I don't follow. If he was a child abuser as you're implying, wouldn't he be for encryption?
He's against encryption for the commoners, the 99.999% of people not part of the transnational elite, who as we've seen in the Epstein case can fly around and do more or less what they want with both people and money because of connections to "intelligence".
I find it somewhat uncomfortable Posting a comment that might seem pro rich, and he did initially get away with minimal penalties, but you didn’t exactly pick the poster boy for Unlimited impunity.
If people are interested go to the Epstein subreddit take deep dive - most likely it was a classic honeypot operation to blackmail high ranking politicians for political gain or for some industrial complex - not a lone wolf with a back story that makes no sense in isolation, suddenly getting rich without anyone knowing why.
[https://www.newsweek.com/alex-acosta-epstein-sex-trafficking...] "back off he's intelligence".
The conspiracy theorists turn to one another and remark, “This goes even higher than we thought”
I personally find it interesting like i find the Snowden revelations interesting, or the Wikileaks implications or geopolitics in general.
I started majoring in history before going into tech so i don't personally find any of these "conspiracies" fringe or stupid seen in a historical context of for example US intelligence organisations throughout the 20's century - obviously non organic campaigns like qAnon is something completely different but this info is from classic journalism.
But i can see that those top-down campaigns has really turned people away from even the slightest deviation of the "official narrative" now, so well, qAnon and other psyops really are working - there is only the mainstream, and the idiots left.