Trying to be the UKs Clinton

Could be Blair

Across a lot of the iMessages, the number 7, when appearing by itself, is redacted

Dave Bautista’s Bowtie Pasta

Bari Weiʃʃ

Is this anything?

February 5, 2019 iMessage from Woody Allen to Jeffrey Epstien: Good thing you weren't in Paris because there was a mentally ill woman in the 16 who set fire to a house and eight people were killed and 16 injured. Epstein Response: my luck the woman will be underage

Woody Allen response to message in other photo: Not a bad joke for you.

Jfc

www.justice.gov/epstein/file...

www.justice.gov/epstein/file...

I'm pretty sure it was Melanie Walker. She was a known connection btw Epstein and Gates, Jim is probably Jim Kim, head of the World Bank at the time, to whom she was a senior advisor.

www.justice.gov/epstein/file...

Same person is [1] in this one. World Bank employee, mentions gates (I assume Bill, may be wrong).

Numbering varies on each page, but earlier parts of the convo lead me to believe this is a world bank employee.

In batch 9, doc no 00506XX and on, there's a full rip of his iMessage history. Many names are redacted, but here he's telling a World Bank employee (I think) what to say in an interview with a journalist, w/o the journalist being aware of it. #epsteinfiles

www.justice.gov/epstein/file...

Late 2012 Email from the Epstein files, in order from oldest to newest omitting timestamps, subject lines, etc.: Epstein: tell elon that the blonde that walked with me , is a friend of his mothers that tried to set her up with him her name is yfke sturm Replied to by Nicholas Pritzker: Whoa! Elon is doing great as you saw. Thanks for another mind bending time. Elon replied: That was indeed a very enjoyable conversation! Elon replied again: Hopefully the first of many Sorry for all the typos .Sent from my iPhone

Found one where his mom tries to get him a date

iMessage from redacted to Epstein, 12/25/2018: Same here. Next week I'm going to say I will not be the party candidate for President. And after that I will see how strong is the demand to have me as a non-party candidate. I'm relaxed either way.

Messages from redacted to Epstein on January 11, 2019. I'll stay in New York one night longer, so in case Monday the 4th works for you better, we can meet on Monday Btw it's out now that I'm not running. The party is asking our EU Commissioner. He will most likely agree. Sony, most likely I will have to stick to original plan Travel plan

Based on context, these messages are almost certainly Tom Steyer (numbering on the iMessage pages are only consistent within each page). Steyer announced he wouldn't run on Jan 9, 2019.

www.justice.gov/epstein/file...

www.justice.gov/epstein/file...

Late 2012 Email from the Epstein files, in order from oldest to newest omitting timestamps, subject lines, etc.: Epstein: tell elon that the blonde that walked with me , is a friend of his mothers that tried to set her up with him her name is yfke sturm Replied to by Nicholas Pritzker: Whoa! Elon is doing great as you saw. Thanks for another mind bending time. Elon replied: That was indeed a very enjoyable conversation! Elon replied again: Hopefully the first of many Sorry for all the typos .Sent from my iPhone

@niedermeyer.online

Lol found one of his mom trying to get him a date

Link to the document: www.justice.gov/epstein/file...

[nods sagely] Mr. And Mrs. Epstein.

Ironically, this furthers the author’s claim that the book represents our generations version of liberalism

Republicans: We’re happy about law enforcement abusing the populace, so we should give them more money and equipment.

Democrats: We’re upset about law enforcement abusing the populace, so we should give them more money and equipment.

"Oh, and now that I'm on your side, criticizing any of my past statements or behavior is actually helping the bad guys. You should be grateful I'm on your side now, and questioning that is just the terrible purity test stuff I've spent years attacking you for, you ingrates."

The people who argue Lee was a great general if you just ignore logistics and strategy are stunned by the most basic organizational competence

This is legitimately embarrassing. Among everything else, you present literally zero evidence of your central claim. Nearly every popular thing from one generation’s childhood is less popular with the next generation. Did you also drink from a hose or use a rotary phone, you hack?

As a legal matter, a dead person cannot be defamed.

It’s also wild cuz Disney adults have a literal century of media and tons of new stuff every year. HP adults have one book/film series from when they were kids, and everything else just plays on the nostalgia for that one series

If we’re talking about regular folk, sure. If we’re talking about people who have been paid handsomely for decades to be knowledgeable about politics it’s reasonable to doubt their integrity when they demand to still be treated as thought leaders or taken seriously or acquitted of past failures

lol, I mean, you could set your withholding to $0 or some trivial amount. If you’re responsible that may be better, even if you do pay taxes, cuz you can put it somewhere that earns interest instead of paying the gov’t in advance.

For the most part this would benefit the gov’t because your taxes were already withheld by your employer. Not claiming a refund would just let the gov’t keep more

Just opened facebook for some godawful reason, and the first post is a very elderly family friend whose post began:

"Dear friends, It has been brought to my attention that the 19 minute video I posted portraying Rachel Maddow may be a fake AI."

It is amazing how the flag only has 11 stripes.

One of the funniest things about their spotlight sun model is that it also doesn’t understand how spotlights work! Or really any light source! You can see a powerful flashlight from much farther away than it could possibly illuminate

Correct. The bill would not have passed had Jeffries successfully whipped the votes. As such, it would not have passed regardless of whipping. (Just realized I said “voting yes” instead of “voting against” in the previous comment).

Correct. I may have been unclear, I meant it wouldn’t have passed if Jeffries had whipped them all into voting yes. I read your initial comment as meaning it would have passed regardless of whether they all voted no. Was I mistaken?

Hi David, it actually doesn’t pass regardless. If all Dems had voted no, it would have lost it in the house (final vote was 220-207, with seven Dems crossing party lines)