Tuneout 🎨
UncMCI think we can all agree that when Trump got grazed it was an inside job
that s*** was strange lol and the convenient shooter got killed
the classic move
- UncMC 🪕
Next month is kirktember
- Tuneout 🎨
Poopfeast420For mutually assured destruction.
I’m not having this argument for the third time so you can read back for more context but:If a group of people all decide to commit a crime, and they all agree that if anyone talks, they all go down together. That’s not blackmail. For it to be blackmail, in a conversational sense, one party has to asymmetrically benefit.
which epstein would since he was already a known pedo and these were the most powerful people on earth. and epstein had the evidence, he recorded in secret and they did not.
·1 replyPoopfeast420There is no evidence he ever used those videos to blackmail someone. Could he have? Sure. Is there evidence? No. It doesn’t get simpler
I mean yea they’re obv not gonna release the blackmail cause they’re jumping through hoops to avoid implicating anyone powerful
So if you want to say there’s no definitive proof that we as private citizens can pull up on Google and say “yup, there’s bill clinton f***ing a s***slave” then sure, but we can put 2 and 2 together here
And I say that as someone who recognizes how thirsty people are for a juicy story, especially regarding the Epstein stuff
- ·1 replyOrangutan
I mean yea they’re obv not gonna release the blackmail cause they’re jumping through hoops to avoid implicating anyone powerful
So if you want to say there’s no definitive proof that we as private citizens can pull up on Google and say “yup, there’s bill clinton f***ing a s***slave” then sure, but we can put 2 and 2 together here
And I say that as someone who recognizes how thirsty people are for a juicy story, especially regarding the Epstein stuff
No, there is already a reasonable amount of proof s***crimes occurred. There is no proof that Epstein was hosting these s***crimes as part of a blackmail operation.
·2 repliesTuneout
Watchmen 5-8 for this week?? Or u wanted to pick something else
- Tuneout 🎨·1 replyBruuiisees
Watchmen 5-8 for this week?? Or u wanted to pick something else
yes watchmen 5-8!
- Tuneout
yes watchmen 5-8!
- Tuneout 🎨·1 replyBruuiisees
Watchmen 5-8 for this week?? Or u wanted to pick something else
is et not picking this week?
- ·1 replyTuneout
is et not picking this week?
We will be reading watchmen 5-8 for this week
- Tuneout 🎨·1 replyBruuiisees
We will be reading watchmen 5-8 for this week
oket getting skipped in the cup for this tomfoolery
- Tuneout 🎨
vz sanctions
It doesn’t make any of it any better. I just feel that conspiratorial thinking leads to red herrings the vast majority of the time. It really doesn’t need more depth than a bunch of rich pedos that need to be executed.
- ·1 replyTuneout ok
et getting skipped in the cup for this tomfoolery
Then I’m out
- Tuneout 🎨·1 replyPoopfeast420
Then I’m out
i didnt agree or disagree !! i think you shoudl appeal it to bmass
- Tuneout 🎨
that is the legal process of the cup
- ·1 replyTuneout
i didnt agree or disagree !! i think you shoudl appeal it to bmass
No I already decided that bmass appeal is unnecessary
- Tuneout 🎨·1 replyBruuiisees
No I already decided that bmass appeal is unnecessary
this is above my pay grade and between u three!! i am not a boss in the cup
- ·2 repliesPoopfeast420
No, there is already a reasonable amount of proof s***crimes occurred. There is no proof that Epstein was hosting these s***crimes as part of a blackmail operation.
I’m not saying he was or wasn’t hosting some elaborate blackmail operation
I’m just saying it’s pretty reasonable to assume the hidden cameras were not for capturing irreplaceable home memories
I read what u said about mutually assured destruction, ans I’d argue that the power probably lies with the guy with video proof of you in an incriminating situation. Even if it was tit for tat, I’d say we’re reaching the point of pedantry.
- Tuneout 🎨Orangutan
I’m not saying he was or wasn’t hosting some elaborate blackmail operation
I’m just saying it’s pretty reasonable to assume the hidden cameras were not for capturing irreplaceable home memories
I read what u said about mutually assured destruction, ans I’d argue that the power probably lies with the guy with video proof of you in an incriminating situation. Even if it was tit for tat, I’d say we’re reaching the point of pedantry.
W tang
- Tuneout
this is above my pay grade and between u three!! i am not a boss in the cup
Yes so
Simply read watchmen 5-8
- ·1 reply
I can’t believe I came back from the dead… FOR THIS!
- ·1 replyOrangutan
I’m not saying he was or wasn’t hosting some elaborate blackmail operation
I’m just saying it’s pretty reasonable to assume the hidden cameras were not for capturing irreplaceable home memories
I read what u said about mutually assured destruction, ans I’d argue that the power probably lies with the guy with video proof of you in an incriminating situation. Even if it was tit for tat, I’d say we’re reaching the point of pedantry.
I would argue that most of the power lies with the president of the United States and the other powerful people implicated. Without the videos, there is no insurance policy for Epstein’s crew. Again, if the only requirement is mutual silence from all parties, it’s not blackmail. If there is any other asymmetrical requirement, then it’s blackmail.
- ·1 replyOrangutan
I can’t believe I came back from the dead… FOR THIS!
Its bad times for the nightshift