[ SECRET POST #6971 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6971 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 06 secrets from Secret Submission Post #995.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

Turns out she might have been projecting when she rants about adults preying on kids.

Of course, that isn't all Mister Galbraith has been projecting about.

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

But but she's suuuuuuuuuuuch a feminist who prioritizes being able to bleed above anything else! /s

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

https://www.snopes.com/news/2026/02/06/jk-rowling-epstein-files/

Calm your tits. Look. Plenty of people I hate are mentioned in those files, but the fact I have to accept is that their names were in ads on web pages visited by someone who actually was connected with the bastard. And sadly he was apparently left on a ton of lists that got automated messages and invitations.

You don't have to be in the Epstein Files to be a bad person.

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

Jon Stewart is in the Epstein Files because they talked about hiring "someone like Jon Stewart."

JK Rowling is in the Epstein Files because she invited Epstein to events after he was convicted.

They are not the same.

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

I think ayrt is saying the Rowling stuff is circumstantial at best. At least for now.

It's true that being mentioned in the files doesn't necessarily mean you did something bad, but given Rowling's behavior these last 10-15 years, and the type of circles she runs in, I don't think it's a stretch that she may have known him. I have no reason to believe she participated in any activity, but if she were a passive presence and did nothing, all while knowing who and what he was, then that's bad too. (But again, no hard evidence of that at this time.)

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

It definitely doesn't prove that she did any offenses against a named person, but knowingly associating with an offending pedophile when you're a big name children's author is.....a Choice that speaks volumes.

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

The invitation seems pretty obviously "this person is in a certain echelon of society who goes on a list that gets invited to fancy things". JKR is not the only person who is also in the Epstein Files for "inviting" him to shit. It seems fairly impersonal and automated, I doubt she personally pored over the Guest List.

The fault here lies with whoever made up the list of elite people (and I'm fairly certain it's a standard one that everyone uses) and didn't take him off it.

Re: Epstein files-JK Rowling is all over them.

[(Anonymous)]

So... is it normal to invite everyone in that echelon of society to your play and a private dinner? How many private dinners would she have to have had?