It's interesting that the focus of Epstein's affairs seem to have been transferred to the Prince Andrew of the Royal Family- rather than the ring leaders- and the possible existence of a pedophilia ring designed to create honey traps for powerful influencers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Giuffre

Perhaps colourful Miami is not the most family friendly neighbourhood.

The similarities to the Weinstein affair are interesting- could be a coincidence.

The fact that both Epstein and Weinstein are both of the Hebrew diaspora points to the idea that perhaps their separate cultural status has led to a lack of compassion for those of other ethnicities- and is perhaps a form of cultural dominance.

The below thread is interesting...

http://www.reddit.com/r/Epstein/comments/cshj4v/ron_eppinger_the_man_who_abused_roberts_before/

rache, don't be too hard on Randy Andy, he's thinking of the little people. AND how much richer the royal family would be if they actually got a real job. Why do we even entertain this family of misfits.

Rache finds it interesting that "Epstein's affairs seem to have been transferred to the Prince Andrew of the Royal Family".

Well, what a grand opportunity it has been to attack an institution hated by certain people and aided by the gutter press. For 70 years, the Queen has kept the traditions of service and self-sacrifice drilled into her by her father, who was catapulted into a job he didn’t want by the selfishness of his brother, who would have wrecked the monarchy back then if he had been left to it. Andrew is not the first Royal Dud in our time.

Nobody, even anti-monarchists, would have tolerated Queen Elizabeth being attacked. Then along came the next generation who, high and mighty as they might appear, suffer from the same moral decay and lack of responsibility as the commoner lot. One of them starts mixing with scum. Bingo!

Move on to the next generation and there's Harry, whom many of us suspect has no 'royal blood' at all, but is still a God-send, with his tarty wife, for the republicans, the haters, and all those who are rubbish human beings themselves wanting to to bring down as much of history and tradition as they can.

Easy. King Charles will not be getting the run his mother has had, either.

What should be questioned here is the motivation of
Virginia Giuffre in her accusation of Prince Andrew.
Yes, she was an under-age female when she provided him
with sex. But she was working for Epstein at the time.
Prince Andrew was merely one of many clients that she
serviced and was paid to do so. I imagine that Prince
Andrew was serviced by quite a few young females at
that time when he was a guest of Epsteins and stayed
at his facilities.

Ms Giuffre claims she was "abused." How so?
By whom and in what fashion? Nobody forced her to
provide the service. She's an American who was given
an opportunity - and she took it.

To now play the role of a victim - when the entire affair
was consensual - is again - an opportunity for her - which
she has taken. She's married now, has three children, and
lives in Australia. Her husband must be rubbing his hands
with glee - this is better than winning tattslotto for them.

The timing could not have been better. The royal family
wants to protect the Queen's Jubilee from being spoilt.
They want to protect their reputation. This gave Ms Giuffre
all the leverage she needed. She used it and she triumphed.

Prince Andrew may have been "Randy Andy," but he certainly
did not deserve this. He has lost much - and there's even
talk that he may be banned from attending his mother's
Jubilee having already lost his royal status and other
royal rights.

Not fair - not right. Ms Giuffre is attacking the wrong
person. If anyone should be attacked - it should be Epstein's
partner in crime - Ghislaine Maxwell who did all the procuring
for Epstein. Why didn't Virginia Giuffre testify at her trial?

"It's interesting that the focus of Epstein's affairs seem to have been transferred to the Prince Andrew of the Royal Family- rather than the ring leaders- and the possible existence of a pedophilia ring designed to create honey traps for powerful influencers."

Wow, someone actually got it right after all these years.
Good on you Calem Malum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kompromat

Ghislane's Father
http://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-7867-1078-2

Giuffre is no innocent young girl now, if she ever was. She is a hardened gold digger who knew full well what she was doing at the time. But, Andrew lost all credibility when he said that he never met her. A photograph clearly said he did; before photoshopping was available, I believe.