Local opinion: Connecting the basic Epstein dots

Ahh — when politics comes to dot-connecting. As children, we all learned to draw lines between dots to create shapes of animals and things. Sometimes the dots were close together, and we could see the animal images take shape more quickly than if the dots were farther away from each other. But even when the dots were farther away, the images of creatures and things would eventually come into view.

Now, the images of predatory creatures are taking shape — the images of predatory creatures, the shapes of which defy even the most creative of imaginations. They are so disgusting and horrible that the impulse might be just to stop connecting the dots.

We also learned, as children, that the shortest distance between two dots is a straight line.

So, just from what we know from information in the public domain (the dots) and we connect them, the shape of the cover-up emerges. The publicly reported dots include all the players in the Epstein saga (predators, victims, public officials in both official and unofficial roles), relationships, predatory behavior, trials, convictions, punishments, claimed suicide of Epstein, and more. The strategy — blur the dots with sanitized selective release of selective information.

The strategy is buttressed by repeated delay in releasing information, denial of knowledge and roles, then a reversal of roles for victims and predators, and then deflection of our attention to other egregious Trump-manufactured crises. In other words — a massive cover-up strategy and its execution. We humans don’t have long attention spans or memories, but we still know how to connect dots (even with short memories).

Do we want to, even if we know how? Or will the dots be connected, only to be instantly erased (like the images erased on a child’s “magic slate” or “doodle board”) when the images are ugly or unsatisfactory?

Just the basic known and obvious dots — connect them and see where the “inferences” take you.

We don’t need to pore over thousands of pages of details — court litigation documents, deposition transcripts, witness testimony, email, phone records and other details and minutiae to identify dots to connect about the Epstein files. Just the basic known facts and reasonable inferences ordinary folks can make from them with do just fine.

Connecting the dots, so to speak, is about making reasonable inferences from known facts. Relationships (all the players)—their depth, type, and length are dots.

Relationships between people (and their timeframes) are dots.

The content and context of the relationships are dots.

The communications, messaging, and visuals about those relationships are dots.

Behavior and comment in those relationships are dots; that is, the presence of certain behavior and the absence of other behavior are dots. For example, socializing (parties, dancing, alcohol, drugs) vs. business-related interaction.

Monies, things of value, or paid or promised (to whom, by whom, when, for what, where) are dots.

Monies hidden or laundered are dots.

Favors given or not given are dots.

Constant repetition of denials and protests are dots (Shakespeare told us this truth).

Delays in the release of information are dots, when the Justice Department has the power to release all the files (with redactions to protect actual victims).

Daily deflections to manufactured crises and egregious behavior of administration officials are dots.

Lies told, promises made but not kept, about the Epstein files are dots.

Behaviors whitewashed or not described are dots.

Connect the dots. Then what?

If all of the inferences from the dots lead to certain people, and a massive cover-up by those people and their political allies, then the images created, take on clarity. If criminal and unethical conduct are clarified, the question for us to confront is painfully this: Do these things even matter when the predators and their protectors are wealthy, well-connected and powerful? If not, what kind of people have we become?