July 20, 2019

NEW YORK – I’ve had many strange experiences in my decades of covering intelligence affairs. These run from being invited to KGB HQ in Moscow, Chinese intelligence in Beijing, US intelligence in Virginia, Libyan intelligence in Tripoli, South African intelligence, and even Albanian intelligence in Tirana.

But none was odder than the day I was invited to lunch in New York City with the by now notorious figure Jeffrey Epstein. The golden boy of Manhattan and Palm Beach society now sits in a grim jail cell accused of having sex with underage girls. He’s been doing this in plain view since the early 1990’s but, until recently, he seemed bullet-proof.

Soon after I walked into the entrance of Epstein’s mansion on E 71st Street, said to be the city’s largest private home, a butler asked me, ‘would you like an intimate massage, sir, by a pretty young girl?’ This offer seemed so out of place and weird to me that I swiftly declined.

More important than indelicacy, as an old observer of intelligence affairs, to me this offer reeked of ye old honey trap, a tactic to ensnare and blackmail people that was old when Babylon was young. A discreet room with massage table, lubricants and, no doubt, cameras stood ready off the main lobby.

I had arrived with Canada’s leading lady journalist who was then close to Epstein’s sometime girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell and, it was said, procuress – something Maxwell denies. Bizarrely, Maxwell believed that I could get KGB Moscow Center to release satellite photos that showed the murder on his yacht of her father, the press baron Robert Maxwell, who was a well-known double agent for Israel and KGB, and a major criminal.

Also present was the self-promoting lawyer, Alan Dershowitz, who had saved the accused murderer Claus von Bulow, as well as a titan of the New York real estate industry (not Trump) and assorted bigwigs of the city’s elite Jewish society. All sang the praises of Israel.

Epstein reportedly had ties to Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Britain’s Prince Andrew and repeatedly flew them about in his private jet, aka ‘the Lolita Express.’ All guests deny any sexual activity. I turned down dinner with Prince Andrew.

Epstein’s residence in Manhattan and Palm Beach, both of which I visited, were stocked with young female ‘masseuses.’ All were working class girls making big money in their spare time. I did not see any interactions between these girls and the guests.

Epstein and Maxwell became too big for their britches. They flaunted their sexual adventures and laughed at New York society. Everyone wondered about the source of Epstein’s lavish income but no one knew its origins. He claimed to be an exclusive money manager for a group of secretive millionaires. But the only one identified was billionaire Leslie Wexner, the owner of L Brands and Victoria’s Secret. Wexner denied any knowledge of Epstein’s alleged crimes.

Besides sexual frolics, Epstein and Maxwell were up to many odd things. The FBI found diamonds, cash and a fake passport when raiding his mansion and documents showing his net worth at $559,120,954.00. The IRS tax people will be eager to review the sources of this income.

It seems likely that political influence was brought to bear on then US attorney Alexander Acosta (he just resigned under fire last week) to make a sweetheart deal with Epstein, who had been charged by Florida with child molestation. Epstein got off with a token, 13-month jail sentence that allowed him to work from his office much of the day.

Were Trump or Clinton involved? How much did they ‘party’ with Epstein and revel in his fleshmart? There was talk of some sort of ‘intelligence’ angle to the affaire Epstein that spared him a harsh sentence.

A respected former CIA official, Phil Giraldi has come right out and accused Epstein of being an Israeli agent of influence. Epstein was let off with a slap on the wrist on his first child abuse charge, says Giraldi, because of his powerful Israel connections. To Giraldi and this writer, the Epstein ‘massage’ operation was a classic intelligence operation designed to blackmail men of influence into doing Israel’s bidding. Clinton had reportedly already fallen into this trap years earlier while still president.

Now watch this stinking pile of corruption be hurriedly covered up. Talk about draining the swamp.

Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2019

This post is in: Intelligence, USA

5 Responses to “THE HONEY TRAP ON E 71ST”

  1. In light of the ‘age of criminal responsibility’ comment, there are several questions for each under aged participant:
    Did you know what you were doing?
    Have you done this before?
    Have you done this often?
    Were you forced into this?
    Did you do this for monetary gain?
    Did you enjoy the experience?
    Did you have fun?
    Do you enjoy partying?
    Would you do it again?

    Next participant…

  2. Zeeshan7 says:

    Very interesting article and comes as no surprise. May sheikhs of the oil rich kingdoms of the middle east have fallen prey to these traps.

  3. Vincent Jay says:

    Wow. I had no idea that there was an intelligence connection to this story. I thought it was only about a nasty millionaire indulging his own sexual fantasies.

  4. It’s interesting how the authorities adapt the laws to suit themselves or circumstances. I’m not advocating sexual exploitation of minors, and I am not a child pornographer. I am, moreover, concerned about the proper and fair administration of justice and I am not a lawyer.
    The law appears, intentionally, written to be unfair and one sided. Governments should not be allowed to selectively determine what ages are appropriate for different offences or defences. The following might be taken into consideration:
    The age of criminal responsibility varies around the world. This is the age at which children can be prosecuted as adults. The following are the ages of criminal responsibility for several countries around the world (data is from CRIN).
    In Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Poland, and Czech Republic the age is 15 years old;
    In Albania, Italy, Germany, Canada, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Lithuania, Malta, Romania, Russia, and Spain the age is 14 years old;
    In Greece, Monaco and France the age is 13 years old;
    In Belgium, Netherlands, Belgium, Turkey, Scotland, and Hungary the age is 12 years old;
    In the US, for federal crimes, the age is 11 years old;
    In England, Wales & Northern Ireland the age is 10 years old, and,
    In the US, 33 States have no minimum age limit.
    This means that a child of the age, stipulated above, can be charged under law as an adult for a serious offence. For example, in the US, an 11 year old can be charged as an adult for a serious federal crime, and in some states, even younger children can be charged. When it comes to sexual offences, there are laws that prevent the defence from treating this same child as an adult. Depending on the ‘child’, this approach may be inappropriate and patently unfair to the defendant. The use of age as a criteria, it appears, is at the discretion of those in authority.
    One notices that the US and the UK have the lowest ages for criminal responsibility. This application of the law is at the discretion of those in power.
    A similar example can be used for possession of child porn. Early movies of Traci Lords show her in situations that many adults are not involved with. Possession of these movies can be treated as a felony. Her actions clearly show that she is behaving as an adult, but, the law does not consider this in their prosecutions. Again the law is being applied in an unbalanced fashion. In her movies, she is clearly acting as an adult and not as a child.
    Nearly all newscasts, I’ve seen, vilify the defendant as a paedophile. This may be inappropriate and incorrect based on the comments above. Because of the newscasts, It certainly makes selection of an unbiased jury more difficult due to this ‘label’ that has been applied to Epstein.
    In Canada, there was a recent issue where the RCMP seized electronic devices of a Meng Wanzhou of Huawei; they also demanded Ms. Wanzhou turn over passwords to access the device. When questioned about it, the RCMP were innocent of any infraction because they had not accessed the information on the devices. In contrast, there are numerous Canadian laws that possession of some items is ‘prima facie’ evidence that a person has committed an offence. The same reasoning is not applied when it comes to the actions of the authorities in this instance. It would be prima facie evidence that the search was executed.
    Just some thoughts,

  5. It is interesting how RT is the only network raising this issue like this. I wonder why the rest of the media is silent? Maybe because it would require them to question the immaculance of Israel something every anchor in America would rather blow their heads off on live TV than say.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.