Names in Epstein's black book: David Blane, David Blair, Mike Bloomberg, Adam Dell, Eli Wiesel, Duke of York, Steve Forbes, Katie Ford, Kennedys, David Koch, Rupert Murdoch, Picasso family, Prince Charles, Jane Rosenthal, 4 Rothschilds, Jeffrey Sachs, Saudi Prince Solman, Maria Shriver, Kevin Spacey

submitted by magnora7 from scribd.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]magnora7[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Look at this address book!

Mysteriously missing are the Clintons. Bill supposedly went there 26 times and Hillary knew him well too.

Which perhaps brings forward the theory this address book is a fake, to get ahead of the real news. The 26 number is known because the flight logs for Epstein's plane the "Lolita Express" are available.

Also Ivanka Trump is in the address book.

Trump I guess knew the guy as well, but banned him from Mar A Lago because he was harassing women like 15 years ago.

Very huge story. Could shake up a lot of things, potentially. Epstein is obviously at the core of this huge network that does these illicit things, probably with the purpose to entrap powerful people for blackmail purposes, as he said he video-taped everything everyone ever did on his private island.

[–]FormosaOolong 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Trump I guess knew the guy as well, but banned him from Mar A Lago because he was harassing women like 15 years ago

Woah, I had somehow missed that little factoid--the irony is almost overwhelming...

[–]Tom_Bombadil 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Or Trump has some personal scruples.

I'm guessing Epstein had nothing on Trump, or he'd be free.

Actually, I doubt anyone has much on Trump, cause they threw everything they had at him.

Against all odds, he's still standing...

[–]magnora7[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Yeah this whole situation is genuinely bizarre.

[–]Snow 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Someone in the book want to use this "partly correct" book to ruin others.

[–]magnora7[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah I would not be surprised if this was indeed a "limited hangout" of sorts, not telling the full story intentionally

[–]Snow 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If this is not the fact ,how could you read this part of the book?