[throwaw-zxcvbn]

FWIW, I am pretty sure that the rich cavorting with pretty young women (and some of it in an exploitative manner, and some of them under 18, and most of it for compensation) is going on in a lot of places, and certainly in many parts of the Middle East, Asia, Africa.

In fact, it's probably safe to assume that anyone accepting investments from the Middle East or Asia has very likely dealt with or taken money from people engaging in the same or worse conduct, only that it hasn't been prosecuted there.

If this here is the standard by which things ought to be measured and decided now, then I would expect a lot of money be returned and/or given to NGOs and charities.

But then, I suspect this is mostly moral posturing and virtue signalling, so nothing substantial will happen.

[calcifer]

It's funny how this comment in article about an American child sex trafficker that abused American children [1] somehow makes it about unprosecuted rich people in everywhere but the USA.

> I suspect this is mostly moral posturing and virtue signalling

Indeed, though I refer to a different "this".

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Civil_cases

[throwaw-zxcvbn]

If the policy is "don't accept money from American child sex traffickers that abuse American children", then fine, return the Epstein money and ask for the head of everyone that took money from him.

If the policy is "don't accept money from anyone abusing children (or at any rate people under 18)", then I suggest that a lot more due diligence is required.

[calcifer]

But that's just whataboutism. The article and the whole topic is about this particular American child abuser and his American victims.