This document is a digital communication log from June 17, 2019, bearing a House Oversight stamp. It captures messages sent primarily by 'e:jeeitunes@gmail.com' (an account linked to Jeffrey Epstein) discussing high-level US political figures (Bolton, Pompeo) and a contact named 'Nato' regarding a 'choice of miro'. Interspersed is a conversation with a redacted sender discussing a philosophical scientific article about prebiotic chemistry from a journal identified as 'Inference'.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| e:jeeitunes@gmail.com | Sender |
Email address associated with Jeffrey Epstein; sending messages regarding political contacts and science.
|
| Nato | Subject |
Mentioned in message: 'Nato would like to check choice of miro with dc.'
|
| Miro | Subject |
Mentioned in message: 'check choice of miro'
|
| Bolton | Subject |
Likely John Bolton (National Security Advisor at the time); mentioned as a potential contact.
|
| Pompeo | Subject |
Likely Mike Pompeo (Secretary of State at the time); mentioned as a potential contact.
|
| Andrew Jackson | Subject |
Referenced in hashtag #saveandrewjaxkson
|
| [REDACTED] | Sender |
Sender of the long paragraph regarding prebiotic chemistry.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| NATO |
Possible reference to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, though syntax 'Nato would like to check...' could imply...
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Referenced in footer stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_027802
|
|
| Inference |
Cited as the name of the journal containing the science article.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Washington D.C., mentioned in context of checking a choice.
|
"Nato would like to check choice of miro with dc. Should he contact Bolton or pompeo"Source
"Those who think scientists understand the issues of prebiotic chemistry are wholly misinformed."Source
"The basis upon which we as scientists are relying is so shaky that we must openly state the situation for what it is: it is a mystery."Source
"#saveandrewjaxkson"Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,443 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document