General Discussion

before giving to Congress? It's like everyone hears "they came from the Estate" and assume that must mean those are unfiltered originals, in full. I do not subscribe to that notion. Even if the Estate said that were the case I wouldn't necessarily believe them, but I don't know that they've even made any such assurances

As of 2016 (the time of the communication you mentioned below), Julie Brown's Herald article was not out yet, and Epstein had gotten a slap on the wrist for solicitation of a minor for prostitution eight years earlier, the details of which were not national news, so a given person could conceivably be forgiven for not being aware of (or possibly questioning) the real severity of the allegations. And solicitation does not require that "sex was had", in fact that level of charge implies that it did not.

As such I can forgive some people for not completely shunning Epstein as of 2016. I'm sure other people would disagree, but that's my feeling on it, ASSUMING they did not know the actual scope of what he was really doing, as a key stipulation And yes I know Wolff was talking to him after the Herald article as well, but still, he's a journalist. I give legit journalists more leeway and judge their actions by a different standard in this case.