By what standards are the files "overhyped" ? Also to what hysteria do you refer? What would we experience if it was a massive pedo conspiracy of extremely rich and powerful people? Would they all just line up and turn themselves in?
FTFY. Almost one and the same here but gives more context.
Most, if not all of the highly compensated victims were adults when they met the turd Epstein and made decisions as adults. Their claims are untested and uncorroborated but they are massively compensated. Good for them, they're getting paid but the hysteria and panic cost us all. Note how none of the massively compensated can manage to claim anything verifiable involving crimes of sleazebags still living?
Dig up his ranch, sure, why not? Would you bet on anything resembling evidence being found? On the Island? In his NY appartments? All just a massive, highly coordinated, perfectly executed cover-up? Is the govt really that good to get perfectly right, 100% no errors? Under this kind of spotlight with so many looking out for it?
It's a great distraction and there is zero doubt that plenty in washington are taking full advantage. The corruption rages across the aisles.
Everything you think you know about Epstein's crimes, ask yourself "Where is the actual evidence for that?" When you start ignoring the podcast-claims for which there is nothing at all to back it. It starts to look more mundanely awful. Than some monumental bonfire of evil previously un-imagined. He went whoring with Bill Gates who got an STD and it's there in the files trashing Bill's reputation. That was left alone in the cover-up but their pedo ring behaviour perfectly removed without the suggestion of a trace?
People think there is this big conspiracy to conceal the evidence of a grand pedo ring but they didn't protect the moron formerly known as prince andrew from the fall, he'll be well angry if he knows things about a pedo ring so that would be hugely risky. Unbelievably so. Literally.
People want to believe all the worst fabrications. You don't need it, it's bad enough without all that. There's sleaze enough with evidence to prosecute. Prosecutions, starting with Andrew and Mandelson, should happen. And also for everyone else identified by evidence.
Not so much the completely innocent, ordinary people named by Massie and Khanna who aren't in those circles and for whom it seems vanishingly unlikely had anything much to do with Epstein at all, let alone involved in these most hideous of crimes. And who they've now gone completely quiet about having pointed squarely at them and yelled "Evil!"
It's a real shame the extent to which it has polluted rational policy discussion. There's a cost. The cost is larger than you think.
Exactly the behaviour you'd expect of a convicted sex offender and best friend of a paedophile, husband to an illegal immigrant apparently trafficked by that paedophile who was not covering anything up, huh. /s
I guess you also think the early closing of Congress to prevent any vote on Hegseth and Trump's war crimes to also just be a coincidence?
Aside from everything else, Trump is a convicted rapist - it's just shocking to me that people like yourself choose to support a person like that who is entirely unrepentant.
Any and all evidence of Donald Trump's crimes (for which there is a very large amount of the actually credible variety, ie not this, not Russian collusion involving pissing prostitutes in Steele files) should result in his prosecution and Jailing. I would like to see that.
Let's re-phrase that more sensibly.
Any and all evidence of politician and senior public servant criminal corruption (for which there is a very large amount of the credible variety) should result in prosecution and Jailing.
Washington corruption? No! Look over there! Epstein pedo ring!
Was it a pedo blackmail ring of the powerful (who are all pedos so that is universal weakness to get control) at the behest of the Mossad and CIA involving throwing children from a plane over epstein island to remove the witness testimony?
Or something that isn't quite that.
Something which is itself a crime for which there is evidence, you can assess (and a court did!), to support it and is totally believable?
By this method you can begin to weed out the bullshit. Soon you look at the mountain of bullshit that you, yourself reject on your own terms, not necessarily agreeing with me or anyone else. A mountain just by looking.
--------
"Pol Pot was actually being controlled by the scientologist-mormon conspiracy to conquer Sweden to get total herring control."
"Wow? Really? What's the evidence?"
"He killed millions! Why are you defending Pol Pot and the conspiracy?!?! You must be in league with Tom Cruise and Mitt Romney!"
(I'm not completely convinced Epstein did kill himself as you seem to be for what it's worth. There seems to be some real evidence he did, it seems like the most likely explanation but I have some doubt. Based on evidence. What I don't have is any evidence of who did it and why _IF_ it wasn't suicide. Again suicide the most likely. I have enough imagination to invent cool stories involving MI5, the cia, the mossad and the french secret service but choose not to. I've heard plenty of other people's cool stories but yeah, not how I want to consume fiction).
A great distraction from what?
You can choose to dismiss the evidence that does exist because of your biases, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
What is the cost you mention that's larger than I think? You keep doing this sort of thing... throwing out these weighty statements, but they're never concrete; never backed up with anything other than your conjecture. Why should anyone listen to you?