this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
712 points (99.7% liked)

News

33796 readers
3594 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
 

“The justice department’s document dump this afternoon does not comply with Thomas Massie and my Epstein Transparency Act,” Ro Khanna, the California Democratic congressman who co-wrote the law requiring full disclosure of all of the government’s investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein by Friday, said in a video statement posted on social media.

By way of example, Khanna noted: “They released one document from a New York grand jury of a 119 pages totally blacked out! This despite a New York judge ordering them to release that document, and our law requires them to explain redactions. There’s not a single explanation for why that entire document was redacted.”

“We have not seen the draft indictment,” Khanna added, “that implicates other rich and powerful men who were on Epstein’s rape island, who either watched the abuse of young girls or participated in the abuse of young girls.”

“It is an incomplete release, with too many redactions. Thomas Massie and I are exploring all options,” Khanna said, including the impeachment of justice department officials, finding them in contempt of Congress, “or referring for prosecution those who are obstructing justice.”

Thomas Massie, the Kentucky Republican congressman who co-wrote the legislation, shared Khanna’s video statement on social media, with the comment that the document release by Pam Bondi, the attorney general, and Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general who previously served as Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, “grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law” that Trump signed, “just 30 days ago”.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kmartburrito@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago
[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.world 141 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Remember kids, every black line says the word Trump over and over and over. Spread the word.

[–] gnutrino@programming.dev 101 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

Supposedly there was about 300Gb of material, compared to about 3Gb released so far, so it's fair to assume the other 99% is videos of Trump fucking kids unless/until they release the rest to show otherwise.

[–] phoenixarise@lemmy.world 43 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I have no idea how the retractors live with themselves. What the fuck.

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They're probably in on it, too. This administration surely drew like-minded people.

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

FYI a retractor is a surgical implement. I believe the word you were looking for is detractor.

[–] alcibiades@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)

the word is redactor. a detractor is someone who disparages someone/thing. The commenter made a new definition of retractor by turning the verb retract into a noun that describes someone.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DontRedditMyLemmy@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago

FYI: Little 'b' means bit. Big 'B' means byte, a factor of eight larger. Basically, there's eight times as much Pedonald.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why did all these people allow their photos to be taken? Like Clinton and Gates... "sure take my photo with this young woman so we can all remember what a great time we're having"

[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.world 45 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That was part of the deal. Mutual blackmail. It's been alluded to several times in the Maxwell testimonies.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 10 points 1 week ago

Oh yeah that kinda makes sense i guess.

This is supposedly where the phrase “thick as thieves” comes from. If thieves were working together, they’d share stories of some of their previous crimes. So the group would all have blackmail on each individual member. The idea was that no individual person would rat, because then everyone they’ve worked with in the past would rat on them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Due to a system specifically designed by and for them and their fellow economical and political elites, they consider themselves untouchable by the consequences meant for mere mortals.

The worst part is that this megalomaniacal assumption is almost invariably proven correct 🤬

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Trump, active politicians, wealthy CEOs, connected public figures, and even Israeli spies and handlers.

Take your pick of Epstein associates that the US govt would opt to protect for reasons other than the public good or national security.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If you hold your screen up to a light you can see behind the black and it is literally just the word 'Trump'.

[–] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You might be joking, but in Slovakia there have been a few censored PDFs I've seen where they just used black highliter. Like, the text was still there.
I thought it was something rare when I found that, but someone on Reddit found same shit elsewhere too.

Here's an example: https://www.teleoff.gov.sk/images/urad/odbory-oddelenia/odbor-statneho-dohladu-elektronickych-komunikacii/rozhodnutia-statneho-dohladu-elektronickych-komunikacii/rozhodnutie-zakaze-poskytovat-siete-sluzby-z-29-4-2025.pdf

Just select the "censored" text and copy it.

Lmfao that is incredible

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Embargo@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

::: TRUMPTRUMPTRUMPTRUMP :::

[–] ramble81@lemmy.zip 50 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why hasn’t the actual document been leaked yet? At first I thought it was because it couldn’t be used if it was. But there’s literally a law ordering its release, so just dump it.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 47 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Because the pedo protectors have the documents.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Of course they are. Anyone who expected something different is unbelievable naive.

There is a provision in the law that they can withhold anything related to "national security", so they can basically filter at will. You can't claim something you'll never see not to falling under that provision...

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 11 points 1 week ago

But they didn't say the redactions were due to national security. It'd be bullshit if they did, yeah, but they didn't. So they're still not complying.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 30 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Firstly: the partial / redacted release was entirely predictable.

Secondly, I dont understand where we are at now.

Is this impeachment going to be like all the others and be meaningless?

If JD Bimbo lady was charged and convicted wouldn't Trump just pardon her?

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I can at least answer this one

Is this impeachment going to be like all the others and be meaningless?

Yes. No impeachment has ever had any teeth to it. This man broke the record for being the first to be impeached his first term. Then he broke another record by being the first to be impeached twice. Why not a third?

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Impeachment of Trump is not yet on the table, but impeachment of Bondi and Trump's personal lawyer currently acting as Bondi's deputy, that's on the table and could result in a removal.

While it's true that no impeachment of a president has succeeded, the process has succeeded several times.

Also remember that while Trump is somehow bulletproof, his hanger ons enjoy zero protection.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They don't have protection when they stop being useful to him. They're still useful.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] QBertReynolds@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

US Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:

...he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

[–] ExtraPartsLeft@piefed.zip 7 points 1 week ago

"Obviously the founding fathers meant to exclude ilegal impeachments. And since it would be from the crooked democrats and RINOs, any impeachment at this point would be an ilegal one." (Says Trump and the Supreme Court probably.)

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago

Is this impeachment going to be like all the others and be meaningless?

Nah, don't worry: it's going to be even MORE meaningless, now that the fascist criminals are in full control of every single branch of government and may well succeed in remaking campaign and election laws so that it stays that way no matter how big the majority of people disapproving of them gets.

[–] WanderWisley@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago

Every deletion is an admission.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 25 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Of course they're missing, did anybody thing anything else would happen? They'll release just enough salacious material to keep the voyeurs satisfied, but none of it will be actionable, at least not against MAGAs or Oligarchs. They'll keep the good stuff quarantined, or perhaps it's already been burned.

[–] Echolynx@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They even reported how FBI agents were taken off regular assignments to comb through for any mention of Dear Leader and rack up overtime. That was months ago.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Yep. I bet the released materials cover a) Democrats and b) anyone else Trump dislikes.

[–] falseWhite@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

That's incorrect. They DID release all of the most important and incriminating documents, 119 pages of them bundled in a single file. Here they are:

https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%203/EFTA00005586.pdf

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago

🎶 No colours anymore, I want them to turn black 🎶

[–] lka1988@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] falseWhite@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Yes. You can go browse the released files yourself

https://www.justice.gov/epstein

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 22 points 1 week ago

Since we only know of a few "politically exposed individuals", I'm just going to have to assume that all the redactions are pertaining to them. Probably, primarily, Trump...since I doubt, if the rumors are lies or exaggerations, that Trump would go through so much trouble to protect Clinton.

In which case, why is Trump so afraid of all of these documents, to the point he has to black out nearly everything?

If he's truly innocent he shouldn't have any problem proving it, right?

If you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear, right?

Right, Taco?

So c'mon. It should be easy to weasel yourself out of this.

Unless...it's not.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

I think Americans should assume every politician who takes money from AIPAC is involved and we should remove them all from office immediately throw them in prison without bail and try them for treason

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

Dems have access to all the files and can release them by reading them into the Congressional record.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Referring who for prosecution by who? Are the fascist child rapist protectors going to prosecute themselves?

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago

Is this news? We all knew there would be fuckery going on with the DOJ release anyway. I wish I would've invested in black ink earlier this year.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 10 points 1 week ago

since trump, republicans and politicial and financial backers are in it, its unlikely they ever plan of exposing them.

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

How did they not already figure out a response to this completely predictable outcome?

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The justice department’s document dump this afternoon does not comply with Thomas Massie and my Epstein Transparency Act,

And what will you do about it? If history is any indication, nothing at all

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

They just didn't had enough time to photoshop Obama on the island. Seriously who knew that the country that invented "step"-familly porn was full of pedophiles?

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Not surprised and always disappointed with this kind of shit. Everything blackened out has a name of a fucking politician or oligarch. Sick bastards!

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Release the Epstein files, Trump!

What else have you got to fear. Everyone knows your a kiddie abuser and that Putin has a photo of you sucking off Bubba, how much worse could it possibly be?

load more comments
view more: next ›