this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
735 points (99.7% liked)

News

36000 readers
2593 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/43334510

The Department of Justice spoke four separate times to a woman who credibly accused Donald Trump of having sex with a minor he met through Jeffrey Epstein—but most accusations against the president appear to have been removed from the government’s documents on the alleged sex trafficker. 

21-page slideshow buried in the massive trove of Epstein-related documents included allegations that sometime between 1983 and 1985, Trump forced a woman to give him oral sex when she was in her early teens. When the woman bit down on Trump’s exposed penis, he allegedly punched her in the head and kicked her out. That same woman told the DOJ that Epstein had introduced her to Trump in 1984.

Yet last week, Attorney General Pam Bondi insisted that there was “no evidence” that Trump had committed any crime—adding to the growing pile of denials from Trump officials that constitute a sweeping cover-up of the president’s alleged wrongdoing. 

Justice Department records indicate that the FBI spoke to this woman not once but at least four separate times, according to independent journalist Roger Sollenberger. Now those records appear to have been removed from public viewing—despite the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires all documents relating to the alleged sex trafficker to be made public. 

Sollenberger discovered a record of four separate interviews, which took place in the summer of 2019, in a separate database of documents downloaded from the government’s public files on Epstein. That document indicated that the first of the four interviews was conducted on July 24, 2019, and the last conducted on October 16, 2019. That document was given to Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers as part of her trial, though the specific allegations predated Maxwell’s involvement with Epstein, Sollenberger wrote.

The woman’s first interview was entered into the FBI’s case files on August 9, 2019, just one day before Epstein was found dead in his jail cell. FBI agents typically have a deadline of five working days to file interview write-ups, indicating an abnormal 16-day gap, Sollenberger noted.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 7 points 1 hour ago

I want this entire DOJ arrested and the CIA and FBI dismantled and replaced with a transparent agency that is beholden to America and the constitution. Anyone who worked with Mossad should be tried for treason

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Why are they allowed to take stuff down? We need the remaining files still and they’re allowed to take shit down?

[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 46 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Is there anyone from this administration that doesn't deserve to end up mulched and chummed?

[–] lando55@lemmy.zip 9 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

Stephen Miller. He needs to be gassed and burned. 

[–] lka1988@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Beat him, strip him naked, beat him some more, then dump him into the middle of the street with a big tattoo saying "I ORDERED YOUR CHILDREN TO BE DEPORTED".

He won't last long.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

I'd prefer something a little more publicly displayed than that.

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago

I'm thinking being put inside a giant metal bull while we light a fire underneath it. Most deaths are too good for him.

[–] SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world 47 points 20 hours ago (12 children)

Welcome to fascism. Just couldn't vote for Harris? You did this.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 14 points 7 hours ago

I voted for Harris but you have to be very bad at your job to loose that election.

[–] presoak@lazysoci.al 7 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I too prefer the puppet on the left.

[–] SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 hour ago

Left of Hitler, just a touch.

[–] PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The capitalist class did this to us. Blame the people who allowed fascism to rise...which absolutely includes Biden and Harris!

[–] HereIAm@lemmy.world 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The people still voted for trump in greater numbers than Harris. No ifs or buts about that fact. It is the people's responsibility to stay educated and to actually go vote. It's been shown that nations with compulsory voting gain more support for the left. Yes, there is a problem with the Epstein class and capitalism, but that doesn't absolve non-voters and those who voted for fascism from blame.

[–] Turret3857@infosec.pub 5 points 4 hours ago

It is the people's responsibility to stay educated

It is the media's responsibility to be unbiased and not run propaganda. And yet, Fox News exists.

It is a systemic issue, not a personal one. You can not educate the person who feels they know everything. Someone does not feel like they know everything unless they have that affirmed to them daily. Fox News pushes this shit, daily.

[–] ComradePorkRoll@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago

Really tired of you pathetic embarassed republicans blaming leftists for the election loss. Leftists overwhelmingly voted for Harris. Your "centrists" hated her.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 12 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Bro the people that didn't vote for harris ain't here. Not enough of them to realistically blame, anyway.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

But how else do people like this feel superior without having an under class to constantly shit on? By the merit of their own achievements? Hah!

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Its mostly people that are too "individualism pilled" to realize that trump and maga are a fabricated phenomena by wealthy individuals who have been given too much power by society.

And realistically its not that people are wholly misinformed, just a mix of optimistic, detached, isolated, and understandably angry.

The vast majority of people didn't foresee what is happening now but its clear the DNC did and saw a lot of acceptable risks in the way they dealt with biden and harris.

I'd call the real issue the "Chuck Schumer worldview"

[–] suddenlyme@lemmy.zip 21 points 18 hours ago

Trump should never have been on the ticket.

[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 14 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

But Harris didn’t say she was going to solve all the world’s problems immediately! She wanted to personally murder every single Palestinian person. Or something.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

She had a funny laugh.

But realistically she had a vagina and voters aren't super fond of that. If she'd have been a man, she'd have won. I'll get downvoted and accused of being misogynist but it's voters who are, especially women.

And now she's running again and god help us if the party makes the same mistake in 2028, if we have real elections.

[–] Crankenstein@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Yea, your take is absolutely not realistic in the slightest.

She lost because she was a genocide enabling, corporatist pig who tried to demand votes from people that she refused to represent the interests of.

Her being a woman had nothing to do with why she lost. The only people who gave a shit about that were Republicans and they were never going to flip sides to begin with regardless of how much the Democrats try to capitulate to them.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (2 children)

She lost because she was a genocide enabling, corporatist pig who tried to demand votes from people that she refused to represent the interests of.

Because Trump was certainly none of those things. He totally represented working class people, immigrants, and world peace. There is obviously nothing that Trump has done past and present that would suggest otherwise.

The only difference between him and Kamala is... What again? Sorry, I'm having a hard time finding anything different between the two of them other than their genitals.

She 100% lost because she is a woman. People would rather vote for their own economic demise and livelihood rather than vote for a woman. Don't give Americans too much credit, the majority of them can't even fucking read.

[–] Crankenstein@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Miss me with the false dichotomy bullshit. Just because someone was against Kalama doesn't mean they are an advocate for Trump.

Your simple minded perspective is no excuse for your lack of understanding about politics.

[–] Turret3857@infosec.pub 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Hillary won the 2016 popular vote but yeah Kamala lost because she was a woman and not because people want radical change. Its definitely the Vulva, not the fact she was promising to be Joe Biden 2.0 at a time where most Americans were feeling Biden was failing them due to how shitty their bank accounts were.

Trump marketed that he would fix the economy. He didn't and rug pulled. Kamala did not even bother to say radical change was coming.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world -2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Congrats on missing the entire point. Is the ignorance intentional? Or are you just this bad at piecing things together?

[–] Turret3857@infosec.pub 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I just told you the difference, not my fault you don't have reading comprehension.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world -2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

You said people wanted radical change. They elected Trump in 2016 so what change?

You said Americans were feeling Biden was failing them due to their bank accounts. Yet they re-elected Trump while he was president during one of the worst economic times in US history.

Trump marketed that he would fix the economy, but during his first term he tanked it and Biden brought it back up.

I've never accused Americans of being smart, but come on dude... We all know why people voted for Trump. It wasn't because he was radical change or economic growth since there was already 4 years of proof he was full of shit.

America just didn't want a woman. A fucking moose could have run against Kamala and won because Americans are pretentious idiots.

[–] Turret3857@infosec.pub 1 points 33 minutes ago* (last edited 30 minutes ago)

You said people wanted radical change. They elected Trump in 2016 so what change?

When Trump left office in 2021, he left the country in complete disarray due to his poor handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Joe Biden came in and did what neoliberal democrats do. He cleaned up the mess the previous republican made, but he made damn sure not to toe the line outside of being a neoliberal democrat. He applied duct tape to a sinking ship. He did nothing to stop the alt-right propaganda machine. He did nothing to the large corporate bodies that run all the mainstream and social media that people get their information from that got Trump 2016 elected. What Joe Biden did do in regards to anything related to propaganda, was set Trumps buddies up to buy TikTok, because neolibs were upset that people on TikTok were spreading the truth about what Israel is doing. And he made damn sure to drag the Trump prosecution out as long as possible, because what if it looks like a political prosecution? When they punch low, we go high!

So, we had a population that is on the unregulated propaganda machine 24/7. We had a President who was unwilling to actually prevent Trump from running in 2024.

You said Americans were feeling Biden was failing them due to their bank accounts. Yet they re-elected Trump while he was president during one of the worst economic times in US history. Trump marketed that he would fix the economy, but during his first term he tanked it and Biden brought it back up.

Of the entire population in 2024 roughly 25% of them felt they were living paycheck to paycheck. Accounting for the different age groups surveyed in this study, that is a roughly 2-3% increase over 2019 (Pre-pandemic). What the takeaway from this information is that while Biden may have "fixed" the economy, he did not fix it for the average US family. Being charitable would be saying he restored it to a pre-pandemic state. Trump may have done massive damage to the economy, but it is worse to be the oppositional party, and not do anything to improve the circumstances to prevent such an occurrence in the future. The reason Trump's COVID-19 was so devastating to the economy was the unregulated propaganda, the conspiracy theories about the vaccine giving you autism and having tracking chips, the people who refused to wear masks and Trumps inability to actually enforce an actual fucking lockdown. Biden could have passed anti-disinformation laws, could have put the screws to Fox, OAN, and friends with the FCC. Could have regulated vaccines for citizens. He did NOTHING.

What we have at the point leading up to July 2024 is a population of voters who are either full of propaganda talking points, or people completely apathetic to the current administration due to the fact they are either back where they started, or they are worse off than they were in 2019. Speaking of, who was running for election in July of 2024? OH! It was Joe Biden! typically, under normal circumstances, (And let's not forget, Joe Biden was promising in 2020 that he would only run for one term and this should have been normal circumstances) candidates would have roughly a years time to get their name out in the media. Then, the primary starts in January. Once again, if we are charitable here and not counting pre-primary time, Kamala was already getting rat fucked by having lost over 6 months advertising & campaigning time. In comparison, do you know how much time Trump had to get his name out there? 10 fucking years.

Not ONLY do we have a population of voters who are apathetic due to their lives being shitty due to the economy, you also have to add in that Kamala only had 4 months to not only get people to know who she was (Remember, we are talking about Americans, who do not know the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground), but to convince those same people to vote for her. Compare this with Trumps roughly 120 months and it is ridiculous to even begin to start with the assumption that Kamala was passed over because she was a woman. In the 2024 election Trump had 77,302,580 votes to Kamalas 75,017,613. This is a difference of 2,284,967 or 1% of voters. Every year roughly 36%-46% of the US population just straight up does not vote in the presidential election, and this has been documented since the 1930s. In 2024 41% did not show up, which is an almost perfect average of the last 90 years.

The only statistic you can even argue is "I did not vote for her because she is a woman" is that 1% of voters that pushed trump over the top, but you'd be stretching it assuming that 1% would ever vote for a Republican. You can try and argue that "Well the people who stayed at home stayed at home because she is a woman!!", except, 44% of people stayed home in the 2016 election (More than in 2024), the election in which, HILLARY WON THE POPULAR VOTE, WHICH IS A FACT YOU COMPLETELY FUCKING IGNORED THE FIRST TIME I BROUGHT IT UP. If you can find some statistics that point to the main reason Kamala losing is because she is a woman, I would love to see them. You won't though, because she didn't lose because she was a woman. She lost because she had 4 months to campaign. She lost because she was the same old neoliberal shrill that the DNC loves to push. She lost because no one knew who the fuck she was or what her platforms are (You admitted it yourself, Americans are not smart). She lost because Trump had brand recognition, She lost because she did not say ANYTHING on the campaign trail that inspired confidence in the voter base, nothing that would have caused them to go out and vote. Do you know who did give them lip service? Trump did. Trump told them he would fix the grocery prices. Trump told them he would "get rid of the violent illegals". Trump told them everything they wanted to hear. Hook, line and sinker. When he won, all of that went away. and the core Trump voter base in none the wiser. Too bad democrats aren't allowed to lie on the campaign trail.

But yeah, maybe you're right. Maybe it's because she had a uterus and there were no other factors that lead to this happening. Ugh, typical misogynistic USA (Who just 9 years ago had a woman win the popular vote but we're going to ignore that because it's convenient for my argument)

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 27 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (3 children)

So the FBI had an interview about the then president sexually assaulting/raping a child and them punching her in the face when it didn't go his way. The interview evidence gets mishandled and instead of taking 5 business days required to file it took 12 business days. The next day the person who connected the President to these charges is found dead. With his brother requesting a secondary otopsy because he believed his brother was murdered, and the review showed they did not believe the death to be suicide. And the footage mysteriously having issues as well. And the people who moved the body had no recollection of removing a noose.

This is nothing but a conspiracy, lol

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 14 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

So Jeffrey Epstein is pretty much just another partner or employee Trump threw under the bus. And I'm beginning to think it's more the *latter.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

100%

Epstein got an unheard of sweetheart deal the first time he was charged, by then Florida AG Alex Acosta.

Alex Acosta would then go on to be rewarded with a major cabinet position in Trump's first term. Labor Secretary. Something he had no real experience with.

Epstein got off very easy so he wouldn't be compelled to talk, and Acosta was rewarded for facilitating it.

Years later, during Trump's first term, his Attorney General Bill Barr would go on to facilitate the murder of Epstein while in prison.

It's all just a massive criminal enterprise. They aren't even bothering to hide it anymore.

[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 191 points 1 day ago (22 children)

Who wrote this shit, "...Trump forced a woman to give him oral sex when she was in her early teens.." so a teenager or child and not a woman then?

[–] SaraTonin@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago

Depressingly common. “Had sex with an underage woman”. So, raped a child

load more comments (21 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›