ACOSTA “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone”

Several days ago I wrote another thread that I thought that Acosta was told as to how to handle the Epstein situation back in 2008 from someone above him. So come forward another day or so and hes beginning to crack under pressure. I have seen this behavior among powerful people including Presidents in publicly traded corporations. So within the last 24 hours it is now being reported out by several news organizations that he now says that he was told to basically back off as Epstein was was an intelligence operative. First of all any US Attorney always wants the big fish and that was his. Epstein's money can buy anything and who knows whom did what to whom and for whom but in the case of Acosta his statement makes sense to me. Also, back in 2008 the FBI was contacted about this situation with Mueller in charge. I sure would like to see who was assigned and what was uncovered. Probably nothing so Acosta had to punt and get a light sentence. I do not believe that hes going to fall on his sword on this one. But as in the arena of INTEL what is up is down and vise versa. So lets watch and see how this plays out.

Here's just one link as there are several out there.

Daily Observer

Alexander Acosta, the current U.S. Labor Secretary, is in the hot seat, since a dozen years ago he was the U.S. Attorney for South Florida who cut that deal with Epstein. Ward explained the background of that deal, which is now a noose for Acosta. Specifically, she elaborated that the Epstein issue came up when Acosta was appointed to the cabinet by President Donald Trump. Ward writes: He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)

Here's another statement from years ago that supports Acosta:

Zero Hedge

It should be noted the reason I attach credibility to the above is based on who wrote it, Vicky Ward. She has an extensive history of digging into Epstein, and wrote one of the earliest profiles on him back in 2003. As she notes in today’s article: I spent many months on his trail in 2002 for Vanity Fair and discovered not only that he was not who he claimed to be professionally, but also that he had allegedly assaulted two young sisters, one of whom had been underage at the time. Very bravely, they were prepared to go on the record. They were afraid he’d use all his influence to discredit them—and their fear turned out to be legitimate. As the article was being readied for publication, Epstein made a visit to the office of Vanity Fair’s then-editor, Graydon Carter, and suddenly the women and their allegations were removed from the article. “He’s sensitive about the young women,” Carter told me at the time. (Editor’s Note: Carter has previously denied this allegation.) He also mentioned he’d finagled a photograph of Epstein in a swimsuit out of the encounter. And there was also some feeble excuse about the article “being stronger as a business story.” (Epstein had also leaned heavily on my ex-husband’s uncle, Conrad Black, to try to exert his influence on me, which was particularly unwelcome, given that Black happened to be my ex-husband’s boss at the time.) Many people had assumed Epstein was untouchable merely because he had so much dirt on so many powerful people, but it increasingly looks far bigger than that. It appears he may have been untouchable because he was systematically collecting this information on behalf of an intelligence agency. If so, we need to find out precisely who he was working for.

There is also another site which includes a reverse Psyop story mocking and making fun of the guy for stating:

“I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone”

Hay, the guy just wanted to live and go on with his career as we all have to play by others rules. It seems like INTEL is already trying to neutralize the guy

It is just barely within the realm of possibility given some of the crap we know one way or another.

Epstein was generating high value blackmail material with his atrocities, and it's a good way to control the otherwise uncontrollable -- herd cats if you will.

Deep State, indeed.

Now, is that a true explanation? Who knows.

originally posted by: Waterglass
Several days ago I wrote another thread that I thought that Acosta was told as to how to handle the Epstein situation back in 2008 from someone above him. So come forward another day or so and hes beginning to crack under pressure. I have seen this behavior among powerful people including Presidents in publicly traded corporations. So within the last 24 hours it is now being reported out by several news organizations that he now says that he was told to basically back off as Epstein was was an intelligence operative. First of all any US Attorney always wants the big fish and that was his. Epstein's money can buy anything and who knows whom did what to whom and for whom but in the case of Acosta his statement makes sense to me. Also, back in 2008 the FBI was contacted about this situation with Mueller in charge. I sure would like to see who was assigned and what was uncovered. Probably nothing so Acosta had to punt and get a light sentence. I do not believe that hes going to fall on his sword on this one. But as in the arena of INTEL what is up is down and vise versa. So lets watch and see how this plays out.

Here's just one link as there are several out there.

Daily Observer

Alexander Acosta, the current U.S. Labor Secretary, is in the hot seat, since a dozen years ago he was the U.S. Attorney for South Florida who cut that deal with Epstein. Ward explained the background of that deal, which is now a noose for Acosta. Specifically, she elaborated that the Epstein issue came up when Acosta was appointed to the cabinet by President Donald Trump. Ward writes: He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. (The Labor Department had no comment when asked about this.)

Here's another statement from years ago that supports Acosta:

Zero Hedge

It should be noted the reason I attach credibility to the above is based on who wrote it, Vicky Ward. She has an extensive history of digging into Epstein, and wrote one of the earliest profiles on him back in 2003. As she notes in today’s article: I spent many months on his trail in 2002 for Vanity Fair and discovered not only that he was not who he claimed to be professionally, but also that he had allegedly assaulted two young sisters, one of whom had been underage at the time. Very bravely, they were prepared to go on the record. They were afraid he’d use all his influence to discredit them—and their fear turned out to be legitimate. As the article was being readied for publication, Epstein made a visit to the office of Vanity Fair’s then-editor, Graydon Carter, and suddenly the women and their allegations were removed from the article. “He’s sensitive about the young women,” Carter told me at the time. (Editor’s Note: Carter has previously denied this allegation.) He also mentioned he’d finagled a photograph of Epstein in a swimsuit out of the encounter. And there was also some feeble excuse about the article “being stronger as a business story.” (Epstein had also leaned heavily on my ex-husband’s uncle, Conrad Black, to try to exert his influence on me, which was particularly unwelcome, given that Black happened to be my ex-husband’s boss at the time.) Many people had assumed Epstein was untouchable merely because he had so much dirt on so many powerful people, but it increasingly looks far bigger than that. It appears he may have been untouchable because he was systematically collecting this information on behalf of an intelligence agency. If so, we need to find out precisely who he was working for.

There is also another site which includes a reverse Psyop story mocking and making fun of the guy for stating:

“I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone”

Hay, the guy just wanted to live and go on with his career as we all have to play by others rules. It seems like INTEL is already trying to neutralize the guy

I read an interesting piece that basically theorized that Epstein's entire purpose was blackmail of prominent people.... as in that was his business. Hob knob with the rich and famous. Eventually get some of them to take the bait and then use it as leverage. He very well could be an operative.

My gosh are you trying to say the CIA is behind child sex trafficking?
Because that's what it sounds like Acosta is implying

Who cares. He's still a child rapist.

a reply to: Edumakated

Exceedingly plausible. Fits some of my theories on things...

a reply to: dashen

are you trying to say the CIA is behind child sex trafficking

NO!

I read an article from 2016 that suggested he was possibly Mossad but no connection was ever made and if he was INTEL it wasn's USA

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No doubt... thing is I think most of these people have these skeletons in their closets, it's how they are all made to ultimately play ball. If a person does not have these skeletons, then the chance they get a position of power is effectively nil.

Yes, I'm of the opinion anyone in power currently has done disgusting and horrible things in order to gain their position.

originally posted by: Puppylove
Yes, I'm of the opinion anyone in power currently has done disgusting and horrible things in order to gain their position.

I'm of the opinion they're pandering morons willing to sell out to the highest bidder.

Sounds like Acosta is in cover ass mode. The state prosecutor is giving him up as well, they had a big case to file but it got dropped.

Another thread about this at link

originally posted by: dashen
My gosh are you trying to say the CIA is behind child sex trafficking?
Because that's what it sounds like Acosta is implying

Why not? they traffic in coc aine, heroin, arms, etc...

I wouldn't be surprised to discover that Mueller was one of Epstein's 'clients'.

The earlier Cyrus Vance intervention on behalf of lessening Epstein's previous sentence is interesting too.

Epstein plea deal casts light on Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance's role

www.foxnews.com...

Considering Epstein lookup to Robert Maxwell and try to pattern himself like him, I would say he could be a Mossad's asset. Robert Maxwell, had an interesting career, to say the least. Not to mention his daughter, Ghislaine Maxwell, works as his personal procurer of girls, his side dish and personal pilot.

originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: dashen

are you trying to say the CIA is behind child sex trafficking

NO!

I read an article from 2016 that suggested he was possibly Mossad but no connection was ever made and if he was INTEL it wasn's USA

I think you are quite possibly hitting the nail on the head with this comment...

originally posted by: joemoe
Considering Epstein lookup to Robert Maxwell and try to pattern himself like him, I would say he could be a Mossad's asset. Robert Maxwell, had an interesting career, to say the least. Not to mention his daughter, Ghislaine Maxwell, works as his personal procurer of girls, his side dish and personal pilot.

Check out Jean Luc Brunel...listed on Epstein flight logs, owner of a teen modeling agency in Miami...and alleged procurer of young models for Epstein.

Rumors have been circling he is heavily tied in with Mossad.

originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: dashen

are you trying to say the CIA is behind child sex trafficking

NO!

I read an article from 2016 that suggested he was possibly Mossad but no connection was ever made and if he was INTEL it wasn's USA

Ah yes, blame the Jews. I was wondering when it would get to that on this subject. Didn't take long.

originally posted by: 35Foxtrot

originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: dashen

are you trying to say the CIA is behind child sex trafficking

NO!

I read an article from 2016 that suggested he was possibly Mossad but no connection was ever made and if he was INTEL it wasn's USA

I think you are quite possibly hitting the nail on the head with this comment...

If he is a burned Mossad agent and makes bail, he is not long for this world. Mossad is very efficient at tying up loose ends

a reply to: IAMTAT

This whole thing may be a honeypot set up by the Mossad. If it is, imagine the amount of control they have Globally or at least over the Western Nations.

I believe something sorta similar happened with known mobster Whitey Bulger.. he would flip info on other people, remain a criminal, and essentially was sheltered from the government due to being an "informant"..... Epstein flips info on financial crimes and things like that, and is protected from prosecution

a reply to: Waterglass


As many have stated I think the blackmail value for such a setup would be huge, after all it would not be unheard of for for such situations to be setup by intelligence agencies, and it makes perfect sense to put out a "hands off" order to keep the intel pouring in.

Moving on from that it also boggles the mind just how idiotic some peoples action are when they are following their ding dong, do they really think that when they are the public figure of the movers and shakers that some HD tape does not exist on a shelf ready to be used when they commit these disgusting acts in order to sway their position?...

In saying all that there has to be a paper trail somewhere of these setups if true?, and no doubt we will not have them released in our lifetime.