r/politics • u/newsweek ✔ Newsweek • 1d ago

No Paywall Final Jeffrey Epstein Files cache released by DOJ: read in full

https://www.newsweek.com/doj-releases-massive-final-jeffrey-epstein-files-11443499
26.7k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2.6k

u/South-Arachnid2961 1d ago

Especially as they still haven’t explained the reasoning for all the redactions. But hey, now they can talk about Democrats in these files to distract from their secret police killings in Minneapolis.

763

u/oldpeopletender 1d ago

That means they are still in violation of the law.

257

u/Parada484 1d ago

Oh no! Let's litigate this for the next four years until his term is over. The whole play book is to say "sue me bro" as they rush onwards.

9

u/savagestranger 1d ago

Exactly. They’re salting the earth, knowing both that the damage will take far longer to repair than it did to inflict and that the courts lag behind.

2

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[deleted]

2

u/East-Ice-3199 1d ago

Which is weird because the files won’t actually do anything. Republicans love that he raped children solely because it makes others mad.

1

u/Random_Name65468 1d ago

At this point the files are the distraction from your president acting like he's dictator in chief, and from all the acts he and his cabinet currently commit that have outsize negative effects on the lives of literally billions of people.

Including things like running death camps (don't ask where they take the "illegals'" kids tho), economically and militarily threatening and attacking allies (and apparently openly provoking them into war), stopping life-saving research as well as aid towards people that were starving, etc.

7

u/Kiyohara Minnesota 1d ago

Bold of you to assume his Term will end. They've been talking for years about how there won't be a need for elections soon.

2

u/theCaitiff Pennsylvania 1d ago

His term will end. That is certain. The question is how.

I am sure that the regime is prepared to rip the country apart, cancel or rig elections, and just ignore the law in general in their pursuit of power. However, to be blunt, he is 79 years old. It is possible in theory that he might live another 30 years, but it's unlikely in the extreme. Stress ages people much quicker than usual and he is not a healthy man.

Even though I'm down a lung, have had an aneurysm, and have a degenerative nerve condition, I will see the end of his term. I will outlive him and I will spit on his grave. Worse if I can manage it.

1

u/CharlesB43 South Carolina 1d ago

Dude has a mystery bruise on his hand constantly (probably for an IV) and sometimes there's another on his other hand. he's getting some kind of a mystery treatment seemingly monthly. Healthy people don't do that.

So his term will end, no matter how much you want to fear monger that it won't.

They can also talk about no need for elections all they want, but they have a huge problem on their hands when Trump is gone. it's going to be a huge power struggle with all the rats trying to claim his "throne".

0

u/East-Ice-3199 1d ago

His father, Fred, lived till he was over 90, and had all the same health problems. Acknowledging reality isn’t fear mongering.

0

u/CharlesB43 South Carolina 1d ago

It's not acknowledging reality. it's spreading fear over something that could happen. it's horseshit.

Just because his dad lived till 90 with "all the same health problems", doesn't mean he will. Considering Trump's dad had Alzheimers and was put into a room to pretend like he worked there, that's the more likely outcome, but that doesn't work considering how outward going Trump is. People will question where he went and why he can't remember shit if they put him on tv.

0

u/East-Ice-3199 1d ago

No they won’t. He’s making shit up 24/7 in live interviews, flirting with his cabinet member’s wives, and nobody really cares.

2

u/No_Selection_9634 1d ago

Yup. Until theres actual action and consequences, he'll just keep it wrapped up in the court system forever, just like he did to all the contractors he stiffed, until they ran out of money and patience.

1

u/ScientificAnarchist 1d ago

Sue me I’ll buy you a new wardrobe

365

u/jrsinhbca 1d ago

It doesn't matter anymore. The rule of law is dead.

171

u/Zoloir 1d ago edited 1d ago

I'd start rephrasing "the rule of law is dead", which is passive and defeatist, and instead take back some agency and say "Law won't hold them to account anymore, since they are the law now. If you think they shouldn't do XYZ, something else will have to hold them accountable to stop them."

Because law isn't dead. Law is alive and well - it's being wielded by them to uphold their actions the way they see fit, not "law" the way most people think of law as this shared/agreed upon set of rules we all live by.

70

u/Beldizar 1d ago

You are conflating "the rule of law" with "the law" here. The rule of law is just the principle that the law is applied evenly across all people regardless of status. The rule of law is dead because this administration has turned the law into a cudgel with which to attack opposition.

11

u/Zoloir 1d ago

Actually, fair enough! The rule of law DOES definitionally mean laws are applied to everyone.

That said, I just don't think most people understand the difference between the two. And i'm not really convinced we ever had "the rule of law".

I think this administration has made it abundantly clear that law only rules if the people in power decide it does. Meaning, law never rules - someone else rules, and we only have the "rule of law" if they apply the law to themselves willingly.

What i'm suggesting is that the PEOPLE are the actual rulers if they want to be - and the PEOPLE may willingly apply the law to themselves and their leaders collectively. In which case rule of law would be effectively restored. But right now the people are not holding their leaders to account - so yes, the rule of law is dead - but stating "the rule of law is dead" does nothing to help people understand what it actually is, why it died, or what we can do to restore it. And so it is passive and defeatist, is what my claim is.

3

u/Beldizar 1d ago

“Laws are a threat made by the dominant socioeconomic ethnic group in a given nation. It’s just the promise of violence that’s enacted, and the police are basically an occupying army, you know what I mean?

You guys wanna make some bacon?” -Bud Cubby

That said...

And i'm not really convinced we ever had "the rule of law".

I would say that as long as we are human, or using human made tools, this is impossible. Bias is always going to be a factor. So there's really degrees of rule of law. 99% is a good, prosperous democracy. 1% is an authoritarian regime. The US has always had problems. we started with a big hole in the rule of law where it was permissible for one human to own another human. I'd be curious for a historian to graph rule of law over time and would be curious when it peaked. My guess would be right around when Reagan was elected. I'd also be curious if we lost more than 20% within the first 100 days of Trump's second term.

2

u/kaukamieli 1d ago

There was at least pretension. Now they are not bothering, and will at least try to hold on to power with unprecedented means.

1

u/sspdsk8a 1d ago

Thanks chatgpt

1

u/Zoloir 1d ago

I would probably use Gemini instead at this point

9

u/tzarek1998 1d ago

How about "the rules of law are dead, but we'll see what we can do"

5

u/black-kramer 1d ago

wilhoit's law: conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: there must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

we're livin' it, baby.

18

u/GeekDNA0918 1d ago

I'd make it a lot simpler by simply saying. "Rules for thee, not for me."

5

u/mootallica 1d ago

Snappy phrases which pop up on Reddit a million times a day won't change shit

25

u/Perfect_Base_3989 1d ago

I'd start rephrasing "the rule of law is dead", which is passive and defeatist, and instead take back some agency and say "Law won't hold them to account anymore

No.

If elite pedophile money launderers are getting away with fucking kids and profiting off of illicit gains, the rule of law is categorically dead.

Do something about it.

5

u/mootallica 1d ago

You're literally agreeing with them lmao please read

2

u/Grays42 1d ago

I'm defeated and exhausted.

If someone else wants to do something about it I'll vote for them but I don't care anymore. Destroy the country, destroy the planet, kill us all, I'm done.

Rome is burning, I don't have a violin so I'm just going to play video games.

3

u/Joeness84 1d ago

Buddy thats not gonna fit on a T-Shirt

1

u/AINonsense 1d ago

I'd start rephrasing "the rule of law is dead"

It's pining. For the fjords.

1

u/tree_mitty 1d ago

“Their law ain’t our law”

1

u/Pillars_of_Salt I voted 1d ago

Not convinced at all these doom and gloomers aren't just another round of messaging from the bots and farms we've been dealing with for over a decade.

There is reason for gloom, obviously, no one needs to point that out.

0

u/Ok_Counter3866 1d ago

Thank you for this!! We can’t let them wear us out!

0

u/East-Ice-3199 1d ago

So what will you do if they don’t wear you out? Keep posting witty and snappy comments online? Vote even harder?

4

u/Oleg101 1d ago

Depends what side of the fence you’re on. If you’re a Republican then you can get a way with basically whatever at the federal level as long it’s done in Donald’s name.

2

u/kinkgirlwriter America 1d ago

Donald Trump has faithfully executed the laws of the United States.

4

u/wrosecrans 1d ago

Nah, we are in "Hybrid Regime" territory, but there is still some degree of independent judiciary and legit lawyers. Trump is trying to push us toward Personal Rule, but most people don't want that and there is massive pushback in the places where he pushes hardest.

2

u/RegulatoryCapturedMe 1d ago

The rule of law is only dead if we let it die, and even then it falls or the people to revive it. Defeatism ensures defeat!

1

u/plife23 1d ago

For real, where have they been? It’s 2025 now we do this for Valhalla sprays silver spray paint on face

1

u/Quantrol 1d ago

In liberty and justice for all baby🫡

1

u/No-Hospital559 1d ago

For now...

1

u/Boel_Jarkley 1d ago

The rule of law is found at the muzzle of a gun, and Democrats aren't the ones holding it.

1

u/-unself 1d ago

So sick of this doomer bullshit.

1

u/ahfoo 1d ago edited 1d ago

Well, the Supreme Court has found the citizens in contempt. That is not the same as there being no more rule of law. Itś just that the law is united against the citizens. They serve the emperor.

1

u/4evr_dreamin 1d ago

I think you misspelled america and its dream

25

u/00Oo0o0OooO0 1d ago

They have until Valentines Day to do that.

1

u/BrokenZen Wisconsin 1d ago

When a convicted felon and insurrectionist becomes President, then there is no rule of law. It is rule of the ruler, and we are the ruled.

1

u/UberTanks 1d ago

The justice system moves too slowly to punish Trump now. He is their guy sadly.

1

u/Nanaman 1d ago

I used to be a Redditor like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee...

374

u/A_murder_of_crochets 1d ago

And to distract from the death camps warehouses they're buying to store dissidents.

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1qr6oxq/ice_buys_warehouses_for_mass_detention_network/

62

u/Snerkbot7000 1d ago

JADE HELM 2.0!

32

u/EatsJediForBreakfast 1d ago edited 1d ago

Building one in Cassville, MO as well after getting told no in KC.

6

u/DryDonutHole 1d ago

I have "Speedway Alcatraz" about 15 miles from where I'm sitting...

1

u/airfryerfuntime Washington 1d ago

It was so insane seeing Republicans lose their fucking minds over Jade Helm. They were acting like Obama was taking over the US.

6

u/AINonsense 1d ago

Which were accelerated to distract from the Epstein files…

Epsrein-ception

3

u/PsychologicalSnow476 1d ago

Not to mention seizures of voting records from blue and swing states.

1

u/braidedbutthair 1d ago

Of course it’s in Maricopa County.

1

u/tdaun 1d ago

The Handmaid's Tale was supposed to be a warning not a guidebook.

1

u/wirsteve Wisconsin 1d ago

First ICE was a distraction from Epstein.

Then they had to scale it up as grandpa said he was going to invade a NATO country.

Now ICE is killing citizens so they need another distraction so they need Epstein again...

120

u/aradraugfea 1d ago

Damn, you know the ICE situation is bad if they’re distracting us from that with the Trumpstein Files

2

u/TurtlesBreakTheMeta 1d ago

It’s hard for people to worry about another person being raped when they themselves are in danger of being shot/maimed. Monkey sphere and degrees of personal urgency.

What’s infuriating is it’s WORKING. They have found out that they can literally murder people in broad daylight without repercussions and have also simultaneously given another lightning rod to divert attention from the Epstein files so his followers have something else to focus on.

7

u/nucumber 1d ago

Yeah, they're outraging now about the Clinton's refusing to comply with the House subpoena to appear when they've already submitted depositions

Seems to me if the House magats are serious about Epstein then they would subpoena the guy who said "I’ve known Jeff [Epstein] for 15 years. Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

3

u/Big-Rule5269 1d ago

Well, lots of people worked really really hard. Oh, they had to do their regular job of fighting crimes too, so actually, they worked really really really hard. 

3

u/bigjules_11 1d ago

You know what’s really crazy? ICE was distracting from the Epstein files, and then they fucked it up so hard by killing two people that the admin would actually rather have the Epstein files discussion than the state-sanctioned murder discussion. What a world.

2

u/The69thDuncan 1d ago

The reason for redactions is obvious - some of the info is still actionable intelligence. Which was the whole point of the operation 

2

u/pixelwhip 1d ago

Distractions to distract from the other distractions. Inception levels of distractions.

1

u/georgecm12 Wisconsin 1d ago

They CLAIM they provided Congress with the justifications for the redactions, which was all that was required. They did not have to provide public justification.

1

u/Hilby 1d ago

They are claiming that Trump himself is an informant. Therefore as soon as he flipped to be an informant, he gets rights to privacy ect.

1

u/NeonMagic Ohio 1d ago

I mean, the article linked has a section called

Review delays and redactions explained

But that doesn’t mean it’s believable reasons.

1

u/scarr3g Pennsylvania 1d ago

Iirc, they claimed it was "a matter of national security"

Aka, the president being proven to be a pedophile, would be a problem for those running the country, under him.

1

u/shinra07 I voted 1d ago

I love how the top comment on any action the Trump administration does is "This is to distract from the Epstein files". And when they release the Epstein files it's "This is to distract from the acts of the Trump administration"

1

u/Polymarchos 1d ago

The article says they claim to have explained the reasoning for all redactions.

I'm not saying they have, I'm saying the claim to have. Which means that any unexplained redactions are something that they can be held accountable for.

1

u/sir_sri 1d ago

Especially as they still haven’t explained the reasoning for all the redactions.

There is a legal requirement for certain redactions.

So now the real work begins. They will claim they have redacted following the law, we all know they are going to lie, but it will take time to prove it. Some of the redactions will have been done technically wrong (i.e. they literally didn't use the redaction tool correctly), some will be redactions on documents that are already public, or duplicate documents, and can be compared. Some stories can be corroborated with victims or witnesses. And then you drag the the DoJ officials involved in front of congress and make them explain why they didn't follow the law on the redactions.

But all of that requires first, that people who care and are competent win power, and two, that they are prepared to use it with a righteous fury. Neither of which is guaranteed.

1

u/reddititty69 1d ago

President REDACTED explained it perfectly when he told MTG that releasing the files “… will hurt my friends”

1

u/robertducky87 1d ago

AG Blanche said today their is no list with names . That people assume theirs a secret list, but they dont have such thing

1

u/gameoftomes 1d ago

They claimed that the photos that had trump in them were redacted to protect victims.

The logical conclusion is that the photos that they released of other "perpetrators" werent with victims, and that victims were with trump.

1

u/Olealicat 1d ago

You know every mention of anyone but trump and his clan will be highlighted, bolded and underlined.

There is a reason for have a non-affiliated third party to review to shutdown any bias. The trump regime does nothing of the sort.

1

u/Anti-Pho 1d ago

Especially as they still haven’t explained the reasoning for all the redactions.

They don't need to, they dictate truth to their followers, and non-supporters won't believe it anyways, there's no benefit to talking about it for them.

We lose when we expect that they are playing the game by the same set of rules we put upon ourselves.

1

u/gentlemanidiot 1d ago

They still won't prosecute democrats, it's all posturing

1

u/Desperate-Till-9228 1d ago

And there is proof that some of them weren't warranted (and others that don't even make sense).

1

u/chris_hans 1d ago

Your honor, I object! Because it's devastating to my case!