Well, the only one you have to spoof to incriminate is already redacted, so there’s not really a ‘spoof’ concern to worry about unless that is unredacted.
Receiving such an email doesn’t have to be a spoof. See typical spam folder of anyone for all sorts of crazy implications about the recipient.
However, the date is more reliable and back in 2014, nearly no one would be motivated to fake that sort of email toward Epstein. That was before his whole situation was popularly known. The people aware of it were largely in on it that early on.
The key word being those that knew him. He wasn’t famous for things so strangers wouldn’t have done that, and I think if this were a fake email, then sending it to a high profile person would be more of a stranger activity than an associate.
I don’t think an Epstein associate would send a fake email like that, as it would be more likely to blow back on them than implicate Epstein any further than he was already implicated.
So yeah, this email seems a credible thing and consistent with Epstein. Also I would not suspect a fake header if we knew the sender, so I’d think the sender could be presumed not to be a victim of spoofed headers too.
He wasn’t famous for things so strangers wouldn’t have done that
He was famous for throwing raunchy sex parties with underaged European models.
That was his entire roll in his social network.
It’s like showing up in the black book of the DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey and saying “I didn’t know she was a pimp”. That’s literally the only reason you would associate with the person.
Norm fucking Finklestein responds to Epstein on his perversion to his face, ffs.
I’m not saying that his activities were completely unknown, just that some internet rando wouldn’t even recognize his name back then. I think that a faked email could only be a likely scenario if we were talking about after everyone knew who he was and what he did.
So the ‘oh watch out, that 2014 Epstein email might have been faked/forged’ is a relatively small likelihood to bother assuming, and totally beside the point since they censored the ‘from’ in that email and the message didn’t indicate previously unknown behavior on Epstein’s part.
Well, the only one you have to spoof to incriminate is already redacted, so there’s not really a ‘spoof’ concern to worry about unless that is unredacted.
Receiving such an email doesn’t have to be a spoof. See typical spam folder of anyone for all sorts of crazy implications about the recipient.
However, the date is more reliable and back in 2014, nearly no one would be motivated to fake that sort of email toward Epstein. That was before his whole situation was popularly known. The people aware of it were largely in on it that early on.
Epstein was first arrested 2006 and convicted on 2008, anyone association with him after that KNEW him being a sex offender.
The key word being those that knew him. He wasn’t famous for things so strangers wouldn’t have done that, and I think if this were a fake email, then sending it to a high profile person would be more of a stranger activity than an associate.
I don’t think an Epstein associate would send a fake email like that, as it would be more likely to blow back on them than implicate Epstein any further than he was already implicated.
So yeah, this email seems a credible thing and consistent with Epstein. Also I would not suspect a fake header if we knew the sender, so I’d think the sender could be presumed not to be a victim of spoofed headers too.
He was famous for throwing raunchy sex parties with underaged European models.
That was his entire roll in his social network.
It’s like showing up in the black book of the DC Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey and saying “I didn’t know she was a pimp”. That’s literally the only reason you would associate with the person.
Norm fucking Finklestein responds to Epstein on his perversion to his face, ffs.
I’m not saying that his activities were completely unknown, just that some internet rando wouldn’t even recognize his name back then. I think that a faked email could only be a likely scenario if we were talking about after everyone knew who he was and what he did.
So the ‘oh watch out, that 2014 Epstein email might have been faked/forged’ is a relatively small likelihood to bother assuming, and totally beside the point since they censored the ‘from’ in that email and the message didn’t indicate previously unknown behavior on Epstein’s part.