A graph explorer of the Epstein emails

This is the best rendition I've seen so far.

The Bill Clinton entity is interesting.

> 2009: Bill Clinton discontinued association with Jeffrey Epstein

> 2010: Jeffrey Epstein provided flights on jets to Bill Clinton

> 2010-2011: Jeffrey Epstein traveled via private aircraft with Bill Clinton

> 2011: Ghislaine Maxwell piloted helicopter for Bill Clinton

> 2014: Bill Clinton alleged presence at sex parties

> 2015: Bill Clinton distanced relationship from Jeffrey Epstein

Wasn't very good at discontinuing the relationship it seems.

Guess there is precedent for him lying about sexual activities though.

I think a sentiment analysis between the friendliness and social meetups between Epstein and other individuals would be useful.

Who were his friends after 2008 when he was first convicted?

Those who were still friends with him after 2008 were in on it or guilty by association, if not legally, socially.

Friends like Reid Hoffman and Larry Summers...

> From: Reid Hoffman

> Sent: 7/6/2015 5:04:31 PM

> To: jeffrey E. [jeeyacation@gmail.com]

> Subject: RE: ICYMI

> slow progress.

> planning to see you in August.

> Hope you're well.

Larry Summers has too many to list. Doesn't look good though digging through them.

Of course, deflect discussion to Trump. Does that make any of those other people look better to you?

Trump gave information against Epstein in 2009 and unlike Bill and others did cut ties after learning he was poaching girls from Mar-a-Lago.

I specifically made the point to look into those who were friends with Epstein even after knowing what he was doing.

Nice whataboutism though. Feel free to reference source materials to support your claims.

Btw are you a bot or is that just a canned statement you use?

Well for one those other people are not the current president of the most powerful country in the world.

But sure, lock all of them up, just don't ignore a few because they are too powerful.

It’s been wild to see people subsume not defending child rapists to their partisan identity.

I’m still convinced it’s a minority of loud voices online and on social media.

You're proving the point here.

You don't need to trust the media or care about his views on immigration to know that the guy got 34 felony convictions (for attempting to cover up mere infidelity with a porn star), that he's lost a lawsuit regarding sexual assault claims, and that sexual assault claims against him go back to the 70s and involving at least 28 women and him walking in on naked teenage pageant contestants.

Then there's the non-sexual stuff. If you want to say it's "shady" being twice impeached, or hanging his own arrest photo next to the oval office, or the huge number of business lawsuits, or the way he's now able to sue himself and win, or that he's now pardoning convicted co-conspirators etc., that's on you: as the quote goes, democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

The possibility of pee tapes was funny, but did anyone really care if golden shower was a liquid reference or a "24 carat (plated)" like his redecoration of the oval office?

> Show me where it’s a felony to use your own money to cover up an affair?

The "falsified business records" bit, for which he was convicted under felony charges. Those bits, where he was convicted as a felon, are what makes it a felony.

Likewise, it wasn't a crime for Bill Clinton to have an affair with any of the White House interns (AFAICT Paula Jones was before then), but then Clinton went and lied about affairs under oath, which was.

There's a reason why I put emphasis on "mere infidelity".

> My esteemed colleagues in the bar would be outraged if a legal theory half as aggressively creative as this one was brought against a gang murderer. They would leap at the chance to handle the appeals pro bono.

The fact he was convicted says otherwise on the first part, and the observation that he's still having trouble getting competent lawyers to defend him even now he's back in office speaks poorly of either your esteemed colleagues or of your estimation of them.