Epstein's been known as a scumbag for decades - media calls him a "financier" but his only source of income was running young girls and blackmail ... he carried out his activities on such a scale that he could live like a billionaire even if he was not actually one (... so $20m+ expenditure per year - and that is before you get to property and investments - so that is just spending money) .... So the scale of what he was doing meant it wasnt hidden - people knew about this guy .... and he was part of a network. It wasnt a one man thing.... plus he was convicted for running young girls more than a decade ago. So after that nobody could claim they had no idea.
Targeting the rich and powerful for financial blackmail or, more commonly, influence operations is a well known scam. Epstein is not the first. ... young girls is not the most common. That would be sex parties. Most of the time its not about money, its about power and solidifying networks - and most of the organisers are not doing it for the money - the social side is much more important .... and it doesnt just work for the guys running the network, the guys who take part dont just get sexual favours they can get access to the network - which is much more valuable.... that's why people hung around Epstein. It wasnt for the girls - that's not hard to get - it was for the network. The seedy sex was not the main thing ... but running kids is obviously a very bad thing and Epstein's angle on a pretty common grift was just ... disgusting.
And its not that all rich/powerful people know each other ... some are big networkers, others arnt - you cant generalise like that .... its that Epstein was an exceptionally good networker ... that was his real skill. That's why so many people were connected to him.
But being such a good networker and using the sex with kids angle to solidify his network and also carryout blackmail to make his money meant that a lot of people knew what Epstein was about for a long time ... so if people show up in his records, they need to explain themselves .... when did they deal with him? Before the first conviction or after? How close were they to him?
Its simple questions ... though, obviously, innocent till proven guilty is also an important principle to be actively respected - especially as its not at all clear how many were just part of his social network (in the real sense not in the internet site sense) and how many partook of the seedy side of his activities.
Edited by jjcale, 10 December 2021 - 03:12.