I found some of the tangential details a little odd, although nothing that I'd call "disqualifying" (the Jane Goodall stuff was weird)[1].
I'm not sure what to make of the author[2], it looks like she threw online content pasta at the web's wall and hoped something might stick. Again, not necessarily "disqualifying", just caused me to take this all in with a grain of salt.
We need someone who can independently verify all of this, and it's deeply sad (and highly relevant) that so many of the usual sources of veracity in these situations are now unreliable. From the Justice Department to mainstream news. Hopefully someone with an org like ProPublica or Bellingcat can dig into these stories with the rigor and attention to detail they deserve.
I found some of the tangential details a little odd, although nothing that I'd call "disqualifying" (the Jane Goodall stuff was weird)[1].
I'm not sure what to make of the author[2], it looks like she threw online content pasta at the web's wall and hoped something might stick. Again, not necessarily "disqualifying", just caused me to take this all in with a grain of salt.
We need someone who can independently verify all of this, and it's deeply sad (and highly relevant) that so many of the usual sources of veracity in these situations are now unreliable. From the Justice Department to mainstream news. Hopefully someone with an org like ProPublica or Bellingcat can dig into these stories with the rigor and attention to detail they deserve.
1. https://old.reddit.com/r/Epstein/comments/1qbdq4b/calling_at...
2. https://www.voldeng.com/
This is hard to read. Wow.