What if Bill Gates was an Epstein ‘client?’

What if the Red Cross antibody results had been known by late Feb. 2020? Everything might have changed.

Bill Gates is one of many powerful figures linked to Jeffrey Epstein. However, investigators have never shown any interest in questioning possible “Johns” in Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring.

This essay deals with known knowables, unknown unknowables and, perhaps most importantly unknown knowables. I also focus on two “what if” questions I don’t think any other journalist has considered:

1. What if Bill Gates - in, say, 2019 or maybe earlier -  had been exposed as a regular client of Jeffrey Epstein’s “sex trafficking” operation?

2. What if America’s leading public health officials had acknowledged - in say, late February 2020 - that many million Americans had already been infected by the coronavirus by early December 2019?

Here’s what I think might have happened (or not happened):

Bill Gates would have been as disgraced

as Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein

Bill Gates would have been publicly disgraced, perhaps even charged with crimes - an event which might have changed the lives of every person on the planet … for the better.

Here’s why I think this might have happened:

Except for perhaps Anthony Fauci, no single person has had a greater influence on Covid policies than Bill Gates.  If Gates was exposed as a regular client of an on-going sex-trafficking ring involving young women, including perhaps minors, the influence of he and his massive Foundation would probably have ended over night.

For example, if the above scenario had occurred, it’s highly unlikely any organization would have accepted Gates Foundation money …. or taken meetings from such a disgraced figure … and then implement policies endorsed by Gates.

Whatever date Gates’ (hypothetical) involvement had been exposed to the public, that’s the date his massive influence in “public health” would have ended. And this date could have been years before anyone had heard of Covid-19.

All those “table-top” planning exercises Gates was probably instrumental in commissioning might not have happened. All the vaccine research he funded and championed might have ended as well. Every person his money and influence helped get installed in key positions might not have been hired for these positions.

So investigations that never happen can change history just like investigations that do take place.

That is, one of the key players on the team that established the Covid response would have been instantly removed from the roster. Absent this key quarterback, would the outcome of the Covid game been starkly different? Would misery on a grand scale likely or perhaps been prevented?

I say yes … primarily for one reason: because nothing important happens without huge amounts of money being spread throughout myriad organizations … and Gates was (and still is) THE money man.

Important Disclaimer ….

It should be stressed that neither myself nor the public knows if Mr. Gates was, in fact, ever a “client” of Epstein. Mr. Gates has stated that his interactions with Epstein were minimal. As best I can tell, all of the named VIPs associated with Epstein have denied having sexual contact with any of the legions of girls and young women who frequented Epstein’s various properties.

But, then again, wouldn’t they deny this … especially if they knew no law enforcement officials were ever going to question them?

That is, no evidence has been presented that might “prove” this because no official investigators (or mainstream journalists) have seriously investigated this possibility. This, in fact, is one of my main points - i.e. almost nothing “scandalous” can become a “known knowable” if no investigation ever occurs.

This ‘fact’ most people think is true … is false

Most in the country think prosecutors did eventually arrest Epstein (twice) and, belatedly, his main accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, and charged both with “sex trafficking.” In fact, there has never been any evidence presented in any trial that young ladies or minors were “trafficked” to anyone other than Epstein himself.

The possible “Johns” or “clients” have always been of no interest to investigators … which is a giant tell about how corrupt our society and government have become in my opinion.

The  “unknown unknowable” is the public will never know if everything that followed might have changed if such an investigation had been pursued and IF Gates had been conclusively identified as one of Epstein’s “Johns.”

The event that didn’t happen that could have changed everything ….

My second “what if” would probably have made my first “what if” a moot question.

What if officials - and the public - knew that the novel coronavirus had already spread around the world by early December 2019? And these officials KNEW this before they imposed the lockdowns on the world in mid-March 2020?

The important question is could these officials have known this by, say, early March 2020? My answer: Yes, they could have. All they would have had to do was test 1,900 units of blood for Covid antibodies. One tranche of such blood was collected from Red Cross blood donors Dec. 13-16, 2019 from locations in California, Washington and Oregon.

As the public belatedly learned (almost 12 months later on November 30, 2020 when the results of this study were finally released to the public), this particular tranche of blood included 39 antibody-positive samples.

This represents 2.03 percent of the approximately 1,900 blood donors, a figure that extrapolated to the entire U.S. population would suggest that almost 8 million Americans may have already been infected with this virus by early December 2019.

The five-trillion-dollar question …

The “unknown KNOWABLE” is why weren’t these antibody tests done early enough to call off the lockdowns? While we don’t know this answer, we do know the answer is, in fact, “knowable.”

Furthermore, it seems to be a “known knowable” that one of the main reasons for shutting down the entire country was to prevent or slow the “spread” of this virus. The unstated predicate is that this virus had only recently begun to spread in the country - thus a supreme and unprecedented effort was required to keep people from being exposed to this “deadly” virus.

Would Birx, Fauci etc. have gone ahead

with the lockdowns if this was known?

Some might say the lockdowns might still have been ordered even if it was acknowledged that the virus had already spread across all 50 U.S. states and probably most countries in the world months earlier. This may be true (although we’ll never know), but if it were true our public health officials would in effect be saying this:

“Yes, we have evidence that many millions of Americans were probably infected by early December 2019 and, yes, we know this virus is very contagious, so that number has no doubt grown over the past three months (the rest of December, January and February), but we still need to shut down schools and restaurants and cancel elective surgeries at hospitals because we can still slow or stop the spread of this virus.”

If 7 or 8 million Americans had already been infected by, say, Dec. 1st 2019, this number would have certainly grown to at least 20 million by March 15th. Would the bulk of the population have really submitted to draconian lockdowns if they knew that maybe 20 million people had already contracted this virus?

I think many citizens would have actually concluded, “Oh yeah, I had this back in December or early January when I had that terrible cough and shortness of breath.”

Also, what if the 106 people who tested positive (from both Red Cross tranches) had been known and identified? Wouldn’t some reporters somewhere have interviewed a few of them and found out if they or a close contact experienced Covid symptoms in the weeks or months before they donated that blood? What if those stories (that never happened but could have) included quotes like this:

“Yes, I was sick in November. It was pretty bad - kind of like the flu, but I’m fine now. I didn’t have to be admitted to the hospital or anything.”

The public might also have learned that some of these people had very mild cases or even asymptomatic cases. Under this scenario, perhaps most Americans would have reached the conclusion that they really didn’t need to panic about this new pandemic.

As events actually transpired, important facts and details that should have become a “known knowable” did not.

The (five) trillion-dollar question is WHY this didn’t become known to the public? Why didn’t our best minds in public health go ahead and test some archived blood for Covid antibodies … before they decided to turn the world upside down?

The only sex-trafficker in world history who only trafficked girls/women to himself.

Circling back to the Epstein non-investigation …

In my opinion, if the public did learn the truth about Epstein’s decades-long sex trafficking operation, we’d learn several important things.

We’d learn how prurient and immoral a cross-section of the world’s “leaders” really are.

We’d probably also learn that agencies of our own government had knowledge of this operation and effectively spiked any investigations or prosecutions that would reveal the true sordid story to the public. For officials with incredible power, “public trust” is a vital commodity and once you lose it, you might not get it back.

Another  lesson might be that officials of our own government are willing and eager to cover up embarrassing truths.

Also, those “scales of justice” are not really perfectly balanced. If you are powerful and rich, you stand a good chance of escaping justice.

Now, let’s see if I can tie this all together …

The “narrative” is that Bill Gates is a wonderful philanthropist who is leading the battle to fight infectious diseases and create life-saving vaccines.

The narrative is also that nobody in our government knew this virus was spreading around the world by November 2019.

Amazingly, hardly anyone (who mattered) questioned any of these two narratives. But what if they had?

This piece has really tried to apply logical syllogisms to the events of our times.

If you’ve read my other “early spread” articles, logic might tell us that if Mayor Michael Melham was indeed infected with this virus by November 20th, 2019, he wasn’t the only person in America who was infected with this virus. The same with those 39 Red Cross blood donors in Washington, Oregon and California (who donated their blood as early as Dec. 13, 2019).

Logic tells us …

That is, from one little “known knowable” very large logical inferences can be made … But not if these known knowables never become known to the public.

Regarding the theme of today’s article, it’s unknown whether Bill Gates was really a client of Epstein. However, it wouldn’t have taken much digging on the part of real investigators to find out if he (and other VIPs) were.  This is an unknown knowable.

The same with the Red Cross antibody study. It’s unknown whether officials knew these results when they ordered the lockdowns. It’s also unknown whether they intentionally delayed testing those blood samples until after they’d ordered the lockdowns. While the answers to these questions are unknown …. they could have easily become known.

Why don’t we know these answers? Why didn’t we know these answers years ago when the answers might have averted a cascading wave of deadly consequences?

The answer is that not enough people are asking the right questions. Not enough people are telling us that our “known knowables” might actually have been known lies.

I don’t know the future, but based on the past, I think we can be confident none of the important questions will be asked in the future either - which scares me a lot more than the novel coronavirus.