Anonymous #1 1w

Mamdani’s mom is in the files. Inclusion in the files does not mean guilt

1

Anonymous #2 1w

Yeah but jk Rowling was inviting Jeffery Epstein to her broadway show far after it was already known he was a sex trafficker. So she guilty.

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

And Mamdani’s mom was at Ghislaine’s party with Jeffery a full 3 years after it was known too. That’s not how guilt works

1

Anonymous #2 1w

If that’s true then yeah mamdanis mom is also guilty?

1

Anonymous #2 1w

Source on that tho lol

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

Still wouldn’t make either one guilty. And source is the email with Mamdani’s mom’s name on it also has a date

1

Anonymous #2 1w

What does the email say? Also yes it does. If you’re positively interacting with Epstein and Maxwell years after they’ve been outed as pedophiles you hold some responsibility. What is this cope?

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

Again, that’s not how crimes work. If you want to call them bad people for associating with known bad people okay, but that doesn’t make them guilty of crimes the host of a party did. And the email had named her as a guest in attendance at Ghislaine’s party

3

Anonymous #2 1w

I didn’t say they committed a crime I said they’re guilty. The word guilty doesn’t mean “guilty of a crime” it means you’ve done something morally wrong.

5

Anonymous #2 1w

Which they would’ve. So.. yeah? Sounds like they’re both guilty? I mean if she’s just on the list that doesn’t mean she went, whilst Rowling literally invited Epstein to a broadway show, but yeah.

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

“Prosecute the people in the Epstein files” and “they’re guilty” have pretty strong connotations when used together. And people know exactly what it sounds like when they call people guilty here. And the email is literally Epstein saying he saw her at the party. I think you have some biases here trying to defend one but blowing up the other for sending an invite to a show that she denies (now that I looked it up myself was confirmed she didn’t) and the same files show he was denied entry.

1

Anonymous #2 1w

I didn’t say “prosecute the people in the Epstein files”

1

Anonymous #2 1w

I think you have some biases whilst desperately trying to defend the people in the Epstein files.

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

JK Rowling is a Christian, so she’s either showing Christian forgiveness or getting in on the action. Unfortunately the structure pf Christian forgiveness makes the two look very similar

1

Anonymous #1 1w

If a wealthy ultra powerful “christian” is fraternizing with Jeffery Epstein after it was found out he was a pedophile, that Christian forgiveness angle seems pretty convenient.

3

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

Keep in mind that victims were also at the parties. And regular ppl can be pressured into going or lied to about the guest list

1

Anonymous #1 1w

How does that help JK Rowling case?

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

Well as someone who spent a lot of time around Christians and used to be one, I can understand the pull for Christians to “rescue someone from their sin”. But of course the issue is that bad people will pretend to be a “forgiving Christian” when they meet up with their kind, and Christian children will sometimes be asked to… write their pedo priest forgiveness letters… 🥴

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

I’m not trying to defend anyone, just pointing out other possible explanations for association with Epstein. All explanations should be considered. Also, as someone who has been to parties with bad people, I understand some of the circumstances that would lead someone to do such a thing.

1

Anonymous mushy.the.mushroom 1w

I went to two parties with a terrible group of people because a close friend with a rough family life and people-pleasing tendencies was caught up with them. I was the DD at one party and helped with the logistics at the other party. I didn’t want to be there, but my presence ended up helping this friend leave those terrible people.

1