TLDR;
The discussion revolves around the recently released Epstein files, focusing on disturbing content and reactions to it. It highlights Nick Bryant's mention in the files in a positive light, an email detailing disturbing content about babies, and the overall sense of impunity among the "Epstein class." The conversation also touches on the use of derogatory terms for women in the emails and the light sentence Epstein received despite serious charges.
- Nick Bryant was mentioned in the Epstein files in a positive context.
- The files contain disturbing content, including an email about enhancing a baby's sucking reflex.
- The "Epstein class" operated with a sense of impunity, as evidenced by their written communications.
- Women were referred to with derogatory terms in the emails.
- Epstein received a lenient sentence despite facing serious child trafficking charges.
Nick Bryant is in the Epstein files and he comes off well [0:00]
The discussion begins with the host mentioning that Nick Bryant is mentioned in the Epstein files in a positive way. The host references a previous statement where she noted that Norman Finkelstein and Bernie Sanders also "came off well" in the files. The host shares an email where one of Epstein's associates issued an "all points bulletin" about Nick Bryant, including a picture, to make others aware of him. This was followed by emails instructing Jeffrey Epstein to call Nick Bryant. Although Epstein never contacted him, Bryant expresses gratitude for having alarmed these individuals. The host suggests the calls were intended to dissuade Bryant from reporting on the matter.
Horrifying email about babies [2:48]
The conversation shifts to the disturbing content found within the Epstein files, particularly an email from UCLA neuroscientist Mark Trammo to Epstein. The email discusses ways to "enhance a baby to suck," which the host describes as an evil email. Mark Trammo was let go from UCLA. The host acknowledges the potential for disbelief and dismissal due to the far-fetched nature of the content but emphasizes the reality of some of these things. The email includes a postscript about newborns sucking more vigorously on a pacifier when it plays a recording of their mother's voice. It also mentions that Richard Johnson's editor decided not to run a piece about Jeffrey Epstein.
The Epstein class is in their own world [5:15]
The speakers discuss the "Epstein class" and their detachment from reality, highlighting the horrific nature of their world. The speaker mentions starting to investigate Epstein in 2011, which led to an "All Points Bulletin" being issued about them. They also reference a book they wrote about another trafficking network, the Franklin Scandal, and how the content of the Epstein emails aligns with information known by therapists who consult extreme abuse and trauma victims. The speaker recommends the "extreme abuse survey" as a resource for understanding the context of the email content, noting that sadistic pedophile networks are status quo.
References to women as shrimp, muffins, and steak [6:40]
The discussion addresses the derogatory language used to refer to women in the emails, such as "shrimp," "muffins," and "steak." The speaker expresses surprise that such content was put in writing, attributing it to a sense of impunity. The host then summarizes Jeffrey Epstein's history of trafficking underage girls for 25 years and the lenient sentence he received. Despite facing a 60-count indictment in 2008, including child trafficking charges that could have resulted in a life sentence, Epstein served only 13 months and was allowed to leave the county jail during the day to meet with his "legal assistants."
