521–530 of 653 posts
Sometimes (sometimes) it just implies that someone sent an email, got ignored, and left a paper trail behind
Just being named in the files doesn’t mean you are guilty. In this situation being named in the files gave him an opportunity to demonstrate high moral character. “I turned down his money because he was scummy”
Excerpt from one of the related emails (written by JE): "great proposal„ however, it needs to be more around deception alice -bob. communication. virus hacking, battle between defense and infiltration.. computation is already looked at in various fields. camoflauge , mimickry, signal processing, and its non random nature, misinformation. ( the anti- truth - but right answer for the moment ).. computation does not inv…
Well, it's a prompt to his assistant. It's more short-hand communication than anything else. My self-notes often look like that. They're just phrases to bring to mind some ideas rather than others or direct towards something. Someone[3] mentioned how he sounded in an interview and I went and found his conversation with Steve Bannon. My daughter just went back to sleep and I'm not one for listening to stuff anyway so…
Claude suggested an interesting pattern: on several topics, Epstein starts with some medium level concept (not naive, but not expert-level), then distracts with a metaphor or a short anecdote, then drops some hint that he has great authority on the subject ("I was in the room", "I had insider knowledge") and finally changes subject or claims that nobody really knows, without ever going deeper.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just say "I believe in jury nullification and will use that power if necessary". Easiest out from jury duty ever, and if the judge want's to be a bltch and force me on anyway, well, let's just say that if the law is immoral than the defendant is going to walk.
You shouldn’t brag about shirking civic duty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are equally many HOA horror stories where it functions reasonably for years and then new leadership shows up and turns it into a nightmare.
But such groups are almost invariably coordinated. In a legislature based on sortition, there will be a percentage of busybodies/ assholes/ opportunists but they'll have a coordination problem, opponents, and term limits acting to restrain them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s almost like it was done… as a team. Where one side provided all the money, the other side provided the direction. Both were necessary. Weird huh?
It's really easy to give away money you didn't earn lol
How would you do it? Do you have a way to earn his trust, a service to offer him that he values a lot, a way to steal from him, or anything like that?
Melania apparently managed to do it with true love and kindness. Are you capable of sincerely loving Bill Gates for a period of several years, or fake it in a perfectly convincing way for several years?
I was hoping the comments would be full of similar stories, in which a demon makes a half-hearted effort to pull you into his clutches, only to be naively blown off, then not thought of again until his true nature was revealed. Our story of this sort comes from when my partner interviewed at Theranos (!) long before the collapse or any public recognition, related the super-creepy interview process, and I was like "so…
It is from an extremely articulate and intelligent Epstein victim, that is only speaking out after the DOJ, either trough incompetence or most likely via malicious compliance, had her personal information in the released files.
The most surprising name in the Epstein files is Rebecca Watson also known as Skepchick on YouTube. She has been a thorn in their side for years and years.
I've been enjoying her recent videos about this for sure e.g. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoO9FZXUgv4
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Do you actually believe that if your taxes went up, power would be less concentrated, or that you or your countrymen would have more power? Absolutely. The source of most of the corruption I see in the world today is wealth, and specifically wealthy people paying people off to get their own way. If there was less wealth inequality there'd be much less scope for this. Note: I believe this would be the case even if t…
Every marginal dollar* taxed is a dollar politicians don't have to scrounge from a wealthy donor, in order to get that politician's pet interests achieved. You are saying MORE taxation means less wealthy donor influence on private citizens. And parent is saying LESS taxation means less policy influence on private citizens. Here's what I say: how about both? Or neither? I think the scope of the problem is defined too…
You fundamentally misunderstand the relationship.
The donors donate because the politician will then direct more money at the donors interests.
I spend $1mil on lobbying, $1mil on bunk science at labs I fund or astro turf'd grass roots support (something the government can point to to justify their action), $1mil on donations I get a preferential change in law or rule, or perhaps even government investment in my industry, that lets my business make billions, bringing back say $6mil in profit to me personally. Repeat for all my other business activities.
Politician, political appointees and regulatory agencies pet interests only matter insofar as I get better value for my money by choose one who's interests align.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If not for taxes, how would you fund prisons, police, the army, etc? Not to mention other things.
[flagged]
War bonds covered about half the costs.
Roosevelt was not shy about taxation, before or during the war.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1935
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1937
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1942
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_Income_Tax_Act_of_1...
"A 5% Victory tax on all individual incomes over $624 was created, with postwar credit."