comment: >
  
  The bank has obligations under law to authorities and through contract to their clients. That there are obligations directly to third parties is a bit difficult to argue and would open a pretty big can of worms of implications.
context: "If we started to monitor our clients accounts for details of facilitating sexual abuse we'd have barely any time left on our schedules to launder money." >
  
  Won't somebody think about the bankers? >
  
  Haven’t the 1% suffered enough? When will the condemnation of Wharton graduates come to an end? >
  
  They are a persecuted minority. >
  
  Like so many minority shareholders before them. >
  
  So now we know who is threatened by the Epstein suits. >
  
  It's truly amazing how all of the Epstein stuff has been completely swept under the rug. Epstein somehow managed to have a sex trafficking operation that blackmailed no one and for which no one patronized, yet he was awash in money and access the likes of which only the very global 'elite' could command. I guess he just catered to ghosts and imaginary friends that magically materialized Epstein's wealth and societal connections. >
  
  The people with the money and power to be able to sweep this under the rug had a collective interest in keeping it that way. >
  
  This is such a massive case, why are there not more eyes on it? This is literally a key part to freeing the world from extensive corruption as outlined in Whitney Webb's research, this needs more attention >
  
  Bc the eyes are also guilty. Too many powerful people to be brought down. We’ll never get to see justice on this. 
  For instance: this article is showing you how little by little, the powerful are making the whole thing ‘go away’. 
  I hope it doesn’t end until all guilty parties are punished. Sadly, I think that is just a dream.