I trust the reporting of the nypost and USA Today like I trust cnn…. Until it comes from another published news outlet I could trust and no not fox something else… I have seen what they have done to Trumps photos…. No trust there…
But I did not say anything about his way of thinking just we know you can’t trust a lot of these news outlets they lie straight out…. cnn for one does….
The Clintons and the Trumps were actually very close friends at one time (heck Ivanka had mentioned in an interview when she was pregnant with her 2nd or 3rd child that Chelsea was the first friend she told).
My guess is that Bill and Donald have lots of dirt on each other and there is a Cold War type agreement of “I won’t rat you out if you don’t rat me out” and, at this point, Trump has much more to lose than Bill. Does anyone really CARE what Bill does or says these days? Yeah, might be a big news story and embarrassing but he is not in office or has to worry about being politically toxic to those around him.
I can’t get past anything that refers to a man in a bathing suit as “half naked”. That’s exactly the right amount of clothing for a hot tub or any kind of pool, regardless of sexual context. Totally disingenuous reporting to phrase it that way.
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. How-do-I-get-user-flair
What else is there to say? For thirty plus years the victims have only accused Epstein and Maxwell. The victims are happy about the new documents, why isn’t the left?
What is the left unhappy about? If anything, the article you linked says that democrats are unhappy because the DOJ has violated the law by not releasing all the documents by the stated timeline and also making redactions without explanations or for reasons other than protecting victims. The only thing I’ve seen from the left is that they are mad at the DOJ because they want more information than what the DOJ gave (as required by law). But maybe I just am unaware of other stances that you have seen?
There are two reasons why this “incongruence” isn’t what you’re making it out to be.
1) The victim’s statements of happiness, per your own source, do not communicate that she is now fully content with the overall state of the documents’ release. Your article says that a report that she had made to the FBI about Epstein’s crimes finally made it into the light of day. She had spent so long feeling bothered that her efforts to bring Epstein to justice had gone ignored, and now that particular document’s release (I’m sure in addition to the dam beginning to break on all the other documents that have been released so far) is helping her to feel “redeemed.” But not only that, here’s an article that shows that Farmer signed a letter along with other Epstein victims expressing discontent over how the DOJ has not followed the law:
I wonder what she would say if she read your comment and its implication of her overall opinion that she and democrats are somehow at odds.
EDIT: I wonder what not only Farmer but the other victims would say if they saw your comment. You said “the victims are happy,” though there are clearly multiple feelings. They’re happy that the dam is breaking, and they’re angry that the DOJ is trying to hold the dam together.
2) Even if she was fully content with the state of the release as it is right now and did not want any more documents to be released, that doesn’t make it right. You gave one context-devoid (or context-ignoring) example of a survivor being “happy,” and you ignored all the other survivors (including your own example) that are angry with the DOJ for not following the law. Now that Clinton’s photos appeared in the current release a bunch, are you content with leaving all the redacted co-conspirators unnamed, thinking, “that’s it, we got him, a victim said that she’s happy, no need for anything more?”
That’s not what the NYT article says and even if it did, nobody trusts them anymore, they are fake news. In this situation where victims are involved, I listen to them only. Everything else is noise. Remember Epstein was close with our government since the 1980s. If he was protected since then, and he’s dead, nothing else will come out.
That is what the NYT article says; I read it myself (although now it’s asking me to subscribe to read it, and I’m not a subscriber). It says that victims wrote and signed a letter of discontent with the DOJ’s release (the lead writer had to remove angry swear words to make it more professional) and want Congress to hold the DOJ accountable.
Here’s another article saying similar stuff. Just Google this instead of saying that the victims are happy and that’s the end of that.
You said that one of the victims was happy and that’s the democrats aren’t, which must mean that they have incongruent intentions about the files and their release.
I showed you how there is a group of victims that are unhappy with how the DOJ is not in compliance with the law regarding the files, a group of victims that includes the one you brought up. You only claimed that my source is unreliable instead of looking up other sources with corroborating info, so I gave you another one.
Your response to that was “you must not understand the law.” Are you saying that the DOJ is actually in compliance with the law?
YouTube search “Epstein victims interview”. I will only listen to them directly.
Do this, imagine you were a victim. How do you put someone in jail? What is step 1,2,3? Once you answer this you’ll understand why these article are nonsense.
The victims said on Friday they felt relief, and now yesterday more than a dozen survivors, Maria Farmer included, signed a letter saying they were displeased with how the files were being released and what was being held back — along with demanding Congress act.
Your original question/point was “The victims are happy about the new documents; why isn’t the left?” I showed you how they are not, in fact happy (this other person who joined the conversation gave you more sources for that, one of which was the same news outlet you used to claim that the victims are happy.
Now you’re claiming that multiple sources corroborating each others’ information is not enough; it has to be a video of them speaking words, even though you believed the original article you linked that was not a video. Here’s a video of two survivors talking about how they are frustrated with the way the DOJ has released files:
I am aware that you’re going to doubt a source like NBC, but the victims are there in that interview saying words from their mouths.
As far as the steps to putting someone in jail go, I saw what you said to the other commenter. Did you mean to imply that the victims have not accused anyone else or that the DOJ and FBI have done their jobs adequately? Because, in the article you shared way up in this thread, the reason that Farmer was happy was because a report she’d made (and gotten hung up on by the FBI) finally saw the light of day and was made public. She tried to get an indictment, and the FBI failed her. The survivors have also named other co-conspirators in lawsuits in which the documents have not been named public. Co-conspirators’ names were actually redacted in some of the released files. Are you really trying to put this blame on the victims?
And at the same time, that’s not anything close to what this conversation was actually about; you were trying to paint democrats as opposed to the survivors when they are in reality aligned in their frustration about the fact that the DOJ has broken the law and has provided far less information than they should have. That’s been debunked. No democrat is saying that the DOJ shouldn’t have produced any files; they’re saying that the DOJ is not being transparent or following the law and is actually hiding perpetrators, which is the same thing that the victims are saying.
I can tell. If you were a super powerful lawyer and wanted to help one of these victims prosecute someone, what victim would you call first and what person would you go after? And can you show me where this person accused this person – not Epstein.
James Commy was head of the FBI. He put Martha Stewart in jail and tried to bust Hilary Clinton (email) and Trump (Russiagate). He wouldn’t have ignored an opportunity to bust Bill Clinton.
James Commy was head of the FBI. He put Martha Stewart in jail and tried to bust Hilary Clinton (email) and Trump (Russiagate). He wouldn’t have ignored busting Bill Clinton, he craved these cases.
Yeah totally, that’s why Thomas Massie and Rho Khanna are calling for members to be impeached and prosecuted for not realeasing all the files. Massie said and I quote “there are at least 20 known figures in these cases that were not released in these files.” I know because I’ve spoken to victims of these abusers”. He discussed this heavily in a news interview on CBS yesterday.
Clinton obviously protected Epstein in the 90s. If there were documents about Clinton, those are long destroyed. You saw the link I shared? that was the 1990s.
I think this story is ancient. You saw my link, that lady had gone to the FBI in the 90s. I don’t know why Clinton had protected Epstein, but if there was evidence it’s long gone and destroyed.
QAnon and Trump didn’t emerge in isolation; they grew alongside and fed off the same ecosystem of narratives. The Epstein conspiracy became a kind of connective tissue that linked election denial, COVID conspiracies, and broader institutional distrust into a single worldview. That convergence is well documented, and it’s precisely why psychologists, sociologists, and political scientists are studying it.
What made it unique wasn’t just the content of the beliefs, but the scale and speed: social media amplification, real-world political power, and prolonged crisis conditions all reinforcing one another at once. That combination hadn’t really existed before in modern democracies.
So this isn’t some fringe idea or hindsight spin; it’s already being examined as a case study in mass belief formation, radicalization, and information cascades under stress.
Dude if they just released the documents this would all be over. We literally got a 100+ page document that was fully redacted plus countless other documents that are so heavily redacted you can't tell anything from them. You wonder why people still don't trust this? Why would they need to redact a full 100 page document?
So we are back to the same question. Why not release the documents? I keep being told there is nothing there, but they keep hiding the stuff for some reason. I want this to be over as much as the next person and the only way to do it is to release the documents where they aren't redacted to hell.
Trump said he'd release all the files, put on a show with the first phase of files, then came out and called Republicans stupid for asking he release the rest, suddenly there was no list. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but dang, how can you not add up those events and think, "hmm, this doesn't make sense, feels like they're hiding something..."
When there is a sense that someone is trying to hide something, it is only reasonable for the public to suspect a conspiracy. Lots of members of the current administration clamored for the release of the files during the electoral campaign, only to suddenly reverse their stance when the public actually handed them the authority to release the files. Strange behavior, won't you agree? If these guys didn't pivot, simply released the files for all to see that there was nothing there, then everyone could have just moved on. But they started hiding and obfuscating.
The purpose of this sub is to ask conservatives. Comments between users without conservative flair are not allowed (except inside of our Weekly General Chat thread). Please keep discussions focused on asking conservatives questions and understanding conservatism. Thank you.
You keep pointing to the DOJ OPR report as if it’s some kind of definitive proof that there was no broader wrongdoing or network. That’s not what the report says, and more importantly, that’s not what the report was designed to determine.
The OPR report is a narrow internal ethics review of how federal prosecutors handled the 2006–2008 plea deal. Its only mandate was to decide whether DOJ attorneys violated professional responsibility rules. It does not investigate Epstein’s full criminal activity, does not examine his associates, and does not attempt to map out who else may have been involved.
If this is the report you are referring to then based upon all your responses using it as a "proof" of anything you claim, I highly doubt you have actually read the whole thing
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. How-do-I-get-user-flair
If he goes all in on Clinton that's pretty damning on himself also... Trump and Clinton were friends (maybe still are).
There is a lot of really shitty behavior from many parties concerning this... it wasn't just Epstein by himself, he had a lot of people running interreference for him and supporting him.
This isn't psychosis...this stuff happened. Alex Acosta gave Epstein a wildly good (yet extremely questionable and unprofessional) plea deal in Florida with "immunity for unnamed co-conspirators" and you think it's psychosis to want to know what the hell was going on?
This horrible dude gets to become the Secretary of Labor and serves under President Trump.... who has no connection to Epstein whatsoever, right?
Seriously... why don't you want to know what's going on?
Alex Acosta gave Epstein a wildly good (yet extremely questionable and unprofessional) plea deal in Florida with "immunity for unnamed co-conspirators" and you think it's psychosis to want to know what the hell was going on?
That wasn't the contemporary sentiment. When it happened very few people thought it was a favorable plea deal. If it wasn't for Acosta Epstein probably would have walked free.
He pled rape of minors and trafficking down to a single charge of soliciting a prostitute and his "incarceration" was a sleep away camp where he got to hang out all day in his own office without supervision. They had testimony from over 50 victims. Everyone associated was given preemptive immunity so they could not be asked to testify. How was that not favorable?
Where are you getting this? He hid the plea deal from the victims and his office actively lied to them about it. Epstein's lawyers were threatening victims at the time too. When it was reviewed in 2020 by Trump's DOJ (when it was not whacky) they said the deal wasn't good judgement.
TBH -
That wasn't the contemporary sentiment. When it happened very few people thought it was a favorable plea deal. If it wasn't for Acosta Epstein probably would have walked free.
Given that Epstein had so much support from powerful people I'd give this very little to any credibility. The FBI even ignored reports on Epstein. It's truly horrendous levels of corruptions around a guy raping children and we're cool just letting it go?
Read the DOJ OPR report. Again, hindsight makes it seem like bad judgement but that was not the prevailing sentiment at the time. It was a Palm Beach DA investigation that was going so poorly Acosta stepped to back stop it and make sure something would happen to him. The laws around sex trafficking as it pertains to the case were new and novel when this was happening, there was very low confidence about a major conviction.
I don't know how to make you understand, but Epstein worked the media and he had truly evil lawyers.
The "prevailing sentiment" was likely Epstein putting pressure on the prosecutors.
Also given your whole point why this?
The plea deal waived "federal prosecution in the Southern District of Florida of [Epstein], four named co-conspirators, and 'any potential co-conspirators.'"
Are you actually saying the case was so weak that they had to give immunity to any potential co-conspirators?
WHAT?
I guess the prevailing conservative view is that this is cool.
The prevailing conservative view is that you allowed yourself to fall victim to conspiracy theory about a global sex trafficking cabal and cannot handle or acknowledge anything to the contrary.
The release of the Epstein files shouldn’t be a left vs right topic. As an American you deserve to know the truth, but that is currently hidden behind hundreds of blacked out pages.
It's the same thing he said in the same 2 second clip that progressives clipped out of context and have been holding up claiming it as though that clip constituted a campaign promise.
Mainstream and social media is going to run wild with speculation and ruin a lot of people's names and reputations over nothing.
"Gee, why is the guy who has been thrown to the lions in the court of public opinion without a shred of proof for the last decade defending someone who is currently being thrown to the lions in the court of public opinionwithout a shred of proof?"
All we're going to see for the next few weeks is that people didn't really want "the files" out of any sense of justice, but solely for the opportunity to shit on the other side of the political aisle. Hope they're happy.
Sorry but the groundswell behind getting these out was exclusively partisan and coming from the MAGA cohort. It's an act of intellectual dishonesty and bad faith to now claim this is the mainstream media spearheading all this.
defending someone who is currently being thrown to the lions in the court of public opinion* *without a shred of proof?"
I mean. why is this happening now? during the 2024 campaign Trump had a very different attitude about this, calling out Clinton directly for being involved with this. what changed?
Wow, it's almost like campaign promises are just whatever it takes to get elected and not actually serious. Who would have thought? That never happens.
Who is talking about promises? I'm talking about the fact that Trump attacked Clinton for being close to Epstein and going to the island, openly suggesting that he was involved in Epstein's activities. Now he completely changed his tune, saying exactly the opposite. That's not a broken promise, just a 180 degree turn. Why do you think this changed that drastically? Any theory?
I want the files for justice, which includes shitting on pedophiles. I couldn't care less about their politics because I'm a real human with a real human brain that doesn't treat politics like sports.
The general public isn't involved in delivering justice. What you actually want is vigilante mob antics where people's lives are destroyed based on unproven conjecture.
If you say so. Let's prove it by getting the files, unredacted, into the correct hands. The correct hands would be any adult that isn't actively betraying their principles, beliefs, or the duties of their office, that has the power to prosecute any wrongdoing found in the files.
I think that eliminates the majority of the people in government today, Left or Right, unfortunately. Maybe that's why this is coming down to people just want blood over this. The amount of coverup is so thick its making the Clinton's blush.
A lot of the files weren't redacted properly and you can copy and then paste the redactions.
I've looked through a few dozen of the redacted files and so far they all been the Epstein estate sending a fuck ton of money to victims. It shows their names, amount of money, banks used, etc.
Only a matter of time until something very incriminating comes to light.
Please use Good Faith and the Principle of Charity when commenting. Gender issues are currently under a moratorium, and posts and comments along those lines may be removed. Anti-semitism and calls for violence will not be tolerated, especially when discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I trust the reporting of the nypost and USA Today like I trust cnn…. Until it comes from another published news outlet I could trust and no not fox something else… I have seen what they have done to Trumps photos…. No trust there…
Like which?
Something not left leaning if you are asking a conservative, or are you just down voting conservatives answers….
Trump's greatest trick was to convince others that he and only the news outlets he approves of are the only way to get trusted sources of information
But I did not say anything about his way of thinking just we know you can’t trust a lot of these news outlets they lie straight out…. cnn for one does….
[removed]
Your post was automatically removed because top-level comments are for conservative / right-wing users only.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Birds of a feather fly together.
The Clintons and the Trumps were actually very close friends at one time (heck Ivanka had mentioned in an interview when she was pregnant with her 2nd or 3rd child that Chelsea was the first friend she told).
My guess is that Bill and Donald have lots of dirt on each other and there is a Cold War type agreement of “I won’t rat you out if you don’t rat me out” and, at this point, Trump has much more to lose than Bill. Does anyone really CARE what Bill does or says these days? Yeah, might be a big news story and embarrassing but he is not in office or has to worry about being politically toxic to those around him.
From what I have seen other than deep party loyalists, basically nobody on the left cares if Bill goes down for it
(unless he is the only one, or the only people named are people on the left)
I can’t get past anything that refers to a man in a bathing suit as “half naked”. That’s exactly the right amount of clothing for a hot tub or any kind of pool, regardless of sexual context. Totally disingenuous reporting to phrase it that way.
Can you get past the claim that a b-job does not constitute sexual relations? ;-)
A bathing suit is closer to "completely naked" than "half naked" anyway. So the media is going light on it, if anything. ;-P
https://youtu.be/j4XT-l-_3y0?si=24qYA1NKMsvNfeut
This comment reminds me of this old Onion video lol lol
Disingenuous doesn't even begin to describe the "Epstein files" reporting.
[removed]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. How-do-I-get-user-flair
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Not surprised honestly. Trump and the Clintons used to be extremely close friends prior to 2016 and I'm pretty sure him and Bill still are.
What else is there to say? For thirty plus years the victims have only accused Epstein and Maxwell. The victims are happy about the new documents, why isn’t the left?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/epstein-survivor-lauds-even-partial-release-of-files-i-feel-redeemed/ar-AA1SJj6u?ocid=BingNewsSerp
What is the left unhappy about? If anything, the article you linked says that democrats are unhappy because the DOJ has violated the law by not releasing all the documents by the stated timeline and also making redactions without explanations or for reasons other than protecting victims. The only thing I’ve seen from the left is that they are mad at the DOJ because they want more information than what the DOJ gave (as required by law). But maybe I just am unaware of other stances that you have seen?
The victim is happy, and the democrats are not. You don’t see the incongruence?
There are two reasons why this “incongruence” isn’t what you’re making it out to be.
1) The victim’s statements of happiness, per your own source, do not communicate that she is now fully content with the overall state of the documents’ release. Your article says that a report that she had made to the FBI about Epstein’s crimes finally made it into the light of day. She had spent so long feeling bothered that her efforts to bring Epstein to justice had gone ignored, and now that particular document’s release (I’m sure in addition to the dam beginning to break on all the other documents that have been released so far) is helping her to feel “redeemed.” But not only that, here’s an article that shows that Farmer signed a letter along with other Epstein victims expressing discontent over how the DOJ has not followed the law:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/22/business/epstein-victims-justice-dept-files-released.html
I wonder what she would say if she read your comment and its implication of her overall opinion that she and democrats are somehow at odds.
EDIT: I wonder what not only Farmer but the other victims would say if they saw your comment. You said “the victims are happy,” though there are clearly multiple feelings. They’re happy that the dam is breaking, and they’re angry that the DOJ is trying to hold the dam together.
2) Even if she was fully content with the state of the release as it is right now and did not want any more documents to be released, that doesn’t make it right. You gave one context-devoid (or context-ignoring) example of a survivor being “happy,” and you ignored all the other survivors (including your own example) that are angry with the DOJ for not following the law. Now that Clinton’s photos appeared in the current release a bunch, are you content with leaving all the redacted co-conspirators unnamed, thinking, “that’s it, we got him, a victim said that she’s happy, no need for anything more?”
That’s not what the NYT article says and even if it did, nobody trusts them anymore, they are fake news. In this situation where victims are involved, I listen to them only. Everything else is noise. Remember Epstein was close with our government since the 1980s. If he was protected since then, and he’s dead, nothing else will come out.
That is what the NYT article says; I read it myself (although now it’s asking me to subscribe to read it, and I’m not a subscriber). It says that victims wrote and signed a letter of discontent with the DOJ’s release (the lead writer had to remove angry swear words to make it more professional) and want Congress to hold the DOJ accountable.
Here’s another article saying similar stuff. Just Google this instead of saying that the victims are happy and that’s the end of that.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cwyk526vlnlt?post=asset%3Ae8f99ec6-1111-40bb-9064-b490cc05e776
You can view the NYT with this:
https://archive.is/20251222231900/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/22/business/epstein-victims-justice-dept-files-released.html
You must not understand the law.
I’m so confused.
You said that one of the victims was happy and that’s the democrats aren’t, which must mean that they have incongruent intentions about the files and their release.
I showed you how there is a group of victims that are unhappy with how the DOJ is not in compliance with the law regarding the files, a group of victims that includes the one you brought up. You only claimed that my source is unreliable instead of looking up other sources with corroborating info, so I gave you another one.
Your response to that was “you must not understand the law.” Are you saying that the DOJ is actually in compliance with the law?
YouTube search “Epstein victims interview”. I will only listen to them directly.
Do this, imagine you were a victim. How do you put someone in jail? What is step 1,2,3? Once you answer this you’ll understand why these article are nonsense.
The victims said on Friday they felt relief, and now yesterday more than a dozen survivors, Maria Farmer included, signed a letter saying they were displeased with how the files were being released and what was being held back — along with demanding Congress act.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/12/22/epstein-files-redactions-survivors/87883469007/
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/is-this-the-best-government-can-do-victims-slam-epstein-files-release/ar-AA1SKvwf
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/22/business/epstein-victims-justice-dept-files-released.html?unlocked_article_code=1.-08.oGVR.PsAAfrtukK4K&smid=url-share
If you want to listen to the victims directly, make sure you're listening to ALL of what they say.
Your original question/point was “The victims are happy about the new documents; why isn’t the left?” I showed you how they are not, in fact happy (this other person who joined the conversation gave you more sources for that, one of which was the same news outlet you used to claim that the victims are happy.
Now you’re claiming that multiple sources corroborating each others’ information is not enough; it has to be a video of them speaking words, even though you believed the original article you linked that was not a video. Here’s a video of two survivors talking about how they are frustrated with the way the DOJ has released files:
https://youtu.be/mPT3lt9M41o
I am aware that you’re going to doubt a source like NBC, but the victims are there in that interview saying words from their mouths.
As far as the steps to putting someone in jail go, I saw what you said to the other commenter. Did you mean to imply that the victims have not accused anyone else or that the DOJ and FBI have done their jobs adequately? Because, in the article you shared way up in this thread, the reason that Farmer was happy was because a report she’d made (and gotten hung up on by the FBI) finally saw the light of day and was made public. She tried to get an indictment, and the FBI failed her. The survivors have also named other co-conspirators in lawsuits in which the documents have not been named public. Co-conspirators’ names were actually redacted in some of the released files. Are you really trying to put this blame on the victims?
And at the same time, that’s not anything close to what this conversation was actually about; you were trying to paint democrats as opposed to the survivors when they are in reality aligned in their frustration about the fact that the DOJ has broken the law and has provided far less information than they should have. That’s been debunked. No democrat is saying that the DOJ shouldn’t have produced any files; they’re saying that the DOJ is not being transparent or following the law and is actually hiding perpetrators, which is the same thing that the victims are saying.
One victim out of an alleged 1,200 says she feels redeemed. This is not the same as “the victims are happy”.
H sure sure sure, the 1200 that nobody has heard about for 30 years. They better speak up.
You realise that the figure of “over 1,200 victims” is coming from the current justice department, right?
Sure sure sure, well they better call the police. 30 years is a long time to wait. The statute of limitations isn’t very long.
I don’t even understand what argument you are making here.
I can tell. If you were a super powerful lawyer and wanted to help one of these victims prosecute someone, what victim would you call first and what person would you go after? And can you show me where this person accused this person – not Epstein.
Do you not think all the redactions of info that wasn't told to be redacted is curious?
James Commy was head of the FBI. He put Martha Stewart in jail and tried to bust Hilary Clinton (email) and Trump (Russiagate). He wouldn’t have ignored an opportunity to bust Bill Clinton.
Weird how the FBI was looking into ten co conspirators then huh?
James Commy was head of the FBI. He put Martha Stewart in jail and tried to bust Hilary Clinton (email) and Trump (Russiagate). He wouldn’t have ignored busting Bill Clinton, he craved these cases.
[removed]
Oof. It's amazing how consistently spectacularly uninformed you people are when you come here to berate us with your scary superior knowledge.
Chauntae Davies was 21 years old when she first met Epstein.
Sarah Ransome was recruited into Jeffrey Epstein's network when she was 22
Alicia Arden, says she was sexually by Epstein when she was 28
Liz Stein was a 21-year-old intern at a luxury department store when she was introduced to Ghislaine Maxwell.
etc...
Ask all the judges, FBI, the police, and for 30 years the victims have only Accused Epstein and Maxwell. This is an old story.
Yeah totally, that’s why Thomas Massie and Rho Khanna are calling for members to be impeached and prosecuted for not realeasing all the files. Massie said and I quote “there are at least 20 known figures in these cases that were not released in these files.” I know because I’ve spoken to victims of these abusers”. He discussed this heavily in a news interview on CBS yesterday.
Clinton obviously protected Epstein in the 90s. If there were documents about Clinton, those are long destroyed. You saw the link I shared? that was the 1990s.
Thats not even remotely true. Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, jean-Luc Brunel, glenn dubin, marvin minsky etc etc
Clinton obviously protected Epstein in the 90s. If there were documents about Clinton, those are long destroyed.
https://youtu.be/R7i9KdVTFR4?si=8fLMLHtyeW8xU4Rm
We have a legal process in America that does not include podcasts.
You think the government is following the legal process of releasing the files?
I think this story is ancient. You saw my link, that lady had gone to the FBI in the 90s. I don’t know why Clinton had protected Epstein, but if there was evidence it’s long gone and destroyed.
Removed: Treat other users with civility and respect.
Personal attacks and stereotyping are not allowed.
Pretty measured response from Trump, he's right. The mass psychosis around this will probably end up being studied in psychology text books.
It actually has already started.
QAnon and Trump didn’t emerge in isolation; they grew alongside and fed off the same ecosystem of narratives. The Epstein conspiracy became a kind of connective tissue that linked election denial, COVID conspiracies, and broader institutional distrust into a single worldview. That convergence is well documented, and it’s precisely why psychologists, sociologists, and political scientists are studying it.
What made it unique wasn’t just the content of the beliefs, but the scale and speed: social media amplification, real-world political power, and prolonged crisis conditions all reinforcing one another at once. That combination hadn’t really existed before in modern democracies.
So this isn’t some fringe idea or hindsight spin; it’s already being examined as a case study in mass belief formation, radicalization, and information cascades under stress.
You can't fool everyone all of the time, but you can fool a good amount of people a good amount of the time.
Wasn’t he the one whipping up the “mass psychosis” on the campaign trail?
Dude if they just released the documents this would all be over. We literally got a 100+ page document that was fully redacted plus countless other documents that are so heavily redacted you can't tell anything from them. You wonder why people still don't trust this? Why would they need to redact a full 100 page document?
All anyone has to do is read the DOJ OPR report from 5 years ago and you'll learn pretty much everything there is to know.
So we are back to the same question. Why not release the documents? I keep being told there is nothing there, but they keep hiding the stuff for some reason. I want this to be over as much as the next person and the only way to do it is to release the documents where they aren't redacted to hell.
There is nothing we don't know already. People want there to be a conspiracy so badly that they will never be able to admit there isn't one.
Trump said he'd release all the files, put on a show with the first phase of files, then came out and called Republicans stupid for asking he release the rest, suddenly there was no list. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but dang, how can you not add up those events and think, "hmm, this doesn't make sense, feels like they're hiding something..."
When there is a sense that someone is trying to hide something, it is only reasonable for the public to suspect a conspiracy. Lots of members of the current administration clamored for the release of the files during the electoral campaign, only to suddenly reverse their stance when the public actually handed them the authority to release the files. Strange behavior, won't you agree? If these guys didn't pivot, simply released the files for all to see that there was nothing there, then everyone could have just moved on. But they started hiding and obfuscating.
Everything gets redacted. Literally hundreds of pages completely redacted.
You: "Nothing we don't know already."
Gosh I wish I had this level of trust in the government.
So what did Trump run on during his campaign? Because he seemingly was throwing everyone under the bus over these files up until he got into office.
[removed]
Warning: Rule 5.
The purpose of this sub is to ask conservatives. Comments between users without conservative flair are not allowed (except inside of our Weekly General Chat thread). Please keep discussions focused on asking conservatives questions and understanding conservatism. Thank you.
You keep pointing to the DOJ OPR report as if it’s some kind of definitive proof that there was no broader wrongdoing or network. That’s not what the report says, and more importantly, that’s not what the report was designed to determine.
The OPR report is a narrow internal ethics review of how federal prosecutors handled the 2006–2008 plea deal. Its only mandate was to decide whether DOJ attorneys violated professional responsibility rules. It does not investigate Epstein’s full criminal activity, does not examine his associates, and does not attempt to map out who else may have been involved.
If this is the report you are referring to then based upon all your responses using it as a "proof" of anything you claim, I highly doubt you have actually read the whole thing
https://www.justice.gov/multimedia/DOJ%20Disclosures/Memos.%20%26%20Correspondence/2020.11%20DOJ%20Office%20of%20Professional%20Responsibility%20Report.pdf
It was Trump and mostly the right wing influencers that were hammering for the release of these files
[removed]
Your submission was removed because you do not have any user flair. Please select appropriate flair and then try again. If you are confused as to what flair suits you best simply choose right-wing, left-wing, or Independent. How-do-I-get-user-flair
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
If he goes all in on Clinton that's pretty damning on himself also... Trump and Clinton were friends (maybe still are).
There is a lot of really shitty behavior from many parties concerning this... it wasn't just Epstein by himself, he had a lot of people running interreference for him and supporting him.
This isn't psychosis...this stuff happened. Alex Acosta gave Epstein a wildly good (yet extremely questionable and unprofessional) plea deal in Florida with "immunity for unnamed co-conspirators" and you think it's psychosis to want to know what the hell was going on?
This horrible dude gets to become the Secretary of Labor and serves under President Trump.... who has no connection to Epstein whatsoever, right?
Seriously... why don't you want to know what's going on?
That wasn't the contemporary sentiment. When it happened very few people thought it was a favorable plea deal. If it wasn't for Acosta Epstein probably would have walked free.
He pled rape of minors and trafficking down to a single charge of soliciting a prostitute and his "incarceration" was a sleep away camp where he got to hang out all day in his own office without supervision. They had testimony from over 50 victims. Everyone associated was given preemptive immunity so they could not be asked to testify. How was that not favorable?
Did you not read why I said?
Can you tell me who thought it was a favorable deal?
Yeah and it makes no sense. It's just revisionist, "nothing to see here".
Where are you getting this? He hid the plea deal from the victims and his office actively lied to them about it. Epstein's lawyers were threatening victims at the time too. When it was reviewed in 2020 by Trump's DOJ (when it was not whacky) they said the deal wasn't good judgement.
TBH -
Given that Epstein had so much support from powerful people I'd give this very little to any credibility. The FBI even ignored reports on Epstein. It's truly horrendous levels of corruptions around a guy raping children and we're cool just letting it go?
Read the DOJ OPR report. Again, hindsight makes it seem like bad judgement but that was not the prevailing sentiment at the time. It was a Palm Beach DA investigation that was going so poorly Acosta stepped to back stop it and make sure something would happen to him. The laws around sex trafficking as it pertains to the case were new and novel when this was happening, there was very low confidence about a major conviction.
I don't know how to make you understand, but Epstein worked the media and he had truly evil lawyers.
The "prevailing sentiment" was likely Epstein putting pressure on the prosecutors.
Also given your whole point why this?
The plea deal waived "federal prosecution in the Southern District of Florida of [Epstein], four named co-conspirators, and 'any potential co-conspirators.'"
Are you actually saying the case was so weak that they had to give immunity to any potential co-conspirators?
WHAT?
I guess the prevailing conservative view is that this is cool.
The prevailing conservative view is that you allowed yourself to fall victim to conspiracy theory about a global sex trafficking cabal and cannot handle or acknowledge anything to the contrary.
Why did Trump run on that then?
[removed]
Removed: Treat other users with civility and respect.
Personal attacks and stereotyping are not allowed.
The release of the Epstein files shouldn’t be a left vs right topic. As an American you deserve to know the truth, but that is currently hidden behind hundreds of blacked out pages.
At this point, even if they released everything there will be people forever arguing that's not all of it.
The true crime mania in this country has caused nationwide brainrot. Nobody is psychologically capable of acknowledging their priors might be wrong.
Maybe you guys shouldn’t have elected a conspiracy theorist?
Maybe multiple of Trump’s cabinet members shouldn’t have made promises they couldn’t keep if they wanted to avoid this.
It's the same thing he said in the same 2 second clip that progressives clipped out of context and have been holding up claiming it as though that clip constituted a campaign promise.
Mainstream and social media is going to run wild with speculation and ruin a lot of people's names and reputations over nothing.
"Gee, why is the guy who has been thrown to the lions in the court of public opinion without a shred of proof for the last decade defending someone who is currently being thrown to the lions in the court of public opinion without a shred of proof?"
All we're going to see for the next few weeks is that people didn't really want "the files" out of any sense of justice, but solely for the opportunity to shit on the other side of the political aisle. Hope they're happy.
Sorry but the groundswell behind getting these out was exclusively partisan and coming from the MAGA cohort. It's an act of intellectual dishonesty and bad faith to now claim this is the mainstream media spearheading all this.
I mean. why is this happening now? during the 2024 campaign Trump had a very different attitude about this, calling out Clinton directly for being involved with this. what changed?
Wow, it's almost like campaign promises are just whatever it takes to get elected and not actually serious. Who would have thought? That never happens.
Who is talking about promises? I'm talking about the fact that Trump attacked Clinton for being close to Epstein and going to the island, openly suggesting that he was involved in Epstein's activities. Now he completely changed his tune, saying exactly the opposite. That's not a broken promise, just a 180 degree turn. Why do you think this changed that drastically? Any theory?
Yeah guys, let's just be ok with being lied to by Diaper Daddy.
I want the files for justice, which includes shitting on pedophiles. I couldn't care less about their politics because I'm a real human with a real human brain that doesn't treat politics like sports.
The general public isn't involved in delivering justice. What you actually want is vigilante mob antics where people's lives are destroyed based on unproven conjecture.
If you say so. Let's prove it by getting the files, unredacted, into the correct hands. The correct hands would be any adult that isn't actively betraying their principles, beliefs, or the duties of their office, that has the power to prosecute any wrongdoing found in the files.
I think that eliminates the majority of the people in government today, Left or Right, unfortunately. Maybe that's why this is coming down to people just want blood over this. The amount of coverup is so thick its making the Clinton's blush.
Check out the Epstein subreddit.
A lot of the files weren't redacted properly and you can copy and then paste the redactions.
I've looked through a few dozen of the redacted files and so far they all been the Epstein estate sending a fuck ton of money to victims. It shows their names, amount of money, banks used, etc.
Only a matter of time until something very incriminating comes to light.
This might make sense if Trump himself hadn't been throwing Bill Clinton to the lions lol.