politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I think you may be confusing "wild speculation" with reason.
What would be the other conclusion you draw when you hear a sex trafficking pedophile who murdered and tortured his victims, ordered multiple drums of sulphuric acid to be delivered to his private island the same day a federal investigation was announced?
Oh well as long as that's what he'd always been ~~dissolving bodies in~~ using to purify water, nothing to see here. Just like there was nothing to see in the entire decade between first being arrested for sex trafficking a minor in 2008 and charged with "soliciting prostitution of a minor," continuing to do insane business transactions with powerful elites and banks who still won't release records of those transactions, and ending up dead in his jail cell with a federal record date of death listed the day before he actually died at the exact time security footage resets itself, and both guards take a meal break so there are no witnesses. Oh and 2 minutes are missing because glitches happen.
There's no need for wild speculation because there's always some perfectly logical explanation for why none of this is what it looks like.
Sulphuric acid is not particularly good at dissolving bodies. It's hard to believe that a bunch of billionaires on a private island with bodies to dispose of would chose that as a method.
Agree that Epstein was clearly murdered.
Hydrochloric acid may have been a better choice, but some interesting studies have found sulfuric acid is second most effective.
Postmortem tissue alterations induced by corrosive substances – a scoping review
I've actually had a bit splash in my face while working in a lab. Luckily I was wearing safety goggles, but the tiny bit that did contact my cheek was quite painful and immediately did some damage. It doesn't seem inconceivable that they would attempt to dispose of evidence by sealing it in barrels of acid, including human remains that may have already been in the process of decomposing. It also doesn't mean it was the only thing used to conceal evidence. Definitely don't believe these people have done much to earn the benefit of the doubt.
I would say it's harder to believe a sex trafficking pedophile island run by a bunch of billionaires to serve the world's elite, ever existed in the first place, or that it continued operating for as long as it did while victims of trafficking were flown in to be tortured and as some witnesses have claimed, murdered. And yet...
If a scientist famously attempted to do it, not sure why you would think these people wouldn't?
I'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt, even remotely.
I don't find that hard to believe at all, that seems very consistent with the sort of things billionaires do.
This is what you're not getting. It's not a question of whether they would or wouldn't do it based on morals. Absolutely no question that they would. The thing is they could've literally just dumped bodies into mass graves, what, are cops going to be snooping around? Or thrown them into the sea, whatever they feel like. It's purely a question of practicality.
There's simpler and more mundane explanations anyway, like desalinization. Again it's not a question of "giving them the benefit of the doubt."
username fits
Why's that?