Shills are hoping anons will claim even the loosest or poorly researched connections are put out as pedos without any evidence to support it. I think we should be careful to focus on her, immediate business associated (follow money) and the agencies and those helping promote her. It seems it would turn into a maze that distracts from better evidence? Eg obviously her instagram was used to peddle kids and communicate preferences. The midland stuff and so on are solid.
I guess it’s possible, but I’m one to focus on hard facts. It’s just musing otherwise and maybe a distraction from more solid lines of inquiry, we have seen her pictured with them, etc so we know they are acquainted. We need hard evidence and money connections eg business partners. It would be even better to find more of the so called models (where are they now) as that would incriminate most to have witnesses
I guess I just think about whet LEO might take seriously. They don’t care about the bloodlines.