Of Epsteins, Lolitas and Hoaxes

The alleged suicide of billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, the owner of “Lolita Island,” a place swarming with underage girls and rich and powerful visitors, triggered even many complacent voices into sounding like “conspiracy theorists.” When the likes of The New York Times and trusty veteran Sen. Chuck Schumer are questioning an official narrative, you know that something is up. Attorney General William Barr is demanding answers. And Donald Trump, in typical fashion, retweeted a mention of the Clinton Body Count, and how Epstein may have been the latest addition to it.

Celebrities reacted predictably. Alec Baldwin, Ron Perlman, former WWE star Dave Bautista and MSNBC host Joe Scarborough were among those laughably fingering “Russia,” presumably with straight faces. Will & Grace star Debra Messing was only one of many to directly blame Trump, and tweeted, “He finally killed someone on Fifth Avenue,” referencing the President’s memorable 2016 assertion about being able to get away with anything without losing support. Comedian Patton Oswalt tweeted, “I mean, Trump had him killed. Mon dieu, you fucking idiots.”

Now we are told, by no less than The New York Times, that two guards slept through their scheduled half hour checks on Epstein, and then falsified the records. Early reports indicated that Epstein was on suicide watch at the time, in light of what was initially reported as a physical assault he’d recently suffered at the hands of another in prison, but was later magically transformed into an unsuccessful suicide attempt. When nearly all expressed disbelief that a prisoner under suicide watch could….commit suicide, the narrative was quickly changed to Epstein having been taken off suicide watch.

Epstein was originally placed in a cell with a roommate, reported to have been a particularly violent ex-police officer. At some point, according to CNN, “that person was removed for reasons unknown.” The same unnamed source told CNN that “It’s protocol for inmates coming off suicide watch not to be placed alone in a cell.”  A federal official told the nation’s most hilarious source of news that “no foul play was suspected.” An autopsy was performed August 11, but results have not yet been released. Michael Baden, a Fox News contributor known to JFK assassination researchers as a reliable establishment tool whose work with the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that Oswald acted alone, observed the proceedings.

Epstein was charged with sexual trafficking of underage girls in 2007, and received a “sweetheart deal” courtesy of future Trump Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta, and future Trump nemesis Robert Mueller. He was arrested again in early July of this year, charged by New York prosecutors (among them the daughter of Trump nemesis James Comey) with operating a traffic ring of underage girls. Eyebrows were further raised when his trial date was postponed until next year, in a decidedly unusual move.

The arrest and belated attention to the allegations against Epstein, discussed and written about for years by “conspiracy theorists,” stunned me, and others of my ilk. When asked about it in interviews, I confessed to being absolutely baffled. Those at Epstein’s level, charged with these kinds of heinous crimes, are not normally prosecuted for anything, and on the rare occasions they are, it doesn’t garner much media coverage (as was the case in 2007).

The renewed attention to Epstein came about largely as a result of a series of articles in The Miami Herald, written by Julie K. Brown. Brown’s reaction to Epstein’s death echoed what most were saying. “I was pretty stunned. Disbelief. It’s still a little shocking that something like that could have happened given his high-profile status in the Bureau of Prisons,” she said, during an interview with CNN. “There’s so many avenues that have yet to be investigated … other co-conspirators involved in this — but also on how this whole thing happened back in 2008 and why it happened, and whether there’s any corruption there to look at.” I think everyone outside the halls of the mainstream media understands that this case is dripping with corruption.

According to Joseph Recarey, the lead detective on Epstein’s case, he was in effect operating a “sexual pyramid scheme.” Brown discovered about 80 women who claim they were molested or otherwise sexually abused by Epstein, and most assume the total number is much higher. “He told me he wanted them as young as I could find them,’’ Courtney Wild, who recruited 70 or 80 girls for Epstein, told Brown. “He wanted as many girls as I could get him. It was never enough.’’

In a different twist on the usual eugenicist philosophy one invariably finds in the minds of our leaders, Epstein supposedly was plotting to “seed the human race with his DNA by impregnating women at his vast New Mexico ranch,” according to The New York Times. One of Epstein’s tactics during his original prosecution, devised with his powerful legal team led by Alan Dershowitz and former Clinton nemesis Kenneth Starr, was to “dig up dirt” on his female accusers as well as the police and prosecutors working his case. As happens routinely in these cases, there was collateral damage. One alleged young victim became addicted to drugs and served three years in prison. Another woman who’d claimed to be molested by Epstein was found dead of an alleged heroin overdose.

Epstein, by contrast, served just thirteen months in a private wing of a Palm Beach county jail, and was permitted under work release to go to a “comfortable office” for 12 hours a day, six days a week. It was not unlike the sentences doled out to chronic traffic offenders. The FBI had assembled a 53 page indictment that could have resulted in a life sentence for Epstein. Also under this incredible deal, if Epstein had named “any potential co-conspirators,” they would have faced no consequences. And the deal was kept secret from his alleged victims, preventing them from challenging it in court.

Epstein’s personal background is murky and full of suspicious gaps. We are led to believe he somehow went from math teacher to billionaire. Our rigged system just doesn’t work that way. One of his close associates was said to be Ghislaine Maxwell, daughter of British publishing magnate and politician Robert Maxwell. Like Epstein himself, Maxwell was suspected of being a Mossad agent. Maxwell died in suitably  unnatural style; his naked body found floating in the ocean, with the official cause of death coming from a heart attack and accidental drowning.

However he made his money, and whatever shadowy benefactors aided him, Epstein wound up with Manhattan’s largest single house. He spent much of his time flying around the world in his fleet of private planes, often to the 100 acre secluded island in St. Thomas, where so many notable names visited, and where it is alleged he kept a harem of “Lolitas.” His wealth was questioned by many, including Michael Stroll, who sued Epstein over a failed business deal, and told New York Magazine in 2007, “I never saw him work. Anybody I know that is that wealthy works 26 hours a day. This guy plays 26 hours a day.”

Epstein assembled an impressive list of celebrity friends. First and foremost was Bill Clinton, who is said to have visited “Lolita Island” some 26 times. Actors like Bill Murray and Kevin Spacey, attorney Dershowitz, and Oprah Winfrey are others said to have visited the island. Donald Trump certainly was associated with Epstein in some way,  and once called him a “terrific guy” who “enjoys his social life,” specifically noting his predilection for young girls.

Donald Trump was intriguing, as always, with his comments. Not only did he retweet an inference connecting Clinton to Epstein’s death, he said, “The question you have to ask is, ‘Did Bill Clinton go to the island?’ If you find that out, you’re going to know a lot.” There have been claims that Trump didn’t want to visit the island when he found out there were underage girls there, but he has also been accused himself of raping an underage girl. Others claim Trump once had Epstein thrown out of his Mar-a-Lago estate. Clinton, of course, claims never to have visited the island.

In March, the ninety six year old judge overseeing a key lawsuit against Epstein died. Now, at that age, sudden death is hardly unexpected. The question should be; what was a judge that old doing overseeing an important case? Are there 96 year old judges anywhere, overseeing any case?

While almost no one outside those at the very top of the corridors of power believe Jeffrey Epstein actually killed himself, an increasing number of people don’t think he died at all. Is it really that preposterous to imagine him being whisked off the stage, as perhaps other high-ranking One Percenters are? After all, we are led to believe that 96 year old Henry Kissinger, as obese as ever, is able to move, speak, and function perfectly well. Are there any other obese 96 year old people alive anywhere? Is it irresponsible to suggest that Kissinger and his kind are the beneficiaries of secret medical and life extension technology?

Those who have researched widely-reported incidents like the Gabby Giffords shooting, the “Batman” Aurora shooting, Sandy Hook, the Boston Bombing, Parkland, and many others, understand the gargantuan holes in each official narrative, which lead naturally to sometimes wild theories. As Mark Lane wrote regarding the Warren Report, the failure of authorities to properly investigate inexorably “provides fertile ground for speculation.”

In this case, as in all the other highly publicized incidents, the surveillance cameras that are everywhere in our Orwellian world are said not to have functioned properly. Does anybody outside the world of “conspiracy theorists” even question these things? Before these cameras became installed virtually everywhere, crucial evidence usually was “accidentally destroyed,” or somehow lost, in the most obvious Deep State events. Or classified for “national security” reasons. After all, the government is still withholding documents associated with World War One.

So was the Epstein suicide not a murder, but a hoax? Is he sitting on a beach somewhere, happily sipping a cocktail, laughing with his elite brethren at the unshakable gullibility of the American people?

About donaldjeffries

Author of the critically acclaimed best sellers "Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover Ups in American Politics,""Survival of the Richest: How the Corruption of the Marketplace and the Disparity of Wealth Created the Greatest Conspiracy of All," and the newly released "Crimes and Cover Ups in American Politics: 1776-1963." Author of the 2007 sci-fi/fantasy novel "The Unreals," which has been described as a cross between The Wizard of Oz and The Twilight Zone, and compared to A Confederacy of Dunces and classic Russian literature. A second edition of "The Unreals" was published in February 2015 by Pocol Press. Long time JFK assassination researcher. Seeker of truth, proponent of justice and fairness. Enemy of corruption. Sender of as many "tiny ripples of hope" as possible.

Posted on August 14, 2019, in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. 12 Comments.

  1. The more options on the table the better the AI can predict how the public is best conditioned, win for the technocrats, and they’re certainly betting on this somewhere. Meanwhile, the real ethics of the issue gets swept right under the rug, where the ‘gamers’ like it. The effects on humanity and society are negligible as the social engineers process the public into ever-more degrading forms of ‘news’.

  2. There’s something very rotten in USA…

  3. I suspect he never did a day in jail to begin with. Notwithstanding the news (which is completely controlled by deep state; ie Project MockingBird) which brought this degradation into the forefront and the obligatory idea that big names were involved, this is psychological rape on the public. “We’re powerful, look what we can get away with!” With that being said, I tend to doubt the extent of the damage. Perhaps it is as bad as is reported, but just making those claims does equal amounts of damage. Namely to bring about fear, loathing, and general chaos further cementing powerlessness in America 2.0.

  4. Ralph B. Seymour

    If Epstein was working for Mossad they are in possession of his work product and because he is no longer useful, he is expendable to Mossad. All of his blackmail subjects and sex victims wished him dead even before his incarceration.

    If you believe that the FBI are ‘crimefighters’ then of course they might want to get him out of jail to prevent the hit that everyone knew was coming. But we all know that is not the case.

    So who would go to the trouble of springing him from jail? I can’t think of anyone.

  5. The Epstein Case (soon-to-be forgotten, as are all things in the Land of ADD) is merely the latest “fuck you” op, an op consisting of mainly two parts:

    1) The Vampire Class intensifies the general society’s certainty that the VC can and will do anything it wants and will get away with all of it;

    2) And when the VC does show its chops, it seeks to make non-Vampires feel like bitches: gutless fully-mastered victims who will put up with everything, no matter what.

    Specifically with Epstein:

    1) Epstein is exposed back in ’06/’07, showing us just what sort of pimp and procurer he is: one of lovely underage girls (and boys). Point from the Vampire Class: “We can fuck these 14-year-olds and you can’t.”

    2) Epstein “sentenced.” Point: “He’s a serial pedophile and pimp and gets to visit a country club for a few months. You steal a carton of cigarettes from 7/11 and you’re going to a down-home prison for 5 years. Gonna do anything about it? No??”

    3) Flash-forward, Epstein re-arrested. Reason? Perhaps the upcoming Israeli election? Or is the VC itching to stick its “fuck you” template once more up everybody’s ass?

    4) Epstein “beaten-up.” Then changed to “attempted suicide.” Point: “Who the fuck are you to question our consistency? Do you actually think we can’t tell the difference between a man beaten up and a man who’s attempted suicide? No, we’re just letting you know that we can change our fairy tales at a moment’s notice depending on need. And you can’t (and won’t even if you could) do a damn thing about it. Also, we’re setting you up for what’s to come. . .”

    5) Attorney General Bob Barr shows up hours before the announcement of Epstein’s “death.” Bob Barr, CIA hitman. Barr, CIA handler of the Pike Committee, the Church Committee, and the HSCA. (Basically a tweed-covered version of Luca Brasi.) Point: “Just letting you all know where this is coming from, at least operationally.”

    6) Epstein “dead.” The coup-de-grace in two ways. Obviously now no trial. Better yet: the Vampires get to play their favorite sport (aside from corn-holing 12-year-olds): playing cat-and-mouse with the Great Unwashed via the VC’s favorite instrument, the Great Wurlitzer: “See again what we can do? We will let you play with conspiracy theories for awhile. Then drop the hammer, via the bootlicking 5% and 10% all of whom pray everyday for entre into the VC, such as Chief Forensics Liar and Cover-Up Artist, the 110-year-old Dr. Michael Baden.”

    So once again the vampire message to us is clear:

    “You are waste product. The society would be better off without you. In fact, doesn’t even see you.”

    And we go on. . .

    • Ralph B. Seymour

      That’s pretty much it. What does Barr’s appointment say about Trump?
      1. He’s stupid.
      2. He’s one of them.

  6. Could it be he was put into witness protection and is sitting in a modest 1c story house in the middle of the desert waiting to testify?

  7. GIven the ear, nose and facial lines on the corpse on the gurney was completely different to Epstein I do not doubt he is alive and well.

  8. I think Epstein is probably on a beach somewhere in Israel, after getting a hero’s welcome from Mossad. And they are all laughing at how easy it is to fool the goyim. After all, if they got away with 911 and the attack on the USS Liberty, then they can get away with anything.
    In fact, I’m not sure they ever even had him in custody, since there are no photos of his current arrest (they keep showing the photo from the previous arrest), and there are no photos of him in the courtroom, only drawings that don’t actually look like him. All of this is pointed out here:

    https://www.winterwatch.net/2019/08/out-the-book-door-questioning-the-death-of-jeffrey-epstein/

    “There were no photos of his arrest, booking or court appearances — only court sketches of proceedings that depict someone who doesn’t match his description, but rather someone with a thick and heavy neck. A deputy who saw Epstein after his first “suicide attempt” described him as 5’10” and 240 pounds. Yet, Epstein’s arrest record shows him as 6’0″ 180 pounds. Quite a disparity.”

    And in this article https://www.winterwatch.net/2019/07/is-jeffrey-epstein-being-subjected-to-star-chamber-sleight-of-hand/ he notes that “Epstein’s photo is also not visible on the Federal prison inmate locator website either, which is not standard procedure.”
    I think this was an elaborate psyop by Mossad/Israel to ultimately make this all go away (the last thing they wanted was for it to come out in court that this was a Mossad operation to compromise US politicians for Israel)

    And clearly the profile of the dead guy on the gurney (http://www.jimstone.is/epsteingurney1.jpg) does not match the profile of Epstein alive (the nose and ears are not a match). More here: https://www.wnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/dead-man-jeffrey-epstein-comparison-jpg.jpg

    Jon Rappoport describes a plausible scenario here:

    https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2019/08/14/jeffrey-epstein-is-alive-a-fictional-scenario/
    “MOSSAD #1: The man who is now in a cell in Manhattan awaiting trial? It’s not Jeffrey. It’s the double. The FBI arrested the double. We knew the arrest was going to happen, so we made the switch. And Jeffrey is already here with our people.
    MOSSAD #2: Really? Fantastic!
    MOSSAD #1: Yes. We chose our double well. He has a terminal disease. He has a family. He has no money. We promised him we’d take good care of his family. He’s going to commit suicide in his cell. That’s the deal. We’ve made a few payoffs that will allow the suicide to happen. We believe we can control the autopsies and switch DNA samples, if necessary…”

  9. For nearly any field of scientific study you can think of, there is some group somewhere who argues against that field’s findings. It’s a phenomenon we call science denial. Whether it’s fossil fuel proponents arguing against climate science or HIV deniers claiming the virus doesn’t cause AIDS, science denial surrounds us and promotes the spread of misinformation that can even be deadly. Science communicators have to mount increasing defenses against such denial, and in order to best do so, it’s important to understand what form that denial takes. Today we’re going to study one popular rubric for characterizing denial, called FLICC.

    Science denial, in a broad sense, is exactly what it sounds like. It is the denial of a scientific finding, argued in such a way as to persuade fence-sitters or the ignorant general public toward a perspective that disagrees with any given science finding. If you’re a tobacco company and want to persuade people that cigarettes are perfectly healthy, the techniques of science denial laid out in FLICC are what you’re probably going to use in your messaging. In fact these same techniques are employed by the vast majority of science denialists, and once you recognize them, you’ll have one more tool for telling real science from pseudoscience.

    The acronym FLICC comes from John Cook in 2014 (and tested in a 2017 PLoS ONE article), but the five techniques were put forward earlier by Pascal Diethelm and Martin McKee in a 2009 paper in the European Journal of Public Health, based in turn upon a sort of codification of denial by the brothers Mark and Chris Hoofnagle in a ScienceBlogs article as early as 2007. You’ll find links to all of these papers in the References section below. FLICC stands for:

    F: Fake experts
    L: Logical fallacies
    I: Impossible expectations
    C: Cherry picking
    C: Conspiracy theories

    We see the FLICC techniques all the time. In this episode, we’re going to take three common versions of science denial and use each of the five FLICC techniques for each. These three denied sciences are global warming, genetically modified crops, and vaccines. Let’s begin with the first of our five techniques:

    F: Fake Experts
    The first thing out of the mouths of science deniers is that some “legitimate scientist” supports their claim. A familiar example is the “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth”, an online group of more than 3,000 people who believe 9/11 was an inside job. However, perusing the list, it’s clear that the number who actually have relevant expertise can be counted on your fingers. The rest consist of anyone who signs their petition. No credentials at all are required. Yet this group misrepresents themselves to the public as more than 3,000 experts who are all satisfied that, from an engineering perspective, there is no way the twin towers could have been brought down by the airliner crashes, and that they must therefore have been controlled demolitions. Fake experts are everywhere, and they are almost always people who present themselves as such, but who actually have no experience in the relevant field.

    Often, the denialists’ fake experts go hand-in-hand with attacks against actual experts, who are often claimed to be paid shills.

    Global warming deniers: Scientists brought forth to question human-caused global warming are almost never actual climatologists; they are almost always physicists or engineers of some kind. Nevertheless, they still wave their credentials — irrelevant though they may be.

    GMO deniers: If you look at the leading voices in the movement against modern farming, they’re almost never actual farmers or molecular biologists. They are often authors, philosophers, or professors in unrelated fields, and almost always aligned with the organic movement. But put on a white lab coat and hold up your degree, and you can persuade just about any layperson to get on board with your message.

    Vaccine deniers: It’s noteworthy that very few anti-vaccine activists are real doctors. Many of them call themselves doctors, but are often in unaccredited professions like chiropractic or naturopathy. But even when they do hold up one of the tiny percentages of doctors who are anti-vaccine, it’s someone representing a fringe perspective, and very much the opposite of what all other legitimate doctors would say.

    L: Logical Fallacies
    These are the favorite tool of the pseudoscientist, but they are also employed by nearly everyone through all walks of life. Logical fallacies include ad hominem attacks, strawman arguments, slippery slope fallacies, red herrings, false dichotomies, in fact hundreds of such logically invalid ways to make a point. Logical fallacies appeal to your brain’s native tendency to think anecdotally rather than logically. Thus, many arguments that are logically fallacious can still be compelling. The science denier needs to depend on this, because he has no persuasive science on his side; unlike the true scientist who follows the evidence, and thus has no need to make logically invalid arguments.

    Global warming deniers: A common red herring thrown out by climate deniers is that scientists can’t even predict tomorrow’s weather reliably, so how can we trust anything they say on climate? This is a red herring — an irrelevant distraction — because climate and weather don’t have anything to do with one another. Think of climate as the amount of wealth you have in savings and investments, while weather is the amount of spare cash in your wallet right now.

    GMO deniers: Ever since Monsanto became the face of GMO crops, the very name has been used as a weasel word to denigrate biotech. By conflating the technology with all the many imagined ethical and legal transgressions of the company, opponents were employing many fallacies: the red herring, the ad hominem, the non-sequitur, and what I like to call the Argumentum ad Monsantium.

    Vaccine deniers: A slippery slope fallacy we often hear in regards to vaccines is the claim that if the government can mandate vaccines for your children, that will lead to total government control over everyone’s body and we’ll all be microchipped, etc. etc. etc.

    I: Impossible Expectations
    Another science denier’s stratagem is to hold the existing science to an impossible standard, with the implication that if it can’t meet that standard, it is therefore wholly invalid and should be discarded entirely in favor of the denier’s preferred facts. A fireman’s clothing is not 100% fireproof in every imaginable condition, therefore it’s useless, and this T-shirt sprinkled with essential oils is thus the better option. No science finding is 100% proven, and that is in fact the strength of the scientific method. Every finding remains open to new information and improvement, and thus it’s always getting better and stronger. The science process, by definition, is never complete; therefore there is no impossible standard that it can meet. One must be careful to keep expectations reasonable and rational, not impossible.

    Global warming deniers: All one needs to do here is to show that we still have some days colder than they were last year. If we impose the expectation that if global warming were true, it would follow that every day would be warmer year over year. That’s not how warming works, but it’s easy to impose that impossible expectation in order to show that the claims of warming don’t hold up.

    GMO deniers: Can we say with absolute certainty that nobody will ever have an allergic reaction to GMO produce? Of course we can’t predict that, even after tens of trillions of GMO meals served without a single health consequence. It’s an impossible expectation.

    Vaccine deniers: Are vaccines absolutely positively 100% safe? No, a tiny percentage of people have a negative reaction — so we should therefore throw them all out.

    C: Cherry picking
    This is the process of selecting only that data which supports your preferred finding, and ignoring any data that does not. For example, a proponent of alternate cosmologies might well discuss only the conclusions of an odd crackpot or two from history, and completely dismiss the far larger amount of work supporting the standard model of the universe. To an innocent audience, it may then appear that there is no data save that which came from the crackpot. Cherry picked findings always exclude contradictory information; while good science findings strive to include as much contradicting information as they can, as efforts to disprove a hypothesis are a key part of the scientific method.

    Global warming deniers: It’s very easy to use cherry picking to show that global temperatures are either falling or are constant. All one needs to do is single out one specific region over some specific time frame. You can easily see this being done in just about any global warming denying video on YouTube.

    GMO deniers: When the National Academies of Sciences published a major 2016 report finding that GMO crops suffered less crop losses due to insects, opponents ignored that and cherry picked the fact that some insects had nevertheless evolved resistance to the crops. This falsely implied that GMO crops made the insect problem worse.

    Vaccine deniers: It’s easy to cherry pick the few cases of adverse vaccine reactions and point to them as if they represent a likely outcome of vaccination, falsely suggesting that vaccination is prohibitively dangerous.

    C: Conspiracy Theories
    Generally speaking, the moment you hear a conspiracy theory proposed, you can be assured you’re listening to a science denier. “Who would ever disagree with this, unless they’re being paid to?” Science deniers commonly use words with religious overtones, like dogma or orthodoxy, to describe findings they don’t like. “Science will stand for no challenges to the official dogma,” they will claim, as if research scientists are employed to learn nothing and are paid only to uphold the traditional canon upon which their closed, old-boy’s-network is rooted. They are conspiring — so the claim goes — to suppress the newcomer’s findings, as it would threaten their grant funding. Because, you know, grantors fund grants in the hope of learning nothing, and will keep writing checks so long as the same old traditional dogma is the only thing given to them in return. Makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it?

    Global warming deniers: This is one of the most familiar conspiracy theories around today. It asserts that all the world’s climate scientists are deliberately publishing false data, because that somehow keeps them on some elusive, mysterious gravy train of endless cash flowing from the renewable energy sector.

    GMO deniers: A common claim is that GMO seed producers conspire to take control over the entire world’s food supply, giving them ultimate power worldwide.

    Vaccine deniers: Obviously, doctors and Big Pharma are all in cahoots to give out dangerous vaccines to keep everyone sick so they can make the most profit.
    So that’s FLICC, applied to three popular contentious pseudosciences. There was probably nothing in this episode that was terribly revolutionary for experienced Skeptoid listeners, and it’s certainly no surprise that science denial generally relies on the same techniques no matter what kind of science is being denied. And now that we know what to look for, we can react more readily when we perceive we’re being FLICC’ed off by a science denier.

  10. Ooga booga Bix nood

    Epstein’s dead, he’s surely alive,
    He’s living like a pedo,
    Swimming off the isle

  1. Pingback: Of Epsteins, Lolitas and Hoaxes, by Donald Jeffries | STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC

Leave a Reply to Ross Young Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: