586
New Epstein files fail to quell outrage as advocates claim documents are being withheld
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2026
586 points (99.3% liked)
News
35749 readers
2678 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, that's not what you said. You said the full unredacted files were the only way forward. And now you're backtracking.
That doesn't make any sense in context pal. Releasing the files is the only way forward, to free the blackmailed from Israel and everyone else holding that information over them. Anyone arguing to keep it secret is protecting the pedophile elite. Why would you do that? Why indeed. Don't have to ask why that person would make an unfounded accusation to distract the issue, as they've no leg to stand on with reason to defend the rich not being outed for fucking children.
So it's natural for those taking their cues from our politicians to make personal accusations however ill formed, to put the person on the defensive, it works with most people. But try to stay on topic old boy.
You're the only one going off topic. You straight up said that releasing the full unredacted files was the only way forward. Releasing the full unredacted files means that all the CSAM would be unredacted too.
Even with context it means the same thing.
And I never said anything about keeping it secret. I support releasing everything and only redacting the victims.
Release to organizations to do the redacting I said.
Rather than allowing the government owned by the perpetrators to do the redacting.
Only a person obscuring the issue would take issue with my statement in a way that misidentifies what was said in a preceding comment as such.
No, that's not at all what you said. You said, "Releasing the full UNREDACTED files is the only way forward." No caveats.
Maybe you intended to say that they should be released to organizations to do the redacting, but that's not what you said.
Why is it so hard for you to admit that you misspoke?
Ah ye nest of vipers, how can you speak truth when all you say is lies?
I'm lying by directly quoting you?