412
What a fucking disgusting society we live in.
That's crazy that they are even willing to protect foreign interests over their own people. My guess is anyone redacted would take down the rest if they get caught. It's all shitty people, all the way down.
I hate how the lawmakers in the US still follow the old decorum where they pretend to give administration officials the benefit of the doubt. They pretend the redactions were in good faith, when they supposedly arrived at the justice department already redacted, supposedly for grand jury reasons, even though the bill said the whole documents were to be reviewed and redacted to protect witnesses and ongoing investigations.
We all know these redactions weren't done in good faith. Why keep the old decorum, the administration isn't. It just makes it easier for you to fail when you afford them the courtesy that they don't return.
We need a new bill that gives all the unredacted information to an independent monitor, one that is trustworthy, but whose identities are kept secret even, to redact to protect witnesses. Forget investigations. The only investigations they are doing are to protect the co conspirators of Epstein. Keep the id of the people redacting secret to prevent desperate rich powerful people from threatening them.
The other way is to leak it all, all of it, to multiple news organizations, and let them redact to protect victims. If some, like the New York Times, improperly redacts to protect their favorite rich guys, and Israel and their Israel connections, the other organizations that receive the leaks might not and the NYTimes would be exposed for what they are, less trustworthy than they were, less brave than they were, and in league with fascists in Israel even as they champion a final solution for millions of people.
We need a new bill that gives all the unredacted information to an independent monitor, one that is trustworthy, but whose identities are kept secret even, to redact to protect witnesses.
Maybe also add some personal penalties for failing to comply.
The difference is so stark. UK the guy hired someone two years ago who was in the files and fired him last year and they are asking for his resignation. Just for that. US guy is in the files multiple times and crickets.
Their goal is to smear victims and hide perpetrators.
Of course, that's why they redacted the perps and left victim's names unredacted which was also a warning to other women who had not come forward that they would not get any protection.
And...
Epstein and associates held a lot of sway over officials of many countries. Redacting those foreign officials gives the US control over that leverage.
I'm not sure why this never comes up in articles.
It doesn't give the US control, it gives a specific cohort of misanthropic scumbags leverage to accomplish their misanthropic scumbag agenda.
There is no good reason to redact this information. Giving extra ammunition to the class of people that has been fighting to the nail to cover this all up is in no way a benefit.
It gives Israel continued control over everyone in the files not the US.
Think lots of people who grew up around sexual predators understands this, they see the victims as vindictive and ungrateful, in their minds they did nothing wrong. They always twist their actions to be the fault of the victim, so releasing information to hurt the victims is 100% predictable.
did you expect anything less?
Paid for by our votes and tax dollars.
We're so stupid!
Why can't they just tell us who they are?
I believe, and I may be wrong, that they can say it on record in Congress and not get sued for it.
I'm hoping they'll lay it all bare given that opportunity.
Firstly, it doesn't matter how prominent a person is.
Secondly if any person is so stupid to allow their picture to be taken with Epstein, etc, then they absolutely deserve to be named and shamed for that stupidity.
I think it does. It matters MORE the more prominent they are.
In a version of this timeline where no one has a good guess for any of these, you'd wanna know about the prominent ones first. They're easier to catch, typically.
But since we're in a much worse timeline that doesn't necessarily apply. But in general it matters more, so something can be done about their influence in the meantime. Not to change punishments, but to stop further harm.
Prominent pedophiles
FTFY
I think the whole country assumed it before the lawmakers alleged it.
Wait, are you telling me that releasing the files with the email senders redacted but the victims names unredacted was to protect the assholes and not the victims?!
I'm shocked! SHOCKED I say!
There are enough breadcrumbs within the 3 mil pdfs to accurately deduce the identities of these [redacted] individuals
well how about we dont. They should account.
What is difficult for them to understand that the only ones that should be protected in the files are the victims.
Exactly that is difficult to understand for them. Because they don't care about the Victims, they only care for the ~~offende~~... themselves
this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2026
412 points (99.8% liked)
News
35668 readers
3588 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