Epstein, Kiddies, And Trump. Oh, My

[crazyfingers]

Andy Mountbatten's formerly royal arse just took a whuppin' in our mother country. Take a good look, Pam and Kash.

Ya. In the UK a Prince of England is now arrested.

Why isn't Trump living in a box under a bridge? Because the GOP don't care about sex crimes against kids but hate Equity, Inclusion and Diversity.

Timeline: How Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor fell from grace over his ties to Epstein​

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/19/world/timeline-andrew-arrest-jeffrey-epstein-intl

 

[Tigers!]

Andy Mountbatten's formerly royal arse just took a whuppin' in our mother country. Take a good look, Pam and Kash.

Ya. In the UK a former Prince of England is now arrested.

Why isn't Trump living in a box under a bridge? Because the GOP don't care about sex crimes against kids but hate Equity, Inclusion and Diversity.

Timeline: How Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor fell from grace over his ties to Epstein​

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/19/world/timeline-andrew-arrest-jeffrey-epstein-intl

.

FIFY

He is now the Andrew formerly known as Prince.

 

[crazyfingers]

He is now the Andrew formerly known as Prince.

And he's a former Prince... why? Because in the UK and other non US places it's not OK to do this shit.

But Trump LOVES corruption. He thrives in it and rewards it. It's disgusting. He is disgusting. The rapist elected president!

 

[Derec]

Ya. In the UK a Prince of England is now arrested.

I wonder what evidence of crimes they have that were not available before. Because there have been accusations for years.

Why isn't Trump living in a box under a bridge?

I mean, neither is Andrew.

Because the GOP don't care about sex crimes against kids but hate Equity, Inclusion and Diversity.

What evidence is there of specific "sex crimes against kids" here? Who is the alleged victim?
In what jurisdiction were these crimes allegedly committed? And if there is evidence of "sex crimes against kids", why was Trump only prosecuted for the nothingburger of filing hush money payment to Stormy Daniels wrong?
You can't prosecute people based on vibes, no matter how much Trump would like to do that against his political opponents as well.

Also, DEI is about certain people preferences based on race, ethnicity or gender. It has fuck-all to do with this. Why did you mention it?

 

[Derec]

There's videos of kids being tortured and murdered in the files. Prince Andrew has just been arrested for it. Supposedly he tortured a kid then ordered someone to murder him/her. Arranged for by Ghislaine Maxwell. Sounds like something out of the Hostel movies.

It does sound horrible. Although, if there was any real evidence of something like this, would he really be released on bail the next day?

So, I wonder what actual evidence there is.

 

[Derec]

Several of the leaders of peak New Atheism reared their decrepit heads throughout The Files.

Just being mentioned in the Files is not in itself evidence of any wrongdoing. To suggest otherwise is "guilt by association" fallacy.
Specifically, there are a number of scientists on the list because Epstein offered them funding, not because of any nefarious actions by them.

Of course, some people will use any means to attack those they disagree with. Richard Dawkins, in particular, has been on the receiving end of the left-wing fringe of the atheist movement for over a decade. Not because he did anything bad, but because he did not agree with them on politics and would do things like criticize Islam or certain aspects of movement feminism.

[Rebecca Watson's video]

Ugh, Rebecca Watson. She of the Elevator Gate. God forbid somebody talks to a grown woman in an elevator and asks her out for coffee.
I remember the Schism in the community after Elevatorgate. The left-wing fringe started something they called "Atheism+", meaning "atheism plus left wing politics".

In any case, I can't stomach watching her video. Is there a TL/DW? The sexist title is enough - she is calling all men "pathetic".

 

[Toni]

Ya. In the UK a Prince of England is now arrested.

I wonder what evidence of crimes they have that were not available before. Because there have been accusations for years.

Why isn't Trump living in a box under a bridge?

I mean, neither is Andrew.

Because the GOP don't care about sex crimes against kids but hate Equity, Inclusion and Diversity.

What evidence is there of specific "sex crimes against kids" here? Who is the alleged victim?
In what jurisdiction were these crimes allegedly committed? And if there is evidence of "sex crimes against kids", why was Trump only prosecuted for the nothingburger of filing hush money payment to Stormy Daniels wrong?
You can't prosecute people based on vibes, no matter how much Trump would like to do that against his political opponents as well.

Also, DEI is about certain people preferences based on race, ethnicity or gender. It has fuck-all to do with this. Why did you mention it?

Derec, apparently there are plenty of images, still and video. I’ve read enough to know that, unless you wish to believe that the videos and other images and the email conversations between Epstein and a lot of others are fake, there IS plenty of evidence. What Andrew is being most investigated further and charged with is corruption of the business kind.

 

[Jarhyn]

He is now the Andrew formerly known as Prince.

And he's a former Prince... why? Because in the UK and other non US places it's not OK to do this shit.

But Trump LOVES corruption. He thrives in it and rewards it. It's disgusting. He is disgusting. The rapist elected president!

I really want to see Trump getting testified about and having evidence presented that damns him... As part of the investigation and trial of someone completely outside his power to silence or control.

I seriously have questions about whether the Convict Formerly Known as Prince is ever born from the Commoner Formerly Known as Prince, or whether it will be the Suicide Victim Formerly Known as Prince.

That said, I think this is the last time I will use that gag because Prince was a pretty alright guy from what I've heard and Minneapolis celebrates him.

 

[barbos]

Andrew was arrested not for sex crimes but for basically insider trading.

 

[Derec]

Derec, apparently there are plenty of images, still and video.

"Apparently" is not evidence. I asked for evidence of specific crimes.

I’ve read enough to know that, unless you wish to believe that the videos and other images and the email conversations between Epstein and a lot of others are fake, there IS plenty of evidence.

Epstein exchanged a lot of emails with a lot of people. That is not evidence of wrongdoing, much less of specific crimes against minors.

The Biden administration had access to unredacted Epstein files, including alleged video and photographs. If there was any actionable evidence of specific "sex crimes against kids" in them, why do you think the Biden administration did not prosecute Trump for that? Why limit yourself to things like hush money recording and taking documents to Mar a Lago?

What Andrew is being most investigated further and charged with is corruption of the business kind.

Exactly. If there was evidence of specific crimes against minors, he'd have been charged with that.
There have been a lot of rumors surrounding the Royal Formerly Known as Prince Andrew, but, alas, rumors are not evidence either.

 

[Toni]

Derec, apparently there are plenty of images, still and video.

"Apparently" is not evidence. I asked for evidence of specific crimes.

I’ve read enough to know that, unless you wish to believe that the videos and other images and the email conversations between Epstein and a lot of others are fake, there IS plenty of evidence.

Epstein exchanged a lot of emails with a lot of people. That is not evidence of wrongdoing, much less of specific crimes against minors.

The Biden administration had access to unredacted Epstein files, including alleged video and photographs. If there was any actionable evidence of specific "sex crimes against kids" in them, why do you think the Biden administration did not prosecute Trump for that? Why limit yourself to things like hush money recording and taking documents to Mar a Lago?

What Andrew is being most investigated further and charged with is corruption of the business kind.

Exactly. If there was evidence of specific crimes against minors, he'd have been charged with that.
There have been a lot of rumors surrounding the Royal Formerly Known as Prince Andrew, but, alas, rumors are not evidence either.

The Biden administration did NOT have access to unredacted files. The files were sealed until after Maxwell’s appeals were finished.

There are videos of men raping minors, some of them very young.

 

[Jarhyn]

Derec, apparently there are plenty of images, still and video.

"Apparently" is not evidence. I asked for evidence of specific crimes.

I’ve read enough to know that, unless you wish to believe that the videos and other images and the email conversations between Epstein and a lot of others are fake, there IS plenty of evidence.

Epstein exchanged a lot of emails with a lot of people. That is not evidence of wrongdoing, much less of specific crimes against minors.

The Biden administration had access to unredacted Epstein files, including alleged video and photographs. If there was any actionable evidence of specific "sex crimes against kids" in them, why do you think the Biden administration did not prosecute Trump for that? Why limit yourself to things like hush money recording and taking documents to Mar a Lago?

What Andrew is being most investigated further and charged with is corruption of the business kind.

Exactly. If there was evidence of specific crimes against minors, he'd have been charged with that.
There have been a lot of rumors surrounding the Royal Formerly Known as Prince Andrew, but, alas, rumors are not evidence either.

The Biden administration did NOT have access to unredacted files. The files were sealed until after Maxwell’s appeals were finished.

There are videos of men raping minors, some of them very young.

I mean, while it should be a fairly unsurprising revelation that Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor has video evidence indicating that he raped and killed a minor, the crimes which they have direct evidence of in the UK, owing to the US control of the actual Epstein evidence are likely the financial crimes around those same activities.

When the monetary links between Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor and Epstein are well explored, then he can be put to the question of what he was spending the illegally moved money on.

He might not want to answer those questions, but then "the crown" might have some latitude to not put his head on the block and even give him some manner of clemency and protection from the knife in the dark as it were in the interest of national security to testify as to the heinous things he has done and who he did those things with.

Then, it may actually be a "Capone situation".

 

[Elixir]

The Biden administration did NOT have access to unredacted files.

He should have gone to the Island so he could be in the files too.
Poor naive Joe thought Trump would never win.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the collective intelligence of Americans.

 

[ZiprHead]

Derec, apparently there are plenty of images, still and video.

"Apparently" is not evidence. I asked for evidence of specific crimes.

I’ve read enough to know that, unless you wish to believe that the videos and other images and the email conversations between Epstein and a lot of others are fake, there IS plenty of evidence.

Epstein exchanged a lot of emails with a lot of people. That is not evidence of wrongdoing, much less of specific crimes against minors.

The Biden administration had access to unredacted Epstein files, including alleged video and photographs. If there was any actionable evidence of specific "sex crimes against kids" in them, why do you think the Biden administration did not prosecute Trump for that? Why limit yourself to things like hush money recording and taking documents to Mar a Lago?

What Andrew is being most investigated further and charged with is corruption of the business kind.

Exactly. If there was evidence of specific crimes against minors, he'd have been charged with that.
There have been a lot of rumors surrounding the Royal Formerly Known as Prince Andrew, but, alas, rumors are not evidence either.

Do you understand what your defense of Epstein and his cronies looks like? If you don't want to be seen as a creepy perv, stop defending creepy pervs.

 

[Jarhyn]

Derec, apparently there are plenty of images, still and video.

"Apparently" is not evidence. I asked for evidence of specific crimes.

I’ve read enough to know that, unless you wish to believe that the videos and other images and the email conversations between Epstein and a lot of others are fake, there IS plenty of evidence.

Epstein exchanged a lot of emails with a lot of people. That is not evidence of wrongdoing, much less of specific crimes against minors.

The Biden administration had access to unredacted Epstein files, including alleged video and photographs. If there was any actionable evidence of specific "sex crimes against kids" in them, why do you think the Biden administration did not prosecute Trump for that? Why limit yourself to things like hush money recording and taking documents to Mar a Lago?

What Andrew is being most investigated further and charged with is corruption of the business kind.

Exactly. If there was evidence of specific crimes against minors, he'd have been charged with that.
There have been a lot of rumors surrounding the Royal Formerly Known as Prince Andrew, but, alas, rumors are not evidence either.

Do you understand what your defense of Epstein and his cronies looks like? If you don't want to be seen as a creepy perv, stop defending creepy pervs.

I have the sneaking suspicion that the causes for this involve looking at someone, seeing them as if looking in a mirror, and seeing that if they condemn the other, they condemn themselves and their goals and their ultimate wishes to do that, too.

I mean shit, Trump (and Mr Mountbatten-Windsor) proving out The American Dream but for scum and creepy pervs is a momentous day for the criminal classes of America.

So while they can and ostensibly will criticize someone when they are caught, they will instead criticize their actions that got them caught and attempt to debug the cause as if what causes the downfall of a pedo were an error rather than a feature.

And even then, after the fact, these assholes have the gall to go with the "victim was asking for it" implications.

Hell, even if the victim asks for it, begs for it, or even uses some manner of leverage to demand it (blackmail), it's still wrong.

Even so, I have to wonder sometimes whether the "they were asking for it/it was or could have been transactional" defense is really something they are using to paper over cognitive dissonance over an event of their own past.

We know for a fact that some percentage of sex workers are underage and/or trafficked, and that the Johns are rarely in a position to know. Through a lifetime of hiring prostitutes in the US, it would be a virtual impossibility to be certain none of those "transactional" events involved a victim being sold into a rape. Hence the need to forgive others when they do it "transactionally", to assume the unlikely or the impossible... It's the only mentality that keeps them from making judgements against themselves when it's too late to just not be "a sinner"

 

[unapologetic]

even an asshole like trump is entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

If Rump's ICE doesn't respect 'innocent until proven guilty', why should we.

 

[unapologetic]

2/19/2026 Today in Politics | Explainer
About the political side of the Epstein network

 

[Derec]

Do you understand what your defense of Epstein and his cronies looks like? If you don't want to be seen as a creepy perv, stop defending creepy pervs.

I merely said that evidence of specific crimes should be required to condemn somebody. Being a "crony" or even being just very tangentially involved with somebody (by for example exchanging emails or attending an event) who committed crimes is not enough to declare them guilty of similar crimes. What you and your Ilk are doing here is a witch hunt.

And it's not just Trump who is at the receiving end of the witch hunt by the Ilk. We see the same for example with Rebecca Watson attacking Richard Dawkins.

This used to be a rational community. What the hell happened?

 

[Derec]

If Rump's ICE doesn't respect 'innocent until proven guilty', why should we.

Sure. We can for example declare for example that Jarhyn snuck into the Metropolitan Correction Center, murdered Epstein and made it look like suicide.

Evidence? We don't need no stinkin' evidence! And if you disagree, you must secretly be a murderer yourself, or else you would not be defending murderers. Or at least that's what Ziperianism and Jarhynism teaches us.

 

[southernhybrid]

even an asshole like trump is entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

If Rump's ICE doesn't respect 'innocent until proven guilty', why should we.

Because w're better than Trump. That's why!