Rich and powerful in the new Epstein files: New files released with Trump allegations
Topline
The Justice Department’s Jan. 30 release of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein shows new ties with the world’s most powerful people, including information about his relationship to Richard Branson, Bill Gates and Elon Musk—and the Trump administration released additional files Friday that include previously missing allegations against President Donald Trump.
Key Facts
The DOJ released approximately three million documents Jan. 30, including 2,000 videos and 18,000 photos, part of the government’s requirement to release its full documents on Epstein under federal law—but coming more than a month after the files were required to be released by Dec. 19.
The files released Jan. 30 include a wide variety of documents, including emails between Epstein and his powerful figures—such as Musk—documents related to Epstein and associate Ghislaine Maxwell’s times in prison and witness interviews with Epstein victims, though many are heavily redacted.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche denied the Trump administration had “covered up” any of the Epstein files by failing to release them sooner, pointing to the millions of pages the government had to review and arguing, “There’s not some tranche of super-secret documents that we’re withholding.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/rich-and-powerful-in-the-new-epstein-files-new-files-released-with-trump-allegations/ar-AA1Vl8L5
= new reply since forum marked as read
about this shit, but I say damn the torpedoes, and CALL FOR FUCKING HEARINGS. Try to get Maureen Comey before them, for example. Or Garland. Why didn't they do anything about Jane Doe 4?
But, on top of that, though, THE FUCKING LAW WAS BROKEN due to the failure to produce the docs earlier, and the President was the beneficiary. We HAVE him on that part, regardless of the reliability of this 1 witness, talking about stuff in 1983.
DO IT DEMS!!!
Thinking through what could happen:
* Witness says "we weren't alerted to it by our predecessors (i.e. IQ45) who we relied on for such matters cause whatever protocol"
* Witness says "we reviewed it thoroughly, and it just wasn't actionable due to lack of evidence (or whatnot), and we felt it would be wrong to accuse Trump w/o actionable evidence"
* Witness says "lower level employees were raising a stink, totally taking the situation seriously, but the higher-ups steadfastly refused to advance anything"
Honestly I'm about 75% on one of the first two being the truth, which are both acceptable answers, but #3 could go down poorly, just saying.
STILL, DO IT DEMS!!!
