this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2025
366 points (99.5% liked)

politics

26764 readers
2624 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Justice Department released thousands of new records on convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein on Friday, but at least 550 pages in the documents are fully redacted, CBS News has found.

The newly released files included photos of several prominent people in Epstein's orbit, images from his homes and investigative records that detail disturbing allegations against the late sex offender. But the heavy redactions in many of the records have drawn criticism from Democrats and some Republicans, as the department defends its handling of the files.

One series of three consecutive documents --- totaling 255 pages


is entirely redacted, with each page covered by a black box. A fourth 119-page document labeled "Grand Jury-NY" is also entirely redacted. It's unclear what proceedings it stemmed from, but the document listed immediately before it is a transcript in which a prosecutor asks a grand jury in 2020 to consider evidence for a superseding indictment of Epstein's convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 42 minutes ago

That's just an upraised middle finger.

[–] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 124 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

They told everyone they would redact it to protect the victims. But they think the rapists and traffickers are the victims.

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 37 points 18 hours ago

Consequences? But i’m rich!

[–] NABDad@lemmy.world 16 points 16 hours ago

You don't understand! Epstein told them no one would find out that they were raping children. He lied to them, so they're victims too!

/s

[–] MisterOwl@lemmy.world 50 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

Honestly, did we expect anything else?

[–] espentan@lemmy.world 12 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

I often found myself asking that; what's left of the original files by now? If they were damning for people up top, surely those parts would've been removed by now, either "legally" redacted or otherwise tampered with.

Unless we pried them from Epstein's dead, nasty hands I'd find it a little hard to trust anything in there, redacted or not.

[–] blattrules@lemmy.world 27 points 18 hours ago

They’re all related to Trump and they’re all really bad. That’s the only way to interpret this.

[–] Soulphite@reddthat.com 37 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Haha.. they ran outta time redacting trump and friends and just blacked out whole pages... 'blanket redacting' if you will... these assholes aren't even really trying to hide it.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 10 points 15 hours ago

Did anyone expect something else?

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 17 hours ago

And how many idiots printed those pages?

Check if Pam bought some stock of toner producers. Wouldn’t be surprised.

[–] the_q@lemmy.zip 26 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I don't understand what Trump is afraid of. It could have pictures of him in the act and he wouldn't stop being president, stop being rich and lose many if any supporters. He wouldn't go to jail or anything and we'd all just be mad for nothing exactly like we are now.

As long as the majority holds on to hope that the very system that protects these monsters will somehow punish them the longer it absolutely won't. We're mad but not mad enough.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 8 points 15 hours ago

His supporters are having a tough time swallowing the child raping so the admin is a bit nervous.

Don't worry though with enough time and Fox News / podcasts they will unhinge their jaw and get it down eventually.

[–] DominicG@lemmy.world 26 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah and isn't it crazy that you can find pics of Clinton but I haven't seen any of Trump in there? Interesting.

[–] crozilla@lemmy.world 10 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Think I read there were 109 mentions of Clinton and only two of Trump. Smart not to make it zero, I guess.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 9 points 19 hours ago

This looks like the actions of Big Toner. How to spur more sales.

[–] 0ndead@infosec.pub 8 points 19 hours ago

Who’s got a fax number for the DOJ?

[–] Echolynx@lemmy.zip 3 points 16 hours ago

Why the hell does that video autoplay on mobile?

[–] PM_ME_WRISTS_GIRL@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 17 hours ago

Think before you print this email!