By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The recent release of documents pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein has revealed extensive communication between the notorious sex trafficker and bestselling author Deepak Chopra. Their interactions, spanning from 2016 until just before Epstein’s 2019 arrest, included casual conversations about consciousness and dogs, as well as more explicit discussions and invitations involving “girls” and “prey.” While the messages do not definitively prove wrongdoing on Chopra’s part, they paint a candid picture of their association. Chopra has since acknowledged the communications, stating they “reflect poor judgment” and that he was “never involved in, nor did I participate in, any criminal or exploitative conduct.”
Read the original article here
The emergence of information linking Deepak Chopra, a figure widely recognized as a New Age guru and a professor at the University of California, San Diego, to Jeffrey Epstein’s inner circle has, for many, been less of a shock and more of a confirmation of long-held suspicions. It’s a narrative that, for those who have viewed Chopra’s career through a critical lens, paints a picture of a man whose public persona as a purveyor of spiritual enlightenment might have masked a more troubling reality. The association with Epstein, a convicted sex offender, has cast a significant shadow, raising uncomfortable questions about his judgment and character.
For some, Chopra has long been characterized as a “creep and grifter,” someone whose rise to prominence has been built on a foundation of questionable practices. The “New Age con artist” label is not new, and the connection to a figure like Epstein only serves to reinforce this perception for critics. There’s a prevailing sentiment that religious and spiritual guru types, particularly those who achieve celebrity status, often harbor darker secrets, and this latest revelation is seen by some as a predictable, albeit disturbing, manifestation of that pattern. The idea that such individuals might be predisposed to predatory behavior is a notion that some feel is met with widespread denial.
The very language Chopra has used to describe his sense of self and consciousness, often invoking a universal or cosmic awareness, has been cynically reinterpreted in light of these new allegations. The idea that a “timeless awareness” might be incapable of committing a “finite act” is now seen by some as a convenient, perhaps even deliberate, rhetorical shield. This philosophical approach, once perceived as profound by many of his followers, is now viewed by critics as a potential obfuscation, a way to sidestep accountability for actions that are, in reality, very much finite and human.
The involvement of Chopra, alongside other prominent figures, in the orbit of Jeffrey Epstein has also drawn attention to the broader ecosystem of celebrity and influence that Epstein cultivated. The repeated appearance of individuals associated with Oprah Winfrey in such scandals has led to a sense of weary predictability. For some, the phrase “shocked Pikachu face” has become a shorthand for the lack of surprise felt when another one of Oprah’s well-connected friends faces serious accusations. It’s a sentiment that echoes the idea that the individuals who are least surprising to be implicated are often those who have enjoyed significant public platforms.
The feeling of inevitability surrounding these revelations is palpable. For those who have met Chopra in professional settings, such as at Salesforce events, the interaction has sometimes been described as unsettling. The label “creepy” has been applied to these encounters, suggesting a disconnect between his public image and his personal demeanor. The notion that the “least surprising member of the list” has now been revealed to be connected to Epstein’s network underscores a feeling that certain individuals, despite their public projections, may operate in ways that are consistent with deeply negative character assessments.
Furthermore, specific past remarks attributed to Chopra have resurfaced, adding fuel to the fire of criticism. The alleged comment about “pussy” being “carb free” has been described as “deplorable,” highlighting a perceived disrespect and objectification that stands in stark contrast to his spiritual teachings. This kind of alleged statement, when viewed alongside the Epstein connection, paints a picture of a character that many find difficult to reconcile with the guru image. The frustration expressed by some, that the “Chopra quote generators” have been scrubbed from the internet and that Epstein might be to blame, reflects a desire for accountability and a belief that such information should not be so easily erased.
The parallels drawn between Deepak Chopra and figures like Dr. Oz, both figures amplified by Oprah Winfrey, are also significant. This comparison suggests a pattern of promoting individuals whose credibility, when examined closely, is found wanting, and who may engage in practices that are more about personal gain than genuine well-being. The idea that Oprah has been instrumental in popularizing “charlatans and criminals” is a pointed criticism, implying a responsibility for the wider impact of these figures.
The very act of committing one’s life to a belief system, especially if it is perceived as being insincere, is seen by some as profoundly disturbing. The dedication of time, energy, and expertise to manipulating others for personal gain is viewed as a deeply concerning life choice. The realization that someone at Chopra’s level of public prominence might be engaged in such a deception, to the point of mastering a field solely for the purpose of manipulation, is described as “crazy” and “deplorable.”
Adding another layer of complexity are the discussions around the mechanics of professional speaking fees and how they might be perceived as attempts to “cover up all this BS with a Shaggy.” While some acknowledge that speaking engagements often involve reimbursement for expenses and are treated as business transactions, the context of Chopra’s alleged involvement with Epstein has undoubtedly tainted any such interpretations. The idea that such financial arrangements could be a smokescreen for more sinister activities is a concern for many.
The implications of these revelations extend to the institutions with which Chopra is associated, such as UCSD. The call to “Kick this dude out of his job” reflects a belief that his continued professorship is untenable given the allegations. The hope that he will not be a professor for much longer underscores a desire for academic institutions to uphold ethical standards and to distance themselves from figures whose character is in question.
Looking back at historical anxieties, such as the Cold War fears of ideological subversion, the current situation presents a new and perhaps more insidious threat. The idea that the US might be taken over not by foreign powers but by a network of “elitist capitalists who all knew each other as pedophiles” is a chilling thought. This perspective frames the Epstein scandal, and the involvement of figures like Chopra, as a betrayal of democratic ideals and a manifestation of a deeply corrupt elite.
The irony noted by some, regarding women who have experienced sexual abuse or harassment seemingly supporting figures like Chopra, is a complex and often painful observation. The inclusion of names like Megyn Kelly and potentially Oprah Winfrey in this context, though open to interpretation, points to a societal dynamic that can be difficult to fully comprehend.
Ultimately, the convergence of Deepak Chopra’s identity as a spiritual leader, an academic, and an alleged confidant of Jeffrey Epstein has created a deeply unsettling picture for many. The recurring theme is one of disappointment, disillusionment, and a pervasive sense that the “woo woo” aspects of his public persona may have served as a cover for something far more troubling. The connections, however unwelcome, seem to be, for many, a case of recognizing the most predictable elements within a seemingly respectable facade.