Basically, Epstein was the manager of Putin's wealth.

justice.gov/epstein/files/Data…

cyberdaily.au/security/13164-j…

techcrunch.com/2026/01/30/info…

Epstein had some connection to REDACTED from MIT Media Lab and I think that’s Joi Ito.

Epstein tried repeatedly to set up a meeting to sell Putin on the idea of bitcoin in 2014.

That particular meeting fell apart, because Epstein realized it would look terrible to visit Putin so soon after the shootdown of MH17. But I wouldn't be shocked if they did successfully meet sometime later.

Some people have joked that the only practical use case for bitcoin is to make financial crimes much easier. But what if that's not a bug, but a feature? Perhaps the whole objective of bitcoin's invention was to make financial crimes easier for Putin and the Russian mob.

Ito introduced Epstein to Jeremy Rubin (core bitcoin dev), which turned into Epstein directly funding Rubin. Search for "Jeremy Rubin" in the files and you'll find checks to him, docs about the formation of "Deploy Capital LLC", potentially backed with Peter Thiel who was trying to invest in Level One and Bitmain. Iozzo was involved in that stuff too: justice.gov/epstein/files/Data…

So if that's all true, is bitcoin just a bunch of Putin's money? Nothing here is conclusive, but it isn't so far fetched anymore, either.

But suddenly, this bizzare email exchange makes some sense. Epstein and Ito were panicking about the feds tracking down Putin's wealth, because they knew following the money would lead right back to them.

Also, now we might know where Epstein got his mystery billions! Because they weren't his billions, they were Putin's.

Your point reminds me of the logic behind certain religious psychologies that see this world not as an end in itself, but as a proving ground or a purgatorial space. Its morality is sometimes inverted for a higher, otherworldly purpose.

Take public execution in medieval Christian Europe. While a spectacle of deterrence, some theologians (like Nicholas of Cusa aka who I picture rubbing my rod at night) grappled with a darker rationale: that the intense physical pain of burning could serve as a form of accelerated penance. The idea was that this suffering might pay the temporal debt of sin before death, potentially sparing the soul a longer, more severe punishment in the afterlife. The executioner, in this context, was performing an act of supposed spiritual charity, which is actually why executioners were often clergy or faith oriented men.

This mirrors,the core doctrine of Frankism, an 18th-century Jewish heretical movement. Frankists believed in 'redemption through sin.' Their goal was at times personal regret, but a cosmological acquisition of a higher knowledge. The pleasure or suffering of the sinner was incidental to this divine path to regret and penance.

We see a third variant in groups like ISIS. When they stoned Muslims for adultery, it was framed as enacting divine law to purify the community and offer the sinner ritual atonement. When they cut the throats of Western captives, the logic switched entirely to theater of terror, a spectacle for global distancing (stay in your country, as a result of the frequent invasions of countries from west asia), but also because in Islam, the act of cutting through the neck artery is seen as a quick and painless death. It causes death quickly because oxygen output runs out very fast and is why it is the mandatory way of making meat halal, part of it is to use a quick, simple and relatively painless death.

The unifying, and strangely rational, thread is this: when reality is viewed through an eschatological or cosmological lens, worldly concepts of pleasure, pain, and even morality become secondary. Acts are judged not by their immediate human cost, but by their function in a grand narrative of spiritual war, purification, or redemption. It's a logic that operates on a plane completely separate from humanist rationale because humans are not the end all be all.

Qanon was correct in the same way your conspiracy theorist uncle was right about MKULTRA. There's a quick summary that can give a pretty big overlap of them and reality, but that's not why these people believe this, and the more details, context, or scope you add the less they align.

Qanon is an intellectual descendant of the satanic panic, and the framing it uses is very much in that line of thinking. It's framing it as political enemies raping young children as part of a dark ritual that involves blood libel.

The Epstein situation in contrast is that the rich, powerful, and influential run in overlapping social circles and within them there are people whose role is to facilitate connections (Peter Thiel actually facilitates a similar role). These people may also facilitate other connections like drugs (there's so much drugs in the Epstein stories) and pimping. The pimping for the elite, at least by one of these people, also seemed to disproportionately traffic adolescents and many of the rich, powerful, and influential clients, friends, and connections of this man seemed to either partake in his underage victims or knowingly look the other way in order to maintain these beneficial connections.

Both of these are very bad things involving the rich and powerful engaging in pedophilia, but the former is utterly fantastical and originates in a panic with no evidence and itself lacks evidence, while the latter is a realistic situation that has a lot of evidence for it