I Called Everyone in Jeffrey Epstein’s Little Black Book

[ZiprHead]

What I learned about rich people, conspiracy, “genius,” Ghislaine, stand-up comedy, and evil from 2,000 phone calls.

Jeffrey Epstein’s little black book is one of the most cursed documents ever compiled in this miserable, dying country. Totaling 97 pages and containing the names, numbers, and addresses of a considerable cross section of the global elite, Epstein’s personal contact book first turned up in a courtroom in 2009 after his former butler, Alfredo Rodriguez, tried to sell it to lawyers representing Epstein’s victims for $50,000. Rodriguez described the book, apparently assembled by Epstein’s employees, as the “Holy Grail.” It is annotated with cryptic marginalia—stars next to certain entries, arrows pointing toward others–and the names of at least 38 people are circled for reasons that aren’t totally clear. There are 1,571 names in all, with roughly 5,000 phone numbers and thousands of emails and home addresses. There are celebrities, princes and princesses, high-profile scientists, artists from all over the world, all alongside some of the world’s most powerful oligarchs and political leaders—people like Prince Andrew (circled), Ehud Barak (circled), Donald Trump (circled).

I made close to 2,000 phone calls total. I spoke to billionaires, CEOs, bankers, models, celebrities, scientists, a Kennedy, and some of Epstein’s closest friends and confidants. I sat on my couch and phoned up royalty, spoke to ambassadors, irritated a senior adviser at Blackstone, and left squeaky voicemails for what must constitute a considerable percentage of the world oligarchy. At times the book felt like a dark palantir, giving me glimpses of dreadful, haunted dimensions that my soft, gentle, animal being was never supposed to encounter. At other times it was nearly the opposite, almost grotesquely boring and routine. Seeing at close range the mundanity of Epstein and his fellow elites–how simple and childish they could be–was a sickening experience of its own. The worst call by far was with a woman who told me she’d been groped by Epstein, an incident she said she didn’t report at the time out of fear of retribution from Epstein. (I have been aggressively counseled to remind the readers of Mother Jones that an appearance in the address book is not evidence of any crime, or of complicity in any crime, or of knowledge of any crime.)

The truth is that the elite world that Epstein ascended into, the one I tapped into by way of the black book, is populated with hordes of loathsome, boring, untalented people living their bumbling, idiotic lives while just so happening to wield some share of the preposterous global bounty that he and the rest were after. For all the mystery surrounding Epstein’s fortune, its existence is hardly more inscrutable than the wealth of any of his other billionaire peers. He earned it the same way they all did, which is to say precisely not at all.

This wasn’t some masterful hack into the global aristocracy. It’s what everyone does. It’s what the whole thing is. There is no scam here. It’s grifters grifting grifters all the way down.

Interesting article.

 

[Rhea]

I often think of the grotesque wealth of these people and what should happen in the context of the game of "Settlers of Catan." That is, they _say_ they are good people (Gates, e.g. or Buffet) but they still have grotesque amounts of money. Not lots of money, but grotesque amounts that continue to grow in unfair and unfairly protected ways.

So I feel that I'd like to see them divest themselves in a way they claim they consider fair. Don't dribble out amounts to vaccines, but really dump it - spin off a huge chunk that does vast good. And have a less grotesque amount remaining. And reduce your income to below grotesque levels. Let your people who produce for you keep more of the fruits of their labor. Don't take it just because you can.

And if, after 5 years, you haven't found a way to do this, then half gets taken (or 80%, even,) until you are below a grotesque amount. Just like the Robber Baron send half your resources back to the deck if you are holding more than 7 cards in "Catan" when someone rolls a 7. There's a parallel in history to this, when the inequity becomes too egregious, the uprising causes heads to roll. So pro-tip to the grotesquely wealthy - better to not wait for heads to roll.


Anyway, just something I think about. That change can have a sort of saw-tooth pattern, and it ain't pretty getting caught in the saw. When people are fed up, they are far beyond their sense of forbearance - far beyond.

 

[Angry Floof]

They're just ordinary people except with little or nothing ever happening to them that would shape them into better people, which is the basis of the sea of entitlement these morons swim in.

 

[Swammerdami]

I wanted to ask about Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, and found this thread ... which is more about Warren Buffett than about Epstein.

Would it be considered a hijack to revert the discussion to Epstein?

... For all the mystery surrounding Epstein’s fortune, its existence is hardly more inscrutable than the wealth of any of his other billionaire peers. He earned it the same way they all did, which is to say precisely not at all.

This wasn’t some masterful hack into the global aristocracy. It’s what everyone does. It’s what the whole thing is. There is no scam here. It’s grifters grifting grifters all the way down.

The sentence I've bold-faced is VERY misleading. We know how Buffett got his wealth, how Gates got his, how Walton's children got theirs. Epstein's fortune, however, is a mystery.

Epstein started as an untalented investment manager, partnered in a Madoff-type scheme where he eventually gave up much of his loot, probably to avoid prison term, and then mysteriously became wealthy. He was known to be an incompetent and criminal money manager yet people paid him steep fees? Did anyone ever report a good return on the money Epstein managed for them? Is it not more likely that fees allegedly paid for investment management were actually fees for other services?

I think it's been obvious for some time that Epstein got his wealth by blackmailing the "customers" and rapists of his under-age girls. The family that occupies Buckingham Palace controls much wealth and had motive to enrich Mr. Epstein just for starters, and the list of clients grateful not to have tapes released goes on and on. (Does anyone doubt that Epstein's houses were all wired to record bedroom activities?)

Ho hum; this is all old news, and I'm way behind on the news. The question I want to ask was probably asked and answered in this forum a year ago.

[my bold-facing]
... to begin to understand Ghislaine Maxwell, the place to start might be her dad.

Robert Maxwell's exploits in the underworld brought him in contact with some of the late Twentieth Century's most notorious global mobsters, and paid for the 53-room mansion on a 14-acre park overlooking Cambridge, where Ghislaine grew up. Born Jan Hoch to a peasant Czech family in in 1923, he grew up to be a member of British Parliament and owner of a major media company. But that was only the visible side of his. In their book Robert Maxwell: Superspy, British investigative journalists Gordon Thomas and Martin Dillon claim that Maxwell was a conduit between the KGB, the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, and the emerging Russian kleptocrat oligarchy in the 1980s, creating some 400 companies that were used to launder the newly capitalist Slavs' dirty money.

The authors alleged Maxwell was in business with Russian mob kingpin Semyon Mogilevich, a 300 pound financial mastermind who has been compared to the Wall Street bank Goldman Sachs for the scale of his criminal empire. Mogilevich is on the FBI's ten most wanted list for a variety of sophisticated financial schemes, besides the standard mob businesses of trafficking in humans and drugs.

Maxwell was a prodigious patriarch nine children by one wife and baby Ghislaine was supposedly his favorite. He named his yacht the Lady Ghislaine, and was found dead near it, in 1991, under mysterious circumstances, after a series of criminal financial deals went bad. The cause of death remains murky, and Ghislaine Maxwell has said she doesn't believe he killed himself.

Ghislaine Maxwell moved to New York in 1991, and was soon a society fixture, hanging with the likes of John F. Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump. Her boyfriend was Jeffrey Epstein. According to the defamation lawsuit, by the mid-1990s, she was hunting for troubled girls and grooming them for him. The girls told lawyers they thought Maxwell was Epstein's part-time girlfriend, who wanted them around because she couldn't keep up with his insatiable sexual requirements. She was soon running his houses in New York, Palm Beach, and the Virgin Islands.

Federal prosecutors have admitted in bail filings they don't know what Epstein actually did for money. But one clue lies in another lawsuit between Epstein and some of the accusers in Florida. An Epstein accountant testified that Epstein got his "money start" from Maxwell's father.

What is known is that with his stash of mystery money he built a wired-up sybaritic paradise for horny powerful men, stocked with sexually groomed young girls and women. He then became a keeper of their secrets, as he bragged to author James B. Stewart last year. "The overriding impression I took away from our roughly 90-minute conversation was that Mr. Epstein knew an astonishing number of rich, famous and powerful people, and had photos to prove it," Stewart wrote in the New York Times. "He also claimed to know a great deal about these people, some of it potentially damaging or embarrassing, including details about their supposed sexual proclivities and recreational drug use."

A lot of people knew what Epstein was into. Most have managed to keep hunkered down behind the hedge of lawyers....
...
In the latest documents, one Manhattan billionaire’s butler recalled encountering an unnamed 15-year-old Swedish girl who told him Maxwell took her passport after she refused to have sex with Epstein while on Jeffrey’s private island. The girl was “shaking uncontrollably” and couldn’t remember how she had gotten off the island and back to the U.S, he said.

Summary: Epstein's honey-traps were initially financed by a close confederate of the Russian kleptocracy! No non-criminal motive has been proposed for this finacning.

Had Epstein been blatantly blackmailing the millionaires he entrapped, his parties would have become much less popular. What better way to monetize Pedophile Island than to sell the tapes to the Russian mob, perhaps directly or indirectly to Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin himself. A tape of a rich real estate developer raping a 13-year old would be much more potent than a tape of that same developer engaging in pee-pee fun with 17-year old professionals.

Of all ths stupid things President Trump has done, empowering Russia at the expense of America's allies has been the most inexplicable. Could the links between Epstein and Ghislaine and the Russian kleptocracy be part of the explanation?

 

[Swammerdami]

I am no defender of dog-eat-dog capitalism, but I think the following comment is ill-conceived.

He's doing a lot of good with that wealth--a good you would destroy by taking it away.

Are you doing good if you take far more than you give?

What has Buffett "taken"? He has great paper wealth, but his life-style is rather frugal.

We can argue that, far from taking, Buffett's efforts have contributed to general prosperity. His investment in See's Candies, for example, helps ensure that Americans have good chocolates! Sure, if you treat the stock market as zero-sum (a flawed treatment) then his winnings are other people's losses, but so what? That's the nature of the game: Are you a "taker" just because you bought detergent when it was on sale?

Meanwhile, Buffett is not the thread topic. Please address my recent question!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Epstein started as an untalented investment manager, partnered in a Madoff-type scheme where he eventually gave up much of his loot, probably to avoid prison term, and then mysteriously became wealthy. He was known to be an incompetent and criminal money manager yet people paid him steep fees? Did anyone ever report a good return on the money Epstein managed for them? Is it not more likely that fees allegedly paid for investment management were actually fees for other services?

I think it's been obvious for some time that Epstein got his wealth by blackmailing the "customers" and rapists of his under-age girls. The family that occupies Buckingham Palace controls much wealth and had motive to enrich Mr. Epstein just for starters, and the list of clients grateful not to have tapes released goes on and on. (Does anyone doubt that Epstein's houses were all wired to record bedroom activities?)

While I agree they were for other services and he probably had incriminating evidence that doesn't prove blackmail--it could simply be for discreet procurement of young girls. Blackmailing the sufficiently rich and powerful is a risky proposition and wouldn't work too well at getting them to bring additional clients.

Had Epstein been blatantly blackmailing the millionaires he entrapped, his parties would have become much less popular. What better way to monetize Pedophile Island than to sell the tapes to the Russian mob, perhaps directly or indirectly to Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin himself. A tape of a rich real estate developer raping a 13-year old would be much more potent than a tape of that same developer engaging in pee-pee fun with 17-year old professionals.

But they still would have known where the tapes came from and he would be blamed.

Now, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if now the mob is blackmailing the people involved.

 

[Rhea]

I think it's been obvious for some time that Epstein got his wealth by blackmailing the "customers" and rapists of his under-age girls.

While I agree they were for other services and he probably had incriminating evidence that doesn't prove blackmail--it could simply be for discreet procurement of young girls. Blackmailing the sufficiently rich and powerful is a risky proposition and wouldn't work too well at getting them to bring additional clients.

Had Epstein been blatantly blackmailing the millionaires he entrapped, his parties would have become much less popular. What better way to monetize Pedophile Island than to sell the tapes to the Russian mob, perhaps directly or indirectly to Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin himself. A tape of a rich real estate developer raping a 13-year old would be much more potent than a tape of that same developer engaging in pee-pee fun with 17-year old professionals.

But they still would have known where the tapes came from and he would be blamed.

I agree that the evidence seems to point more to taking money for the procurement more than blackmail. But it is possible for it to be blackmail - it’s just that it seems very tricky and precarious. The evidence of repeat customers suggests that blackmail wouldn’t have started early on. It would be hard to hide that much blackmail. Feels more like exhorbitant prices for unsavory services.

 

[Swammerdami]

Epstein spent huge sums: private jet, private island, etc. I see that it doesn't make sense that he was funded by direct blackmail, but very expensive procurement fees also don't make sense. Some of the "customers" were powerful but not particularly rich, and even rich people (who, anyway, have plenty of other options for illicit sex) may worry about audit trails. Some of the "customers" were probably entrapped themselves, rather than blatantly seeking out an under-age hooker.

So what makes most sense? The operation was financed by Mossad, the Russian Mob, or some combination thereof. Rather than seeking a quick financial return, the Mob was playing a long game, hoping for blackmail material that would be useful years down the road. What other hypothesis explains how Vladimir Vladimirovitch has Trump so willing to betray America?

With Epstein dead, the Russian Mob no longer has reason not to pursue blackmail options on others of Epstein's "customers."

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Epstein spent huge sums: private jet, private island, etc. I see that it doesn't make sense that he was funded by direct blackmail, but very expensive procurement fees also don't make sense. Some of the "customers" were powerful but not particularly rich, and even rich people (who, anyway, have plenty of other options for illicit sex) may worry about audit trails. Some of the "customers" were probably entrapped themselves, rather than blatantly seeking out an under-age hooker.

So what makes most sense? The operation was financed by Mossad, the Russian Mob, or some combination thereof. Rather than seeking a quick financial return, the Mob was playing a long game, hoping for blackmail material that would be useful years down the road. What other hypothesis explains how Vladimir Vladimirovitch has Trump so willing to betray America?

With Epstein dead, the Russian Mob no longer has reason not to pursue blackmail options on others of Epstein's "customers."

If he were really an employee there's no reason for the level of funding we see.

I do agree there was probably a degree of entrapment--people not realizing many of his girls were underage.

 

[Trausti]

Epstein spent huge sums: private jet, private island, etc. I see that it doesn't make sense that he was funded by direct blackmail, but very expensive procurement fees also don't make sense. Some of the "customers" were powerful but not particularly rich, and even rich people (who, anyway, have plenty of other options for illicit sex) may worry about audit trails. Some of the "customers" were probably entrapped themselves, rather than blatantly seeking out an under-age hooker.

So what makes most sense? The operation was financed by Mossad, the Russian Mob, or some combination thereof. Rather than seeking a quick financial return, the Mob was playing a long game, hoping for blackmail material that would be useful years down the road. What other hypothesis explains how Vladimir Vladimirovitch has Trump so willing to betray America?

With Epstein dead, the Russian Mob no longer has reason not to pursue blackmail options on others of Epstein's "customers."

If he were really an employee there's no reason for the level of funding we see.

I do agree there was probably a degree of entrapment--people not realizing many of his girls were underage.

Nah, they knew.

 

[Swammerdami]

Epstein spent huge sums: private jet, private island, etc. I see that it doesn't make sense that he was funded by direct blackmail, but very expensive procurement fees also don't make sense. Some of the "customers" were powerful but not particularly rich, and even rich people (who, anyway, have plenty of other options for illicit sex) may worry about audit trails. Some of the "customers" were probably entrapped themselves, rather than blatantly seeking out an under-age hooker.

So what makes most sense? The operation was financed by Mossad, the Russian Mob, or some combination thereof. Rather than seeking a quick financial return, the Mob was playing a long game, hoping for blackmail material that would be useful years down the road. What other hypothesis explains how Vladimir Vladimirovitch has Trump so willing to betray America?

With Epstein dead, the Russian Mob no longer has reason not to pursue blackmail options on others of Epstein's "customers."

If he were really an employee there's no reason for the level of funding we see.

I do agree there was probably a degree of entrapment--people not realizing many of his girls were underage.

I don't want to thread the needle distinguishing a 17-year old party girl from a 15-year old party girl. My point about entrapment was that some of the "customers" probably were NOT in the market for illicit sex but, perhaps inebriated, accepted it when offered by their host or his "hostesses."

But on the subject of young working-girls, is it not true that Dershowitz (who "only got a massage from an oldish Russian woman" at Epstein's party) is on record as opining that when a man pays a 16-year old for sex, only the girl should be prosecuted? :wow:

 

[Jarhyn]

Epstein spent huge sums: private jet, private island, etc. I see that it doesn't make sense that he was funded by direct blackmail, but very expensive procurement fees also don't make sense. Some of the "customers" were powerful but not particularly rich, and even rich people (who, anyway, have plenty of other options for illicit sex) may worry about audit trails. Some of the "customers" were probably entrapped themselves, rather than blatantly seeking out an under-age hooker.

So what makes most sense? The operation was financed by Mossad, the Russian Mob, or some combination thereof. Rather than seeking a quick financial return, the Mob was playing a long game, hoping for blackmail material that would be useful years down the road. What other hypothesis explains how Vladimir Vladimirovitch has Trump so willing to betray America?

With Epstein dead, the Russian Mob no longer has reason not to pursue blackmail options on others of Epstein's "customers."

If he were really an employee there's no reason for the level of funding we see.

I do agree there was probably a degree of entrapment--people not realizing many of his girls were underage.

I don't want to thread the needle distinguishing a 17-year old party girl from a 15-year old party girl. My point about entrapment was that some of the "customers" probably were NOT in the market for illicit sex but, perhaps inebriated, accepted it when offered by their host or his "hostesses."

But on the subject of young working-girls, is it not true that Dershowitz (who "only got a massage from an oldish Russian woman" at Epstein's party) is on record as opining that when a man pays a 16-year old for sex, only the girl should be prosecuted? :wow:

So, if someone comes to you with an offer to visit Jeffery Epstein's island, knowing full well in your circles what Epstein sells, and then have sex with anyone who even possibly might be underage, I'm sorry, you are already stepping past the point of ethical behavior.

If I walk into a Korean whorehouse without knowing what it is, pay exorbitantly for a "drink" for one of the girls there, and one of the ladies there has sex with me, that's one thing. I would plead innocence. Misread of the situation. But the minute I step in knowing what it is, all my innocence goes out the door.

People KNEW, before the fact, what happened there. The only reason they would go would be to participate. I'd they just wanted sex with prostitutes, they would have used any of the other among countless reliable and discreet prostitute provision services.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't want to thread the needle distinguishing a 17-year old party girl from a 15-year old party girl. My point about entrapment was that some of the "customers" probably were NOT in the market for illicit sex but, perhaps inebriated, accepted it when offered by their host or his "hostesses."

But on the subject of young working-girls, is it not true that Dershowitz (who "only got a massage from an oldish Russian woman" at Epstein's party) is on record as opining that when a man pays a 16-year old for sex, only the girl should be prosecuted? :wow:

So, if someone comes to you with an offer to visit Jeffery Epstein's island, knowing full well in your circles what Epstein sells, and then have sex with anyone who even possibly might be underage, I'm sorry, you are already stepping past the point of ethical behavior.

If I walk into a Korean whorehouse without knowing what it is, pay exorbitantly for a "drink" for one of the girls there, and one of the ladies there has sex with me, that's one thing. I would plead innocence. Misread of the situation. But the minute I step in knowing what it is, all my innocence goes out the door.

People KNEW, before the fact, what happened there. The only reason they would go would be to participate. I'd they just wanted sex with prostitutes, they would have used any of the other among countless reliable and discreet prostitute provision services.

Now we know what happened at his parties, but did the people involved know then?

 

[Jarhyn]

I don't want to thread the needle distinguishing a 17-year old party girl from a 15-year old party girl. My point about entrapment was that some of the "customers" probably were NOT in the market for illicit sex but, perhaps inebriated, accepted it when offered by their host or his "hostesses."

But on the subject of young working-girls, is it not true that Dershowitz (who "only got a massage from an oldish Russian woman" at Epstein's party) is on record as opining that when a man pays a 16-year old for sex, only the girl should be prosecuted? :wow:

So, if someone comes to you with an offer to visit Jeffery Epstein's island, knowing full well in your circles what Epstein sells, and then have sex with anyone who even possibly might be underage, I'm sorry, you are already stepping past the point of ethical behavior.

If I walk into a Korean whorehouse without knowing what it is, pay exorbitantly for a "drink" for one of the girls there, and one of the ladies there has sex with me, that's one thing. I would plead innocence. Misread of the situation. But the minute I step in knowing what it is, all my innocence goes out the door.

People KNEW, before the fact, what happened there. The only reason they would go would be to participate. I'd they just wanted sex with prostitutes, they would have used any of the other among countless reliable and discreet prostitute provision services.

Now we know what happened at his parties, but did the people involved know then?

Donald Trump certainly knew his reputation... I'm betting others did too.