this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2025
642 points (100.0% liked)

politics

24814 readers
2244 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
 

https://archive.is/G8oPw

All but one Republican voted to NOT release the Epstein Files. What are they hiding and why are they protecting child rapists?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 127 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

And if you don’t believe the probability that occured… he admitted on daytime television that he was attracted to his own daughter!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

There are pics of trump and Ivanka that make people in Alabama uncomfortable...

[–] [email protected] 59 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Huh. That's weird.

Now just WHY would the Gang of Pedos be going out of their way to protect pedos? So strange, I thought they were the party that was going to get to the bottom of Qanon and release "the storm" on pedos, which were all presumed to be Democrats?

pikachu_face.jpg here

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (3 children)

On the one hand, yeah, shady as fuck from Republicans. On the other hand, the Dems could have pushed this during Biden's term. I doubt that Epstein was adding more names to his ledger after being dead for a few years. I actually do feel like this is a "both sides issue", and we would be better if this shit landed on both sides of the aisle so we have easy identification of the targets to clean up.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 days ago

Democrats didn't release the files for the same reason Trump didn't. It doesn't even have to be that prominent democrats were on that island (although it's safe to say they were) it just takes a few CEO's and other financiers of our current government to say "Nah, kill that" and it will NEVER see the light of day.

We are constantly losing sight of what all of this is really about and who's really in power here. They want us screaming about Dems versus Republicans in this WWE theater spectacle so we don't start a class-war. And it's worked perfectly.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well, only one side voted the measure down.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

Only one side was dumb enough to draw a bunch of attention to it when it was their guy (who is definitely on the list) is president.

Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 102 points 3 days ago

Either way, this only works in the Democrats favor. Now the crazy MAGAts have more people to be pissed at and not vote for.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

Gross Old Pedos

[–] [email protected] 39 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why is it not expected that they'll release a document that says:

My Clients

Hilary Clinton Bill Clinton Taylor Swift Hillary Clinton Obama Rosie O Donnell Joe Biden Laughing Kamala Abrego Garcia

By Jeffery Epstein

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You forgot to add Hillary Clinton, and it's Barack HUSSEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNN Obama

[–] [email protected] 46 points 3 days ago

House Republicans want to rape your kids too.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 3 days ago (2 children)

What happened: The House Rules Committee, which prepares legislation for votes on the House floor, voted 5 to 6 against attaching Khanna's amendment to a procedural measure related to the GENIUS Act and a defense funding bill.

Republicans said the amendment was not pertinent to the GENIUS Act, which would create the first regulatory framework for stablecoins, or the defense funding bill.

I hope the next step is one page bill to vote on and not an amendment to an unrelated bill.

I feel like this amendment gives Republicans full cover since they can just say, "It was an unrelated amendment" and they'd be right.

Just the other day Rep Khanna tweeted,

On Tuesday, I'm introducing an amendment to force a vote demanding the FULL Epstein files be released to the public. The Speaker must call a vote & put every Congress member on record.

But had this amendment passed it would not have put every Congress member on record. Had this amendment passed Congress would have been voting on the "GENIUS Act" and defense funding bill.

We would have been in the EXACT same situation as we JUST had with the "Big Beautiful Bill". People voting for it and then saying, "Oh, but I don't agree with it."

Had his amendment passed Democrats could then vote against the bill by saying, "The GENIUS Act and defense spending bill are terrible pieces of legislation. I also want the list released, but I couldn't vote for this bill for other reasons."

And yes, a one page bill that says to release the files would never actually get a congressional vote. The Speaker of the House would never bring it for a vote. Some procedural nonsense would block it. BUT make those fuckers defend their decision.

Just because Democrats are in the minority doesn't mean they have to give up at the slightest inconvenience. Push this hard. You've found a weak spot, hit back! Push Republicans. Fuck, push Democrats if you have to.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Do the dems really want these released or is it just a pretend game from both sides?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

oh sweet child, thinking Democrats will act while they have absolutely zero power to yield expecting different results.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Not to throw gas on the fire, but as an outsider, why didn’t Biden release those files in the 4 years he was president?

[–] [email protected] 41 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It's not usual procedure for evidence to be released to the public, and both Biden and his pick for the DoJ, Merrick Garland, were unimaginative precedent-driven ghouls who wouldn't take a piss if it didn't have a court case and bipartisan agreement in the past five years authorizing it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago

Because the "high road" and "Moral Victories" were the primary focus of his presidency. He made absolutely no effort to curtail and obvious dictator coming to power save for "pre-emptive" pardons on the people that were trying. So releasing the Epstein files was contradictory to his style of leadership which is not what we needed. I am not anti-biden, but I really am disappointed that he kept stepping on every land mine the donvict laid out for him as if on purpose sometimes.

[–] morphballganon 7 points 3 days ago

47's tenure might make you forget a few things about how presidencies are supposed to work. Releasing evidence is not something the president does, typically.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

There are Democrats on the list also. Neither party wants this shit to actually come out.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Public deserves to see ALL who are on it, both parties. Burn them all.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

I agree with you, I just don't expect it to happen.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Not saying this happened under Biden, but why would those files be released when they could be used to prosecute those in there? It was the Republicans and more specific MAGA pushing for a release and making it an election topic. At least for me (European), the list, if it exists in this form, is something you base investigations on. You gain nothing from releasing it to the public. But Republicans used it to feed their fringe conspiracy voter base, so the question is not exactly "why don't they release it", but rather "why don't they release it after talking about it for years and then putting the radio hosts who talked about it into key administration positions just to after claiming the files are on their desk stating that they don't actually exist while simultaneously damaging people on release". And it's not like any potential list came up during Biden's admin. Epstein was arrested and died under Trump.

I'd also think that some people have some kind of Dead Man Switch for releasing the relevant documents (if they exist).

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I actually think it should be released publicly. There will be no justice without transparency. The people involved are to powerful to expect it to be handled justly.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Personally, I'm not a fan of vigilante justice, regardless of the crime, and this is certainly what this would lead to. But the big scandal is actually that there seemed to be no investigation into people apart from Epstein and Maxwell; this is the question people should be asking in my opinion: why has nobody else been prosecuted?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Fear of a domino effect? One person rats on another. Suddenly, you got a whole bunch of powerful people in trouble. I just wish someone would leak it. How is everyone who comes in contact with this list okay with it? Like not one person is like "what the fuck?" It boggles my mind.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Generally neither am I. But I also feel no laws should protect the ultra wealthy, especially when the crimes are global. Somebody must take the powerful down and it isn’t going to be the powerful.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I guess that makes sense, use them to build a case, which just got derailed when trump took over remember Elon said Trump was in the filles which indicates he saw them. They probably got dodged into a shredder

[–] [email protected] 32 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

Do not fear, pilgrim. I shall enlighten you on the ways of our LORD.

You see, the LORD knows that his agents require compensation for their holy work. Therefore, God proactively created children to serve his most worthy agents, and thus, serve the LORD! It would be an honor to be chosen for such a holy task.

The Republicans understand Epstein's holy mission, and wish to see it upheld. Such is why Epstein was smited by the hand of God when he turned his back on God's light. No treason shall be tolerated in the eyes of the LORD.

It is the Devil who wants such children freed from their duty. To distract such children from their holy task exudes the grave sin of sloth. We must stand firm against such demonic influence if God's Plan is to succeed.

Please be aware that I am roleplaying as a evangelical whackjob in this comment. Sometimes obviously fake comments are taken as truth.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

You know some people say Mary (mother of Jesus) was raped by a priest, as a young girl. Hence the "divine conception". You could be uncomfortably close to historical truth.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Such is why Epstein was smited by the hand of God when he turned his back on God’s light. No treason shall be tolerated in the eyes of the LORD.

And the LORD will also make sure the guards are asleep and the recordings are erased at just the right time so that none may witness the the LORD'S justice and have proof, because one must have faith and proof denies faith.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What is the name of your religion and how can I make sure my loved ones never join it?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago

That would be the Prosperity Gospel, the one true Gospel penned by the LORD himself, and etched into our very minds! God's approval is directly tied to your wealth - it is entirely possible for you to pay your way into Heaven! And that's not even getting into the Earthly pleasures of being one of God's favored!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 days ago

The Big Beautiful Bill also bundled a bunch of unrelated things, and that still got GOP votes.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

Every Democratic candidate should make that a specific focus of their campaign marketing - that their opponent voted AGAINST releasing the Epstein Files, juxtaposed with any statements they may have made demanding that they be released.

And if it's an incumbent Democrat, claim that their opponent is a vicious hard core MAGA, and they definitely would have voted for against the release.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 days ago (2 children)

That's not remotely surprising, but I would like to know how many Democrats voted no.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 days ago

None. All 4 Democrats on the committee voted in favor. It wasn't a floor vote, it was an amendment to a crypto bill in committee.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 days ago

Since it was the kiddie diddler supporters were going to vote against to block the bill, I'd be surprised if any Democrat switched votes cause there was nothing to gain from doing so.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

Amazing how shocked people are by this.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

Well of course they did. They're all on the list. So are their donors.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

Most people do not follow the minutia of government and will not even know any of this happened.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sometimes I wonder if the one voter just didn’t get the memo how their team was voting. Like bro just go with it like you meant to do it.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

In situations like this where it clearly won't matter, I've always seen it as basically a token vote that they pass around to whoever's turn it is. Everybody on the team gets a few votes throughout their term where they can vote against something that will pass anyway and then they can turn around later when their constituents are mad about whatever and just say "but remember? I voted against that thing you hated!"

I could of course be completely wrong but it just seems like the math just barely works out in the majority party's favor way too much to be a coincidence.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)
load more comments
view more: next ›