-hour video outside of Jeffrey Epstein’s cell that has been published on the DOJ’s website, showing no one entering the cell – and this is aimed at buttressing the claim that Esptein committed suicide. BUT, one of the points that were reported about Epstein’s death is that the cameras were down; and I also think that the guards had fallen asleep.

So, where does this footage come from? Meanwhile, community notes on X indicate that “The video no longer exists on the backup system and has not since at least August 2019 as a result of technical errors.” And so, the question is: How is the DOJ, led by AG Pam Bondi, releasing CCTV footage of Epstein’s jail cell before he died, that allegedly did not exist due to technical errors?

I am willing to believe that in this Trump administration, there is pressure (if not a collective sense of duty) to deliver on all that was promised. And that there are a significant number of people who are dedicated to the fulfilment of the agenda of making America great again. And so, I think previous administrations knew this (especially about Trump as an individual), and could have actually gotten rid of many documents and footage. I think we genuinely should also be willing to consider the fact that what the FBI under Kash Patel and the DOJ under Pam Bondi have – is possibly all they could get their hands on.

To further this, in 2023 (years before his appointment as FBI Director), cash patel had a discussion with Glenn Beck, in which he stated that the FBI had the “black book” which was said to contain the details of Epstein’s clients, aloing with other incriminating and revealing information – which the FBI used as leverage against the people implicated.

And so, I do think that some of these officials came in expecting to gain access to what previous administrations had, but of course, even those administrations knew what a Trump administration having access to such information would mean for them.

RESPONDING TO THE CLAIM THAT THE DOJ IS PROTECTING TRUMP

But, of course as this announcement was made by the DOJ, liberals were claiming that all of this is to conceal Trump’s presence on the Epstein files. Let’s directly respond to this. First, Trump has conceded to having a previous relationship with Epstein. But, he is also. In addition, when Epstein was being looked into for sexual crimes, a journalist stated that Trump was the only high profile individual who was willing not only to sit down with him but also to not hold back on information. And so, the fact that Trump is pictured with Epstein and has acknowledged a previous affiliation with him takes away any surprise factor. In fact, I would say that what is more concerning are the people trying to escape this affiliation with Epstein by all means possible.

Secondly, when allegations of Trump being on the Epstein list were circulating, Epstein’s lawyer, David Schoen stated, on the 6th of June, that he asked Epstein if he had anything on Trump, to which Epstein responded in the negative. And seeing that Epstein died in 2019 – before the presidential election – if he had anything on Trump, that would not only have meant he had information to blackmail a sitting US president (because that was during Trump’s first term), but he could have also looong leveraged it to get himself out of that position – before even his arrest was factor. But furthermore, leading to the November 2024 US presidential elections, we saw lawfare against Trump at an almost unprecedented scale. Can anyone validly say that the same people who weaponised the FBI, DOJ, and intelligence agencies would NOT use the Epstein list against Trump if they knew he was on it? Obama, Biden and Kamala Harris (who were in office 2 out of the three times that Trump was running for president would have 100 percent used that information to end Trump’s presidential campaign – especially Kamala Harris. Let’s not kid ourselves.

Then, finally, even in the present, I do not think the DOJ is currently lying to protect Trump. I say this because the DOJ spinning a very pokable narrative about one of the most followed cases on earth, seems like a pretty weak cop-out, and utterly out of step with everything that Trump represents – hence I said at the beginning that there are individuals who do not walk in lockstep with the president’s vision , and are even bent on undermining this administration. And we need to find that out quickly. But, again, Trump has been questioned about Epstein and has engaged people on this, and here are some of the few times – including when she referenced Bill Clinton’s relationship with Epstein, which could have prompted a similar attack from Democrats if they had anything on him.

Ultimately, this case certainly reveals a need for the DOJ to improve how it addresses cases on sexual crimes, especially as it pertains to high profile individuals. Which brings us to the Sean Diddy Combs case.

WAS THE SEAN COMBS CASE INTENTIONALLY SABOTTAGED BY THE PROSECUTION?

After an eight-week trial, hip-hop mogul Sean Combs quietly celebrated in a Manhattan courtroom after a jury convicted him of two lesser counts of transportation to engage in prostitution – but spared him when it came to the most serious charge against him – sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy, in a case that accused the impresario of coercing women into unwanted sex with male prostitutes – with the assistance of pliant employees.

Prosecutor Maurene Comey argued that Combs was the head of a criminal enterprise who “used power, violence and fear to get what he wanted,” noting that he had used violence, financial control, and threats to manipulate his girlfriends into physically taxing sessions of sexual acts with hired men while filmed it.

Combs’ attorneys then argued that the government’s evidence contradicted its case. They acknowledged that Combs had past issues with domestic violence and drug abuse, but that the accusation that he was a sex trafficker or a criminal ringleader was “badly exaggerated.” ANd the charge he was convicted of carries a maximum sentence of 10 years, vs. the potential life sentence he would have faced if convicted of the more serious charges.

Well, following this case, some observers are asking if the prosecutor, Maurene Comey (daughter of James Comey) sabotaged her own case. She was the prosecutor for Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell who managed not to name a single man who Epstein and Maxwell trafficked underage girls to. It seems like the processes of justice keep evading the most crucial aspects of these cases. And so, once again, the DOJ to improve how it addresses cases on sexual crimes, especially as it pertains to high profile individuals.

Written by Lindokuhle Mabaso