Jokes aside, there are at least a few suspicious looking responses on that doc relating to Epstein like "Job Duties: Covering up Epstein's crimes to protect the Clintons".
So to answer the question, I guess they get to spread their views on particular news networks they disagree with.
Chief Media Correspondent
CNN
$1,054,000
White cis male
15
New York
Pretend ABC didn't cover up Epstein's crimes / Report every minor thing about Fox News and Trump / Envy Sean Spicer's dance skills
> "Epstein|Didn't|Kill|Himself|4|Hillary|Clinton"
Less puckishly: What I feel upon reading this is sort of like that feeling when you find out some bad piece of news about climate change. It's bad enough on its own, but what it implies about the overall health of the national and international socioeconomic context, which, as SWE I (like you) depend on for my survival, is enough to keep one up at night.
Who, among folks smart enough to earn six figures writing code, will deign to don gumboots? And if they don't, who will?
And what happens to us when that person proves incompetent, irregular, desperate, uninformed, or lackadaisical -- all the things that (under capitalism) a healthy salary is supposed to ward against?
> Covering up Epstein's crimes to protect the Clintons
I guess this whole thing is absolutely meaningless?
Unfortunately it seems that way now.
