I would never draw petite breasts on a silhouette of a “woman” unless my art game was Rebecca-from-Cyberpunk-2077 good.
I know time hits different these days, but literally the only thing new is the outline, and that was described and didn’t take much imagination…
But even that his signature was supposed to be pubic hair had been released months ago.
The new part is that it looks nothing like the earlier renderings with large breasts, and quite a few people think they look like child/teen breasts instead of adult women’s.
And we can argue about whether it’s bad art or supposed to be small boobs, but in the context of everything else in that book, the comic about Epstein grooming children, the jokes about rape, etc. but it’s just too much for me to think otherwise.
After seeing just a few pages, fuck anybody in that book, they all fucking had to know every thing going on with Epstein for decades.
Edited:
Actually, good on you for being able to admit you feel for actual fake news believing any of those were real.
It takes a lot to say you though those were actual real and not just random doodles.
Everything close to reputable was clear what was released was a text description, but unfortunately I’m sure a lot of other people made the same mistake as you.
Has anyone tried to do an analysis of the signature on that letter and the standard /\/\/\/\/\/\ that seems to be trump’s performative autograph yet? Someone that owns photoshop should line that shit up, let’s see.
There was an article about it. It matches. I am Jack’s complete lack of surprise.
