Could we please take a moment and think clearly and dispassionately about the crime and punishment of Jeffrey Epstein? Allow me to point out the fact that the man, utterly despicable as he was, guilty of horrifying crimes, is already dead. Whether or not he took his own life, or someone else did him in, he’s dead, and any further punishment we’d like to mete out to him is going to have to be up to God.

Yes, but what about the men who were his guests? His clients? His pedophilic customers? I, too, would like to see them in stocks in the public square where we could all pelt their sorry souls with rotten tomatoes. But there’s the rub. In this most amazing of all human societies, we believe in proof beyond a reasonable doubt before we administer judgment -- not that we always get that right, but we best not give that up.

You see, by this time the Jeffrey waters have become so muddied that no one can ever be rightfully convicted of anything. Let’s say that the “list” materializes. How would a jury ever be convinced that the list was Epstein’s, that it was a list of customers who illicitly enjoyed the connections the list implies? How do we know the purpose of the list? How do we know (beyond a shadow of a doubt) that Epstein had anything at all to do with its creation?

If the grand jury transcripts are unsealed -- and that is working its way through the courts -- what will be revealed? What clarity will that provide? After all, if I understand this correctly, in a grand jury there is no refutation of testimony. No defense attorney is present to hammer the truth out of those who testify. So, I’m not sure that will accomplish anything other than to further ruffle the waters.

But what if there are tapes? What if?  With the advent of AI “seeing is believing” is no longer true; whether stills or video, it’s hard to tell what is real and what is imagination.

But why would anyone bother to produce such materials? Why wouldn’t they? If there are people disgusting enough to lure young girls to a private island to be raped by powerful perverts, why wouldn’t there be people evil enough to stage such “evidence?” Look at the power that could be leveled against one’s enemies. Look at the $ one could squeeze out of those whose faces, whose identities are connected to Epstein and his dens of iniquity.  If Epstein was making his fortune blackmailing his “friends,” why wouldn’t another person try riding that same horse? In the field of sexual crimes accusation is all it takes to ruin a person’s life.

And let’s not forget to throw into the cesspool Ghislaine Maxwell. There’s talk of having her testify before a congressional committee, or at least sit for a deposition. There’s even a date set -- August 11th.  Now, I suffer from as much prurient curiosity as the next person, but what light, what holy and helpful light, could such a woman shed on this stain on our society? She spent at least a decade luring young girls into Epstein’s bedrooms, and into the arms of rich and powerful men (and women?) -- that wasn’t done by truth-telling. Maybe she could explain to us how her Don Juan became so filthy rich, but can we believe anything she says? In the event that she names names of these Johns, what damage could be done with nothing other than the questionable testimony of a convicted felon?

Speaking of damage done, let’s add to the mess the suicide of Virginia Giuffre. She accused Maxwell of connecting her to Epstein, and Epstein and Prince Andrew of sexual abuse. She had been an outspoken defender of young women who are trafficked by rich and powerful men. After recently suffering through a terrible car accident (She was hit by a speeding school bus.) which damaged her kidneys, she didn’t think she would recover and committed suicide shortly thereafter. She was only 41. Sans Epstein in her life might she have had the strength to face recovery?

Add to this is the recent Washington Post article accusing the president of having sent a birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein on the occasion of his 50th birthday. The letter, we are told, was chummy and featured a crude drawing of a naked woman. There can be no good to come from such an article and Trump, who Is suing the owner of the paper for $10 billion, swears it is all a fabrication. Even if it were true why publish it?

I suspect it may have to do with other revelations coming out this week, revelations about another president and a cohort of conspirators who may well have committed treason -- Tulsi Gabbard’s word, not mine. This is far more serious than even the terrible behavior of the country’s most slimy perverts. This could have cost us our country.

And the truth is coming out about voter fraud -- another conspiracy come true, and another one that could have cost us everything. So what will the guilty do? Time for distraction. Time to rile up the righteous who want so badly for the scars that Epstein (and Diddy) have left on our social fabric to be erased. True -- the existence of such creatures injures our collective psyche, but Trump is right -- this balloon does not need re-inflating.

This whole thing has taken on a Who’s-on-First?  level of confusion. Who’s on the plane? No, he’s at the ranch. What’s he there for? What’s he where? Who’s he?  And then when you factor in the auto-pen questions and the realization that Biden was president in name only -- whoa. As that unravels the feathers will really hit the fan.

And then that a previous president and a group of nameable, documentable co-conspirators could plan and carry out an attempt to unseat a duly elected president is a bigger,  even more urgent issue. “Treason doth never prosper -- what’s the reason? / For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.” Well, Tulsi Gabbard has had the courage to call it treason. And treason is a capital crime.  Let’s clear the air and aim our ire and our efforts where they matter.

Deana Chadwell is an adjunct professor and department head at Pacific Bible College in southern Oregon. She teaches writing, logic, and literature. She can be contacted at 1window45@gmail.com

Image: AT via Magic Studio