Yes, The Clintons Do Have Documented Ties To A Pedophile. (Not Russian Propaganda)

With all the cries of fake news about the Clintons being linked to pedophiles, how about some court documents linking them to pedophiles instead? I’ve linked a handful of full court documents throughout this post.
Convicted pedophile and leader of an underage sex trafficking ring, Jeffrey Epstein, claimed in an official plea letter to the United States Attorney that he was part of the original group that conceived of the Clinton Initiative. You can see the full letter by clicking on the image. It’s 24 pages. Don’t be fooled by Dershowitz’s glowing presentation of Epstein or his attempts to poke holes in the evidence. I’ll explain why in a moment.
We discuss this story as well as how the Internet is flooded with certain news stories as a way to drown out and prevent easily provable inconvenient facts from being discovered on episode 10 of the Propaganda Report.
The image below shows that Epstein’s lawyer, attorney for the elites, Alan Dershowitz, endorsed the letter, which was then given to the United States Attorney.
So, no. Stories about the Clintons being tied to a pedophile ring are not fake news, nor are they Russian propaganda. The Clintons have legitimate, uncomfortable ties to Epstein. The mainstream media would just rather protect predators than pursue the truth.
This plea letter is a big deal. Don’t let the glittery language fool you. Dershowitz is putting lipstick on a monster. That’s what plea letters are for, to spin your client into something he or she is not in hopes of getting a deal.
This plea letter, which also references a Bill Clinton quote about Epstein, was used to get Epstein and his co-conspirators a secretive, sweetheart deal. In other words, Epstein’s relationship with the individuals and the organizations discussed in the letter were used to get Epstein this deal. To really emphasize what this says about those who agreed to help Epstein, here are the charges Epstein was facing before he received the deal. Read them carefully.
International child sex trafficking, illicit sexual conduct with a minor, sexual abuse of minors. That’s the kind of person Jeffrey Epstein is. That’s the kind of person the Clintons, by allowing their relationship to be leveraged in the plea letter, helped get a sweetheart deal. And this only begins to provide insights into the type of monster Epstein is.
I’m not going to go through a detailed account of all the evidence against Epstein in this post. It would simply take way too long. I will however, attach some of the documentation throughout this post so that you can go through it in your free time. I will tell you that Epstein’s victims were as young as 12, and that over 30 victims were identified by the U.S. Attorney.
The charges that Epstein was facing were substantial. The first charge alone comes with a minimum of 10 years in prison and the potential for life in prison as you can see in subsection b of the image below.
I’ve included links to the others laws listed in the plea deal below.

Had there been no plea deal and Epstein’s case gone to trial, he was potentially facing decades, even life, in prison. With the plea deal, which was granted with the help of the plea letter, how much time did Epstein, the pedophile, serve? Because of this secretive deal, the federal charges against him were dropped. Instead of potentially facing life in prison for the above crimes, he was allowed to plead guilty at the state level to charges of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution. He was sentenced to 18 months in a jail near his home. He served 13 months. He was not only allowed to stay in his own, private wing, of the jail, he got to leave during the day to go work. He only stayed in jail at night.
To recap:
Without the secretive plea deal, Epstein is facing decades to life in prison. With the plea deal, obtained with the help of the Clintons, Epstein is sentenced to a 13-month sleep over in a private wing of a jail near his house. One of the little girls he sexually abused gets labeled a prostitute. And because the feds worked with Epstein to prevent the victims from finding out this deal was being made, the victims were denied the opportunity to object to the deal. Statements made by the victims during the many civil trials against Epstein prove that they would have tried to prevent the deal from being made had they been notified. They had a legal right to be notified if a plea deal was being made. The feds and Epstein blatantly prevented this from happening because the dozens of underage girls Epstein victimized would have protested the deal. You can read about that and many other details in this 57 page Summary Judgment.
The function of the plea negotiation letter and the content included within it, was to make this deal happen. This is a blatant abuse of power that the Clintons willingly helped facilitate. Not only was the Clintons relationship with Epstein used to protect the leader of a child sex trafficking ring, it was also used to protect Epstein’s employees as well as the elites Epstein pimped child sex slaves out to. On top of the slap on the wrist given to Epstein, the U.S. Attorney threw in a non-prosecution of “co-conspirators” clause that gave a few named employees and who knows how many unnamed elites immunity from prosecution.
Think about that. Many of these co-conspirators would have been facing charges just as severe as Epstein had he not received a plea deal. And they were granted full immunity. Systematic, sexually abuse of children………. And they receive immunity under a non-prosecution of co-conspirators clause that the Clintons helped make happen.
Ask yourself this question; would you let your name and the name of your organization be used to help a child molester, facing a potential of life in prison, get a slap on the wrist? Would you be OK knowing that your actions played a major part in adding to the pain of his victims who now have to live their life knowing that the man who abused them repeatedly was never truly punished? Is this a cause you’d want your name or foundation attached to?
Of course not. So why would the feds give this monster a deal despite substantial evidence against Epstein? You aren’t going to see anyone arguing that Jeffrey Epstein was innocent, nor will you find anyone praising his plea deal as justice served. Quite the opposite in fact. The disgust in regards to how easy Epstein got it is pretty universal. He’s a known pervert who uses his money and power to act on his perversions. So why did they help him? And why would organizations like the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Rockefeller Foundation, whose relationships with Epstein were also used to get him the plea deal, willingly allow their names to be used as advocates for a pedophile?
Why would the Clintons allow Epstein to tell the United States Attorney that he helped conceive the Clinton Global Initiative if this wasn’t true? And assuming that it is true because it’s never been disputed and the U.S. Attorney treated it as an influential fact in their decision to give Epstein a deal, why in the world would the Clintons allow Epstein to name drop them in this plea deal?
Why would Bill Clinton let Dershowitz use his name to protect pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and to help Epstein’s co-conspirators get immunity from prosecution?
Why didn’t the Clintons, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Trilateral Commission, and the Council on Foreign Relations say, “There’s no way in hell you’re associating my name with that monster. There’s no way we’re tying our image to a convicted pedophile who ran an international child sex trafficking operation.” Hillary had political aspirations when this case was on going. That’s the last thing a presidential candidate wants, to have her foundation used as leverage to help a pedophile and his co-conspirators escape justice. Surely, the Clintons wouldn’t have let this happen had there been any other alternative.
So, WHY?
Before answering that question, I should answer the question that those who refuse to believe that any of this is true will ask at this point, which is, “Did the Clintons know that their name was used in the plea negotiation letter?”
That’s a ridiculous question. Of course they knew. Would Alan Dershowitz include the names of such powerful organizations and people in a letter being used to help a pedophile escape justice without first getting their permission? Is it reasonable to believe that they just wouldn’t find out? Is it reasonable to believe that the United States Attorney wouldn’t verify the claims of a plea negotiation letter before granting the deal? Is Dershowitz going to sign off on a letter which states that a pedophile, facing the potential of life in prison, helped conceive the Clinton Global Initiative, without running that by the Clintons first? Of course he wouldn’t. That’s insane. The Clintons were well aware of what was going on. They knew who they were helping and they knew who they were hurting.
So let’s finally, after much belaboring of the point, consider why the feds gave Epstein a deal and why the Clintons and those other powerful, elitist, organizations willingly participated in protecting a pedophile and his co-conspirators.
Just so that I don’t get accused of being Russian propaganda, I want to clarify that while the information I referenced above comes from court documents, the conclusions that I’m about to express are conclusions that I’ve personally come to based on studying the available case files for a very long time. The facts they’re based on come from court documents. These conclusions are conclusions that I can’t imagine anyone who studies the case files, not coming to.
Why did the Feds give Epstein a deal despite the Evidence?
Epstein ran a high level operation, and he was prepared incase he ever got caught. Reading through the thousands of pages of court documents makes this abundantly clear. He intentionally targeted girls from troubled families because they would be easier to smear and discredit if he got caught. Dershowitz ran a smear campaign on Epstein’s victims. Epstein gathered information about his “clients” from the child prostitutes he pimped out to them. He also had Ghislaine Maxwell, who was in charge of procuring sex slaves for Epstein, photograph them. Epstein’s victims claim that this was for blackmail purposes. Investigators found child pornography on Maxwell’s computer. She was protected under the non-prosecution of co-conspirators clause. An interesting aside. On a number of flights that Bill Clinton took on Epstein’s private jet, Lolita, Maxwell was also aboard.

MoS2 Template Master
Prince Andrew, Virginia Roberts, and Ghislaine Maxwell. Maxwell, lurking in the back, procured sex slaves for Epstein’s sex trafficking operation, and photographed the girls, for what was claimed to be blackmail purposes.

Another interesting aside. Maxwell skipped out of her deposition for the civil trial by claiming that she was out of the country helping her ailing mother, and never coming back. A short time later she was photographed at Chelsea Clinton’s wedding. Here’s the court document where Roberts’ lawyer describes this and the photo of Maxwell at the Chelsea Clinton’s wedding……once again lurking in the back.
OK, where was I? Right, why the feds not only gave Epstein a deal, but also why they worked so hard to prevent the dozens of victims he abused from learning about it in time to try and stop it.
Dershowitz attempts to downplay the evidence and smear the victims, but that doesn’t change the fact that the Justice department concluded that the U.S. Attorney would not abuse discretion in prosecuting Epstein, finding the case to be consistent in principal with other federal prosecutions nationwide. Nor does it change the fact that the U.S. Attorney had a list of 31 victims that it was prepared to name as a victim of an enumerated federal offense. And none of what Dershowitz spins eliminates the endless pages of damning witness and victim testimony. This document is over 80 pages. This one is a little more manageable at 22 pages.
The feds didn’t decide to give Epstein a deal because they lacked evidence to prosecute, and they certainly didn’t throw in a “non-prosecution of co-conspirators” clause because they lacked evidence. The feds decision to make the deal in secret and help Epstein prevent his victims from finding out about it also had nothing to do with a lack of evidence. (You can read about this in the previously linked summary judgment.) The U.S. Attorney had more than enough evidence to prosecute Epstein. The reason they gave Epstein a deal is because they feared what information Epstein would reveal if his case went to trial.
Based on the information available, it’s hard not to conclude that the feds gave Epstein a deal and helped him keep it secret because Epstein had dirt on some of the most powerful people in the world. If the case went to trial, Epstein would implicate them. He was prepared to bring the entire system down if they prosecuted him, and the U.S. Attorney couldn’t let that happen. So they protected the monsters instead, by keeping the deal secret and by throwing in a “non-prosecution of co-conspirators” clause for good measure.
Why did the Clintons risk associating their name with this scum, despite Hillary’s political aspirations? 
Who would do that? What individual who plans on running for president would allow the lawyer of a pedophile to tie the name of their foundation to his client in a plea negotiation letter?
For the Clintons to agree to this, the benefits had to outweigh the costs. The costs of helping Epstein was that evidence tying them to a known monster would be out there, and could potentially rise to the surface. This is something they obviously don’t want. So, the alternative had to be worse. The damage the Clintons might have suffered had Jeffrey Epstein gone to trial had to be worse than the damage they suffered from agreeing to be an advocate in support of getting a pedophile and his co-conspirators a sweetheart deal.
Seeing as Epstein’s unnamed co-conspirators would have been facing similar charges had the case gone to trial, they would no doubt have done everything in their power to prevent that from happening. Furthermore, if they could be assured that their names would be sealed and that they would receive immunity from prosecution, they would no doubt risk a little damage to their reputation to make that happen.
Was the offer of a non-prosecution of co-conspirators clause too good for the Clintons to pass up?
The Clintons aren’t the only ones discussed in that plea letter who have uncomfortable ties to Epstein. Tony Blair, Henry Kissinger, and others who represent the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Rockefeller Foundation have been identified in Epstein’s flight logs, identified in Epstein’s black book, or identified by victims as being on pedophile island.
This certainty doesn’t make them guilty of anything. But when there are representatives from the organizations mentioned in the plea letter who all have strange ties to Epstein, it does make you curious about why those organizations were willing to help Epstein and his co-conspirators get a deal.

Epstein’s unnamed co-conspirators are the biggest beneficiaries of Epstein’s deal. Not only did they receive immunity from prosecution but their names are sealed. It goes without saying that a co-conspirator with the power to do so would do whatever he or she could to make sure Epstein got that deal. This includes lending their name, or the name of their organization, to a plea negotiation letter on Epstein’s behalf. 

While many of the facts of this case are concealed, an investigation into the publicly available court documents makes it hard not to conclude that Bill Clinton was a very happy individual when he found out that the feds included a non-prosecution of co-conspirators clause with the deal. It’s undeniable that convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was part of the group that helped conceive the Clinton Initiative. To believe otherwise is to believe that the United States Attorney gave Epstein a deal without verifying a statement made about one of the most powerful organizations in the world. Furthermore, to believe otherwise is to believe that one of the most powerful and politically connected lawyers in the world, Alan Dershowitz, knowingly signed off on a lie about a former president’s foundation in order to help a child abuser get a lighter sentence. Those are both ridiculous notions.

Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted pedophile who was facing charges of international child sex trafficking, helped start the Clinton Global Initiative. The Clintons aided in helping Epstein get a sweetheart deal. These are two facts that cannot be denied. So again, I repeat. Yes, the Clintons do have ties to a pedophile ring. Those ties are found in court documents, and despite this, the mainstream media continues to ignore them. 

We talk about this case in some detail in episode 10 of the Propaganda Report.
If you like this post, subscribe to the Propaganda Report podcast on iTunes for weekly in-depth propaganda analysis by clicking here. 
If you’re an android user, subscribe on Google play by clicking here
You can also check out my youtube page if you’re into that sort of thing. There’s a video somewhere on there of me ranting and raving about this stuff.

4 thoughts on “Yes, The Clintons Do Have Documented Ties To A Pedophile. (Not Russian Propaganda)”

  1. Good stuff but please check your grammar when using apostrophes. The apostrophe in “Why would the Clinton’s allow Epstein… ” is incorrect. It’s “The Clintons.”

    • Haha, thank you. I’ll be the first to admit that punctuation is my weakness. Until we are able to add an editor, my punctuation will be a work in progress. Thank you for the heads up.

Leave a Comment