373
Epstein file redactions reveal victims as young as nine and implicate a high-level government official, lawmakers say
(www.the-independent.com)
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2026
373 points (100.0% liked)
politics
31066 readers
1933 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I would like to hear any reasoning at all for why we should be redacting anything except the identities of victims and perhaps the more troubling details of their abuse.
The reasoning is that the FBI and the DOJ are both compromised by the same cabal of monsters in the files. Tbh it's a miracle we even got anything at all
The given reason is that people are innocent until proven guilty, and the DOJ doesn’t want to create witch-hunts just because someone was mentioned in passing. For instance, Robin Williams is mentioned in an email chain, but only because he refused to visit the island. But if you only hear the first part of that statement, you may be inclined to start a witch-hunt against Robin Williams.
But the most straightforward reason is a coverup. That’s pretty much the only way to actually justify the massive amounts of redactions. As time has gone on and more evidence has mounted, it has become increasingly clear that the given reason is bogus.
If something smells like a duck, it could be a duck, but it could also be a goose, or a chicken, or a swan, or any other number of things that smell like ducks… But if it looks like a duck, smells like a duck, has feathers like a duck, has flippers like a duck, has a flat bill like a duck, and quacks like a duck? We can only reasonably conclude that it’s a duck.