5d ago

New Epstein documents include a claim of an Oklahoma 'murder'

www.oklahoman.com New Epstein documents include a claim of an Oklahoma 'murder'

The U.S. Justice Department said on social media that some documents contain \

The latest release of Jeffrey Epstein documents includes an FBI report about a caller's claim of a suspicious death in Kiefer, Oklahoma, in January 2000.

The caller said a woman was found with her head "blown off" in the small town in northeast Oklahoma days after reporting to police she had been raped by Epstein and Donald Trump. The caller described the death as a murder.

The FBI report was in the nearly 30,000 new documents released by the U.S. Justice Department on Dec. 23.

You're viewing a single thread.

103 comments

So far none of the major outlets have covered this story but I have seen it on a ton of smaller sites. This seems odd
- The big ones are waiting to be told who the scapegoat is.
- They're real though, here are the files from the justice department (2nd one is the one they're describing):
  https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00020517.pdf
  https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00025010.pdf
  
  Update your links for url encoding
  https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00020517.pdf
  https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00025010.pdf
  Yours came up 404 and my first thought was they were recalled again.
  
  Thanks, I don't know what happened there.
  
  Yeah I know I'm just wondering why they aren't reporting this huge story even the outlets that don't like trump aren't reporting it yet
  
  I mean there is a really simple obvious explanation. They have either been told not to or are afraid of repercussions from the administration
  
  Repercussions? Like getting your head blown off?
  
  I mean, Oklahoma sets that precedent
  
  Rather than assuming every single news source is in league with maga or scared of them, the simplest explanation is that the claim doesn't hold any substantial weight.
  There's thousands of documents, not all of them are going to be accurate and spreading something that later turns out to be false will cheapen the public perception of credibility of the other issues bought against them.
  
  Rather than assuming every single news source is in league with maga or scared of them, the simplest explanation is that the claim doesn’t hold any substantial weight.
  It's not an assumption that every single (major) news source is owned by a MAGA crony or is run by someone afraid of a Trump SLAPP suit or regulatory retaliation. And some, such as the New York Times, seem to be going through contortions to minimize Epstein's intelligence links
  Having said that, it's inevitable that there will be crackpot claims in any high-profile case. So check it, and if it's bullshit, discard it. But also, don't assume that something's bullshit just because the person who wrote it can't write, or has other issues. Those issues might be the reason they're not intimidated when a more rational person would be. Someone like that can be a good source but a poor witness.
  One of the DOJ's tactics is to flood the zone with shit. They're deliberately releasing a huge quantity of documents with all context stripped out, to make it harder for journalists and the public to make sense of them. That's not the way they're organized in the DOJ, it's malicious compliance. And the document sets are also almost certainly being deliberately filtered to make the signal/noise ratio even worse-- for example, by redacting all mentions of Trump and by adding in items mentioning Clinton, probably redacted to support false conclusions about his level of involvement.
  
  So check it, and if it's bullshit, discard it. But also, don't assume that something's bullshit just because the person who wrote it can't write, or has other issues
  Sure thing, but thus far these two tips haven't been meaningfully checked and corroborated.
  The two most bombshell events were both tipline fodder during the height of the 2020 election, after Epstein's death and pictures of him and Trump became huge things.
  So yes, by all means scour current and future documents for anything corroborating these tips, but the context makes me extremely skeptical that these two tips are real. Both accounts were held back for decades, both only coming forward during his second election run, both only coming forward implicating a nefarious Trump/Epstein event after that was already a known thing...
  
  All I know is that I believe that person over trump any day. They could be lying, but why would they?
  
  I believe neither of them. Life's more than 2 options.
  People lie all the time, who knows why.
  
  You wouldn't believe a person that claims to be a victim, ever? ERRRRR, wrong answer.
  
  You can believe a persons telling their truth, treat them with respect, and investigate it.
  You do not blindly believe an event happened because someone said so. That’s what leads to people believing Haitian immigrants are eating dogs.
  
  They might be real files, but they might just be unproven accusations.
  
  Because it is a claim made by one single person 25 years ago, as far as we currently know. The big outlets or at least some of them probably have someone on the ground right now trying to establish whether this claims makes any sense, whether this death actually happened, whether with this specific cause of death etc etc. They know that Trump will sue them if they get even a tiny slither of facts wrong.
  
  but they already established that this death happened
  A 19-year-old student from Kiefer died on Jan. 10, 2000, according to death notices in two newspapers, the Tulsa World and the Sapulpa Herald. The state's chief medical examiner, Dr. Eric Pfeifer, told The Oklahoman on Dec. 24 that the death of Dusti Rhea Duke was ruled a suicide by a gunshot to the head.
  Her body was found at an address in Sapulpa, which is near Kiefer, according to medical examiner records.
  
  Problem is the tip was made in 2020, with no prior allegations about this woman being Epstein related, and no apparent reason why this person would have held onto this for 20 years.
  So someone seeing the Trump/Epstein news and moved by the asshole running for re-election could have scanned through news stories and fabricated a Trump/Epsrein connection for a death they found.
  Folks remembered that Comey led credence to the Hilary email stuff in 2016, and likely there were quite a few attempts to induce a similar event through a tip.
  
  Actually it was claim made by a tip line caller in 2020 about a potential Epstein/Trump event in 2000.
  If it was a tip submitted back on 2000, when no one was really thinking about Epstein and Trump as particularly important, controversial, nor linked, then I'd say it would be a very suspicious situation that seems unlikely to be made up.
  Since it was a tip made in October 2020, and the person held on to this supposed big deal for 20 years and only bothered to call it in during the election... After Epstein/Trump was a big thing...
  
  Real documents, but describing tips submitted during the 2020 election without apparent link to more investigative content.
  Any random person can generate a tip, so a tip is a starting point for an investigation, but in and of itself should not be considered newsworthy.
  I'm sure you'd have scary sounding pizzagate themed tips implicating Hilary Clinton during her run. I'm sure there were Hunter Biden laptop tips in 2020. I'm sure there were terrorist themed tips about Obama during his runs.
  
  These weren't anonymous tips.
  
  I never said they were anonymous. Not sure what the consequence of a known false tip might be, it's not a police report. Also not sure that the tip giver realized they weren't anonymous.
- Ideally, the bigger guys would be trying to corroborate the story by other means before reporting it. Verify facts before reporting claims. Generally the purpose of journalism.
  Not that I have much faith left that the big guys do journalism.
- That is because it’s an FBI tip likely left by a mentally ill person. Read the whole thing.
  Most of the “unredacted” stuff is of this nature. We are being played. What they did was hand America one of those archaeology digs for kids and people who don’t understand what was done are crowing about the mummy they found in the compacted sand they chipped away with their plastic chisel.
- If it was a Democrat in the story, it would be the top story EVERYWHERE.
  
  From yesterday: Trump demands DOJ release all the names of Democrats related to the Epstein investigation
  (The article name has since been changed; I got it from this post)
- the MSM are largely trumpers/conservative owners now. they arnt reporting it, because it potentially hurts the republicans, also executives, ceos and politician both foreign and domestic.
- How many major outlets aren’t owned by trump supporter?
  
  My usuals are NPR, PBS, and NBC but I haven't seen anything from them
  
  the last 2 depends on funding, so they might be compromised i dont know about NBC isnt it owned by comcast which is trump leaning anyways? whos the owner.
- It’ll get a small mention soon, when they’ve all decided how to Bari the lede.

103 comments