A graph explorer of the Epstein emails • Hacker News Board

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#141

Post by theultdev » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:05 PM UTC

Zigurd wrote: post #139

rayiner wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is. Trump cut ties because Epstein was poaching employees. That was confirmed by the employee in question, Virginia Giuffre, who always maintained that she was a normal masseuse at Mar-a-Lago: https://abcnews.go.com/US/virginia-giuffre-trump-jeffrey-eps...

You swallowed "Trump cut ties" whole, on a thread discussing messages that prove that wasn't the case. Wow. If I'm ever accused of dozens of felonious depravities I'mma call you.

> on a thread discussing messages that prove that wasn't the case

Point to the messages that proves that wasn't the case.

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#142

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:06 PM UTC

godelski wrote: post #109

theultdev wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. What evidence would you like to use to lock Trump up? Point to an email in this dump or anything else. It's clear as day Trump cut ties when he found out who he was and was against him. Not so much for others.

> It's clear as day Trump cut ties when he found out who he was and was against him. Really? I'm very much under the impression that Trump knew exactly who Epstein was. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45961278

[deleted]

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#143

Post by theultdev » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:31 PM UTC

pohl wrote: post #134

theultdev wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think he snuck out from secret service and had an off-the-book thanksgiving with a pedo? I'm saying there's no direct evidence he did and on face value it's ridiculous. He was meeting the troops and golfing with Tiger Woods and happened to be in the same state Epstein had a house in. Have any evidence otherwise, or just conspiracy theories?

With any other administration I would have granted you that leap in logic, but we already learned, three years ago, from Stephanie Grisham that he held off the books meetings specifically to circumvent record keeping laws. So I think a slightly higher standard of evidence is needed before we dismiss the possibility that he met with the pedo who likely had dirt on him.

You have the standard of evidence reversed.

You need to prove what you're accusing him of, not the other way around.

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#144

Post by pohl » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:34 PM UTC

theultdev wrote: post #143

pohl wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With any other administration I would have granted you that leap in logic, but we already learned, three years ago, from Stephanie Grisham that he held off the books meetings specifically to circumvent record keeping laws. So I think a slightly higher standard of evidence is needed before we dismiss the possibility that he met with the pedo who likely had dirt on him.

You have the standard of evidence reversed. You need to prove what you're accusing him of, not the other way around.

Sounds like you’re assuming that standards for charges/trial should also be used as standards for inquiry/investigation. That is not the case.

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#145

Post by theultdev » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:20 PM UTC

pohl wrote: post #144

theultdev wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have the standard of evidence reversed. You need to prove what you're accusing him of, not the other way around.

Sounds like you’re assuming that standards for charges/trial should also be used as standards for inquiry/investigation. That is not the case.

By all means investigate away on the thanksgiving email, you will find nothing as nothing exists.

Choosing resources to investigate hearsay that is easily disproven is a waste of time though when you have actual evidence of direct correspondence.

Noone is falling for this crap anymore btw. The Trump smear stuff doesn't work as everyone cried wolf too many times.

Very telling you spend this much energy on a silly email talking about Trump vs people who actually talked and met with Epstein.

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#146

Post by JumpCrisscross » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:36 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #110

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s been wild to see people subsume not defending child rapists to their partisan identity. I’m still convinced it’s a minority of loud voices online and on social media.

[flagged]

> what fundamentally differentiates people who simply don’t like Trump for all the legitimate reasons to dislike Trump from the people who go full blown Rachel Maddow is deep-seated liberal universalism

You should know this isn’t me.

I was honestly optimistic for this Presidency. The corruption and lawlessness were annoying. But the masked ICE agents openly defying the law struck a nerve. And now we’re seeing folks like Megyn Kelly advocate for dismissing child rape.

That Trump is acting guilty, and has taken this from a fringe conspiracy theory to something worth considering, is almost besides the point. My condemnation is of the partisan dismissal of the crime per se, not Trump’s involvement.

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#147

Post by pohl » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:39 PM UTC

theultdev wrote: post #145

pohl wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you’re assuming that standards for charges/trial should also be used as standards for inquiry/investigation. That is not the case.

By all means investigate away on the thanksgiving email, you will find nothing as nothing exists. Choosing resources to investigate hearsay that is easily disproven is a waste of time though when you have actual evidence of direct correspondence. Noone is falling for this crap anymore btw. The Trump smear stuff doesn't work as everyone cried wolf too many times. Very telling you spend this much energy on a silly emai…

Are you Donald? How can you be certain that nothing exists?

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#148

Post by razakel » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 3:51 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #140

ben_w wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Show me where it’s a felony to use your own money to cover up an affair? The "falsified business records" bit, for which he was convicted under felony charges. Those bits, where he was convicted as a felon, are what makes it a felony. Likewise, it wasn't a crime for Bill Clinton to have an affair with any of the White House interns (AFAICT Paula Jones was before then), but then Clinton went and lied about affairs u…

[flagged]

>But they turned up their nose at representing Trump because he doesn’t subscribe to their religion.

Of course, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with his habit of refusing to pay.

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#149

Post by theultdev » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 4:20 PM UTC

pohl wrote: post #147

theultdev wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By all means investigate away on the thanksgiving email, you will find nothing as nothing exists. Choosing resources to investigate hearsay that is easily disproven is a waste of time though when you have actual evidence of direct correspondence. Noone is falling for this crap anymore btw. The Trump smear stuff doesn't work as everyone cried wolf too many times. Very telling you spend this much energy on a silly emai…

Are you Donald? How can you be certain that nothing exists?

> Epstein and pohl are down here in Florida

Wow that's damning pohl, prove you weren't with him.

Even if you provide detailed logs of your whereabouts, that won't be enough because I assume you're lying.

Hearsay is a bitch isn't it.

Re: A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

#150

Post by godelski » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 5:40 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #120

godelski wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the gp as saying you should just check the sources, not defending. I mean here's a weird example. Searching Donald Trump there's the headline (1994-06 Wexner Mansion NYC) Donald Trump forced to perform oral sex and physically abused 13-year-old female plaintiff and 12-year-old female. Like that sounds weird... DT forced to rape? That doesn't make sense to me. The longer summary reads A declaration from Tiffany…

Note that this document is from an anonymous lawsuit that was withdrawn and never substantiated or corroborated.

Also note that

  13. I personally witnessed Mr. Epstein physically threaten the life and well-being of the Plaintiff if she ever revealed the details of the physical and sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of Mr. Epstein or any of his guests. 
  14. I personally witnessed Defendant Trump telling the Plaintiff that she shouldn't ever say anything if she didn't want to disappear like the 12-year-old female Maria, and that he was capable of having her whole family killed. 
  15. After leaving the employment of Mr. Epstein in the year 2000, I was personally threatened by Mr. Epstein that I would be killed and my family killed as well if I ever disclosed any of the physical and sexual abuse of minor females that I had personally witnessed by Mr. Epstein or any of his guests.

Doesn't make it true but this seems to be consistent across different accounts and serves as a possible explanation to your note as well as why so many people might have quiet for so long.