Connect with us

Crime

Rep. Luna suggests Epstein’s sex trafficking operation was ‘a lot bigger’ than expected

Published

6 minute read

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL)

From LifeSiteNews

By Emily Mangiaracina

‘It is very much (a) possibility that Jeffrey Epstein was an intelligence asset working for our adversaries,’ Rep. Paulina Luna said.

Republican U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna of Florida said Tuesday that Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation was “a lot bigger” than anyone anticipated.

“There are some very rich and powerful people that need to go to jail,” Luna said in a statement after she and other lawmakers met with Epstein’s victims. “I think everyone’s frustrated as to why that hasn’t happened before.”

Luna then suggested potential government involvement in Epstein’s sex trafficking — previously alleged by U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta — that many observers believe helps explain the lack of transparency and accountability for those involved in Epstein’s criminal activities.

“It is very much so a possibility that Jeffrey Epstein was an intelligence asset working for our adversaries but also, the question we have is, ‘How much did our own government know about it?’” Luna continued.

Epstein’s involvement in U.S. intelligence was suggested by former U.S. Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta, when he explained why he agreed to a non-prosecution deal in the lead-up to Epstein’s 2008 conviction of procuring a child for prostitution. Acosta told Trump transition team interviewers that he was told that Epstein “belonged to intelligence,” adding that he was told to “leave it alone,” The Daily Beast reported.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform released 33,295 pages of Epstein-related documents on Tuesday after issuing a subpoena to the Department of Justice. However, the files reveal minimal new information, according to Politico. They include public court documents, photos, and video footage, including police footage of Epstein’s Palm Beach home, and a clip of a woman recounting her time as one of Epstein’s masseuses.

Republican U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky filed a petition Tuesday “to force a vote on binding legislation to release” the full Epstein files. A White House official subsequently told NBC News that supporting Massie’s effort would be “viewed as a very hostile act to the administration.”

“They’re threatening anyone who helps bring true transparency and justice for the survivors,” Massie remarked on X. “This is a tacit admission the Oversight Committee data release is woefully incomplete.”

The FBI triggered a public outcry earlier this year when it released an incomplete set of Epstein files. Some Epstein flight records had been released in previous litigation, but they remain limited, as does other information regarding Epstein’s associates. Republican U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn filed a subpoena in late 2023 to obtain the complete flight logs, and in January 2025 accused Democratic U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin of blocking her request.

In her book “One Nation Under Blackmail: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Crime That Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein,” investigative journalist Whitney Webb explained how the intelligence community leverages sex trafficking through operatives like Epstein to blackmail politicians, members of law enforcement, businessmen, and other influential figures.

Webb cited as evidence of this Acosta’s statement that he was told that Epstein “belonged to intelligence.”

While Epstein himself never stood trial, as he allegedly committed suicide while under “suicide watch” in his jail cell in 2019, many have questioned the suicide and whether the well-connected financier was actually murdered as part of a cover-up.

These theories were only emboldened when investigative reporters at Project Veritas discovered that the major news outlets of ABC and CBS News quashed a purportedly devastating report exposing Epstein.

A full list of the names of people mentioned in the previously released Epstein files, including many who have not been accused of any crimes, can be found here. Previously published Epstein flight logs show that former President Bill Clinton along with Secret Service members, actor Kevin Spacey, comedian Chris Tucker, and British model Naomi Campbell all flew on Epstein’s private plane central to his sex-trafficking case, dubbed the “Lolita Express” by the media.

In one batch of unsealed documents, Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre said he paid her $15,000 in 2011 to have sex with Britain’s Prince Andrew, and that she had sex multiple times with retail mogul Leslie Wexner, who was a financial client of Epstein’s for at least 20 years. Giuffre has since reportedly died by suicide.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Courageous Discourse

No Exit Wound – EITHER there was a very public “miracle” OR Charlie Kirk’s murder is not as it appears

Published on

By John Leake

Turning Point Spokesman: “No Exit Wound a Miracle”

Charlie Kirk Show producer Andrew Kolvet repeats extremely dubious claim purportedly made by “the surgeon who operated on Kirk.”

Monday Blaze Media (relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey) reported the following:

Turning Point USA spokesman and executive producer of the “Charlie Kirk Show” Andrew Kolvet revealed new details about the shooting that even doctors are calling a miracle. According to Kolvet, the surgeon who operated on Kirk claimed that the high-velocity bullet was powerful enough to kill multiple large animals — and “should have gone through” his body. But for some reason, Kirk’s body was able to stop it.

“I want to address some of the discussion about the lack of an exit wound with Charlie,” Kolvet wrote in a post on X.

“The fact that there wasn’t an exit wound is probably another miracle, and I want people to know,” Kolvet continued, explaining that he had spoken with the surgeon who worked on Charlie in the hospital.

“He said the bullet ‘absolutely should have gone through, which is very very normal for a high powered, high velocity round. I’ve seen wounds from this caliber many times and they always just go through everything. This would have taken a moose or two down, an elk, etc,’” he recalled.

“But it didn’t go through. Charlie’s body stopped it,” he added.

When he mentioned to the doctor that there were “dozens of staff, students, and special guests standing directly behind Charlie” when he was shot, the doctor reportedly replied, “It was an absolute miracle that someone else didn’t get killed.”

“His bone was so healthy and the density was so so impressive that he’s like the man of steel,” Kolvet recalls the doctor saying.

This is not a credible statement, and it raises a number of concerns.

It strikes me as very perplexing that a “surgeon operated on Kirk,” because in the video of the shooting, Charlie reacted with a decorticate posture—that is, an abnormal body posture characterized by flexion of the upper limbs—caused by severe trauma to the central nervous system. This indicates that the bullet either directly struck his cervical spinal cord, or the shock wave of the supersonic bullet passing near his spinal cord traumatized it.

A 150-grain, .30-06 bullet’s energy at 150 yards from the muzzle varies by ammunition, but a common hunting cartridge has an estimated value of approximately 1,800-2,000 foot-pounds (with the bullet traveling at about 2500 feet per second). In other words, the .30 caliber (.30 inch diameter) metal projectile struck his neck with sufficient kinetic energy to move a 2,000 pound mass a linear distance of one foot.

If the bullet that struck Charlie’s cervical spinal cord was a .30-06 fired from 150 yards away, it would have:

1). Severed his spinal cord, killing him instantly.

2). Passed through his neck.

Note that the cervical vertebrae are supported by strong muscles and have high compressive strength, but are far too delicate to stop a .30-06 bullet traveling at 2,500 feet per second.

If ALL of the kinetic energy of the bullet was absorbed by Charlie’s neck, it would have done spectacular trauma to his neck, as distinct from producing the clean bullet hole visible in the video footage that ruptured his Carotid artery.

Though I appreciate that some may find a supernatural explanation to be consoling, it seems to me that the investigation should not rest on the this explanation.

As I wrote a few weeks ago: If I were investigating the murder, I would consider the hypothesis that Charlie was shot with a weapon equipped with a suppressor and loaded with a subsonic cartridge to further reduce the sound. I have seen footage of someone firing a rifle with this setup, and the shot was amazingly quiet. The effective range of such a weapon is about 100 yards or less, and the shooter must be very skilled.

However, such a setup could fire a subsonic projectile that would penetrate a human neck without passing through it. In this scenario, the actual assassin (firing the suppressed rifle) hypothetically coordinated the timing of his shot with someone else firing a normal (supersonic and loud) rifle cartridge into the air at the same time to create a distraction or red herring.

In a functioning society in which the people trust their authorities—including their medical examiners—it would be easy to discover what happened and to disclose at least a preliminary report that would satisfy most reasonable people. The trouble our Republic is facing now is that so many of us no longer trust our federal and state authorities to tell us the truth.

For example, we have strong grounds for suspecting that medical examiners are not diligently investigating (with the proper analytic methods) unexpected, fatal cardiac arrests in young people to determine if they were caused by vaccine-induced myocarditis.

Share

Subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

Business

Quebecers want feds to focus on illegal gun smuggling not gun confiscation

Published on

By Nicolas Gagnon

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation released new Leger polling showing that half of Quebecers say the most effective way to reduce gun crime is to crack down on illegal gun smuggling from the United States, not a federal gun ban and confiscation.

“Law enforcement experts say the best way to make Canada safer is to stop illegal gun smuggling and Quebecers say exactly the same thing,” said Nicolas Gagnon, CTF Quebec Director. “It makes no sense to pour hundreds of millions into a confiscation that only takes guns from lawfully licensed gun owners.”

In 2020, the federal government launched its policy to confiscate thousands of so-called “assault-style” firearms from licensed gun owners. Ottawa recently announced a pilot project in Cape Breton to start taking firearms from individual owners.

The Leger poll asked Quebecers what they think is the most effective way to reduce gun crime. Results of the poll show:

  • 51 per cent say introducing tougher measures to stop the illegal smuggling of guns into Canada from the United States
  • 37 per cent say banning the sale and ownership of many different makes and models of guns along with a government buyback program
  • Six per cent say neither of these options
  • Seven per cent do not know

The results of the polls arrived as recorded remarks from Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree made headlines in September.

In a leaked audio recording, the minister suggested the confiscation program is being pushed in part because of voters in Quebec, while also expressing doubt that local police services have the resources to enforce it.

Police organizations have long warned Ottawa’s confiscation program is misguided. The RCMP union says it “diverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.”

The program was first estimated to cost $200 million. Just providing compensation for the banned guns, not including administrative costs, could cost up to $756 million, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan have both publicly said that they would not cooperate with Ottawa’s gun ban. Premier François Legault has stayed silent on this issue.

“Quebecers have been clear: the real problem is illegal gun smuggling, not law-abiding firearms owners,” said Gagnon. “The police have also made it clear the gun confiscation will waste money that could be used to stop criminals from committing gun crimes.

“Legault needs to stand up for Quebec taxpayers and refuse to help implement Ottawa’s costly and ineffective confiscation scheme. The federal government needs to drop this plan and focus its resources on intercepting illegal guns at the border: that’s how you actually make communities safer.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X