The Guardian.

Two crusading U.S. Congressmen, Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie, released the names of six men they claimed were "powerful" people tied to Epstein. But no clear evidence ties them to the disgraced financier and accused sex trafficker.

Well.... This is getting weirder everyday.

all 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 26 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

To be clear, it's correct that these few are not, apparently, "powerful" men. However, they are also not victims, and it's highly unlikely that the DoJ has an open investigation looking into the people in this photo lineup, so they still were not supposed to be redacted in the first place. The law is very clear on who is allowed to be redacted.

  • source
  • It turns out that illegally redacting large parts of the files made them hard to process. I'm sure the DOJ never anticipated that. Now people are only talking about the 4 and not about the other 2. I'm sure DOJ are really upset about that as well.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    A little context.

    When contacted for comment on this story and told administration officials confirmed the document was a photo lineup, Khanna posted on X that “I wish DoJ had provided that explanation earlier instead of redacting then unredacting their names. They have failed to protect survivors, created confusion for innocent men, and have protected rich and powerful abusers. We must have full transparency and the truth.” He also thanked the Guardian for reporting on the connection to the photo lineup

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 24 points 8 months ago* (5 children)

    Maybe a sign of the documents being altered? There is no better censorship than replacement.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -20 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Or that morons trying to score political points should sit down and shut the fuck up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago

    So messed up... And "own goal"-type errors (if that is genuinely what this turns out to be) like this are doubly infuriating in that they not only unnecessarily smear uninvolved civilians but also provide ammo to bad-faith actors who will now double down on their insistence the entire push for transparency is a "witch hunt". The last thing the world needs is to give the flailing MAGA attack apparatus ammo. Ugh.

  • source
  • 7 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 29 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

    "disgraced financier and accused sex trafficker"

    Accused?

    Convicted.

    Motherfucker plead guilty to solicitation of a minor in 2008.

    He is not an accused sex trafficker.

    And why the fuck did you lead with finance?

    "Disgraced sex trafficking serial rapist, alleged serial murderer and foreign secret intelligence agent Jeffery Epstein..."

    Someone at the guardian is for sure in the fucking files.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Soliciting a minor wouldn't be considered as sex trafficking though, be would it? I agree though that this is a heinously cowardly description of the man...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

    Posthumously. Ghislane Maxwell was found guilty of conspiring WITH JEFFERY EPSTEIN to

    conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.

    Source: justice.gov

    So while he wasn't a convicted sex trafficker, per se, he was a convicted sex offender, and his sex trafficking is beyond accusatory, it is on the record. "Known sex trafficker," or as I said, "Disgraced sex trafficker."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago

    i support him now :
    Thomas Massie, congressman

    What I said in November still holds true, “until men are being walked to the jail, this is still a cover-up.”
    Transparency is an essential part of unraveling this global sex trafficking scheme, but it’s not the Department of Transparency, it’s the Department of Justice.
    https://nitter.net/RepThomasMassie/status/2022706033538601206#m
    2026 Feb 14, 16h14 utc (11h14 e.time)

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I wonder if DOJ tried to Honeypot the Congress folks that went to see the files with false documents. We know their searches were monitored. I hate that I sound like a conspiracy theorist but I don't know what I'd put past these assholes

  • source