this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2025
304 points (99.0% liked)

News

32434 readers
3961 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 right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


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.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


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
 

A Democrat easily won a special election for an open House seat in Arizona, giving a bipartisan group of representatives the numbers needed to force a vote to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.

Adelita Grijalva, who was running to succeed her late father, Rep. Raul Grijalva, has vowed to sign a House resolution to force a vote on legislation instructing the Department of Justice to release all of its investigative files on the late sex offender.

Her victory cuts the Republican House majority to 219-214, and means she can deliver a decisive signature on the petition, which needs 218 votes to pass, CNN reported.

Its co-sponsor, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), told the outlet that a vote on his Epstein Files Transparency Act could be coming as soon as mid-October.

The Associated Press called the race for Arizona’s 7th district early Wednesday for Grijalva, who was leading her Republican opponent with 68.5 percent of the vote.

Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson has refused to call a vote on the legislation, which President Donald Trump opposes, and even released the House a day early for its August recess to avoid any votes on the files.

In response, Massie and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna introduced a discharge petition earlier this month that would circumvent party leaders to bring the bill to the floor.

Every House Democrat has signed, along with a handful of Republican defectors. The White House has warned lawmakers that Trump views pushing for the files’ release as a “very hostile act.”

For more than a decade, Trump was good friends with Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.

Although officials concluded the disgraced financier died by suicide, several MAGA factions have argued that he was murdered in his cell to protect his powerful clients.

Despite promising to release the files during his re-election bid, the president has since dismissed the effort as a Democrat-led “hoax” designed to distract from what he argues are “the most successful eight months of any president ever.”

Last week, Massie told CNN that the House could vote on his Epstein bill as soon as mid-October. Once Grijalva is sworn in and the needed signatures are secured, Massie must wait at least seven legislative days to bring the bill to the floor.

House leaders can also wait two legislative days before putting it to a vote. The bill is likely to face an uphill battle in the Senate if it clears the House, but it will force Republicans to go on record over the Epstein files.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

We all know Trump will just not sign it... right?

[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm trying to imagine the absolutely disaster that would be for him. Trump refusing to sign puts ownership of the Epstein coverup directly on him alone in a way that it really hasn't been thus far. That might be a better outcome for Trump than the world finding out the extent of his involvement in sex trafficking with Epstein, but it is still a terrible scenario for him. Particularly if it happens before the election because it then gives Democrats something to directly rally his own base against Republicans while campaigning: Give us enough seats in Congress and we will override this veto and deliver the Epstein files.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago

You're over thinking it.

"This is a witch hunt bill passed by Nancy Pelosi, Obama, Hilary Clinton (what about her emails) and radical left lunatics to insult your favorite precedent."

[–] shittydwarf@piefed.social 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Trump will sign anything that is put on that desk. And when I say anything, I mean anything

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It's a petition for Congress not a bill, so if I understand correctly the Senate nor the Executive branch would have a say in blocking it.

Maybe someone will correct me if I'm wrong

[–] wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Couldn't any Democrat with access to the unredacted documents just dump the whole pile into the record of a random committee meeting and poof it is now in the Library of Congress?

I assume no one in Congress has access or they would have just started reading them on the floor. The FBI likely only has them, which of course has had 7 years or so to make things disappear.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago

From my understanding, the democrats don't have access to all of the files. Any that they've had access to, were released.

[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It's not a matter of if the actual truth comes out, but when. At least that's what I reckon.

There are just way too many people caught up in the web -- and orders of magnitude more who have a non-zero investment in the outcome, emotionally or otherwise -- for it to quietly fade away like they're wanting it to.

This is like, the last reliably bipartisan thing we have left if you don't count eating, sleeping and shitting. I would say it's even beyond that - pretty much everyone who's not a pedo (which I would hope is, like, at the very minimum 99%) wants the same thing -- for the truth to come out, and for comprehensive justice to be served.

I'm not going to make it part of my personality and larp as an activist, filling the Internet with low-effort spam, or claiming that everything else that ever happens is "a distraction" from this, no.

The dam will break, the ticking thingy eventually explodes, and I can be very patient. I just hope we still have a functioning justice system when it does.

[–] chiocciola@lemmy.cafe 3 points 11 hours ago

It’s never coming out in its entirety. Ever.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 day ago

Another Democrat: pulls a Fetterman and votes no

[–] Poppa_Mo@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

All this means is another GOP in Democrat clothing will have to reveal themselves to keep the shit sealed. We have no idea how many shills are wearing a fake cap right now.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We all know he's in there. He literally bragged about molesting children before he was elected. What is this going to change?

[–] the_q@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

He'll lose some of his followers and that's about it.

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's good for many reasons that the Republican candidate lost, but unless I am mistaken, the Republican candidate also said that he would sign the petition to release the Epstein files if he won.

[–] onslaught545@lemmy.zip 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You trusted him to actually do it?

[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't trust any politicians. There are even politicians who switch parties at some time after they're elected.

You're not supposed to trust a politician. You're supposed to bullwhip them if they don't follow their campaign promises.

[–] the_q@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 22 hours ago

In the minority party.

Both candidates in this election pledged to release the files though so it’s less that the democrats winning that made this possible and more that this vote can now be cast.