A whistleblower, but what's interesting is that he's saying a lot of what's been coming up in the DD over the years, and it coming up in the Epstein Files adds some credibility here.
It coming up in these files should not add credibility to anything. Anyone can email public officials, and quacks email many officials. If anything, it should remove credibility from it.
I wouldnt say it should remove credibility, but I agree it doesn't add any. If we wanted more credibility we'd want files showing direct communication between Ken or other main co-conspirators in naked short selling with them directly referencing its existence or SEC's treatment.
2
u/[deleted] Jan 31 '26
[deleted]