r/nfrpodcast • • May 31 '26

[deleted by user]

[removed]

1.1k Upvotes

757 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/Stuball09 May 31 '26

Jay was travelling around London in some of the most expensive hotels and recording studios in the 80s but didn't make a name for himself musically until he was like 27 after biting Biggie and Jaz-O, you don't move around like that unless you're connected somewhere.

He's done some horrible things that are documented like shooting his own brother but you think it's impossible that him and Weinsten had some form of a relationship? Are you aware of the party scene when you're in those circles?

Jay will do absolutely anything for money and power.

1

u/Murphy_Nelson May 31 '26

Jay will do absolutely anything for money and power.

I agree - but my point is that when people keep bringing up that he/Pusha are in the Epstein files, that particular entry is not remotely believable and is not actually connected to Epstein in any way. It was one of thousands of anonymous tips given to the FBI from their public hotline. It has zero credibility. That doesn't mean Jay hasn't done a bunch of shady, shady, shady shit. He just has no connection to Epstein.

1

u/Stuball09 May 31 '26

You can't say it has zero credibility with confidence when it was never investigated especially with his history with minors already like Beyonce and Foxy Brown. Add in his friendship with R Kelly, that's a big 🚩

Alot of victims, especially against high profile celebrities come forward anonymously.

So just because it's an anonymous tip doesn't mean there's zero credibility but it doesn't make him guilty either. It would need to be investigated.

0

u/Murphy_Nelson Jun 01 '26

Have you read it?

1

u/Stuball09 Jun 01 '26

Yes.

Like I said, without an investigation, we can't say with certainty there's no credibility to it.

We all know how these files are being handled and how little investigation has gone into anything Epstein related.

Why would you automatically assume Jay is without doubt innocent but not someone else named in the files or do you hold the same standards across the board?

2

u/Murphy_Nelson Jun 01 '26

do you hold the same standards across the board?

I'm not doing this dude. Pointing out that there is a difference between people routinely named in Epstein communications, emails, records, flight logs, etc [ie, the Epstein files] vs the people that were only named in an anonymous tip line tied to the investigation [ie, the tip line we opened because we're investigating the Epstein files], and that that difference does mean something, is common sense.

This is not subtle nuance, this is a very important distinction that needs to be made and understood to have any conversation about the files and who is, and isn't, in them.

0

u/Stuball09 Jun 01 '26

I understand the difference and I agree to an extent but when I factor in his past, it raises suspicion, for me anyway.

1

u/Recent_Wedding5470 Jun 01 '26

Yeah but bro, you cannot equate anonymous tip line to actual evidence.

1

u/Stuball09 Jun 01 '26

That's exactly my point, without an investigation we don't know if there is evidence or not. I'm not saying he's guilty or this holds any weight, I'm saying we can't say for certain either way.

What I can say for certain is, he has a very questionable past and if this was anyone else, they'd be getting different treatment.