I don't think what is apparent on the surface actually well represents what is really happening. I don't think it's either or. Consider a mafia style gang. During a power struggle within the organization, the losers are offed by the winners, who take power over the gang. Neither party wants to destroy the gang. It's what they want control of. During that struggle the parties may strike at each other's business interests, use anonymous informants to tip off authorities about the other party's activities, or many other things besides just shooting them.

Roy Cohn taught Donald Trump a lot, and it wasn't about the construction industry, but about what Cohn did: brownstone operations and blackmail. Epstein is considered to be a genius, able to discuss physics with Nobel Prize winner Murray Gell-man (now deceased), but Trump outsmarted him, it appears.

That's what I think is happening between Trump, Clinton, and Epstein. If Trump were actually intent on shutting down the industry, the Weiner laptop evidence would have become public, or at least used. We know much of that evidence involved HRC, yet she remains uncharged.

Once the mob boss has secured leadership of the syndicate, they don't need to undertake conflict with folks that are now their underlings, and doing so puts the business at risk. That's what I think happened with HRC, and not with Epstein.

When Epstein was arrested, a lot of blackmail evidence was seized from his safe. This indicates to me, coupled with his arrest, that he hadn't quit seeking leadership of the gang, and Trump had to take him down hard this time.

If I'm right, the evidence from Epstein's safe will end up exactly like the evidence from Weiner's laptop: nowhere to be found.

We'll see what happens.