As a thought exercise the only morally justifiable framework I can conceive of for this would be some kind of crypto or escrow based channel for anonymous donat

As a thought exercise the only morally justifiable framework I can conceive of for this would be some kind of crypto or escrow based channel for anonymous donations that would be completely 'laundered' of the origin. For example, if a donor donates to this channel, there'd have to be some mechanism in place that even if they accurately stated publicly the amount and time they took the transaction, there would be no way to prove that claim. Then, if a blacklisted donor comes to you, decline their offer to donate in name but note the above channel exists In a situation where people are communicating and facilitating the donation with such a blacklisted person they are a) able to confirm the donation and b) are in a position to participate in some kind of quid pro quo -- this seems extremely hard to justify given the difficulty of disproving that no such quid pro quo took place. In this specific instance, it sounds like Epstein did receive material attention and visitation so safely assuming that this was a neutral transaction flies out the window completely.