Jeffrey Epstein, billionaire convicted/recharged felon

[Jeff Lebowski]

I saw online that the immunity ruling by SCOTUS made the president less accountable than literal royalty. Quite the historical reversal for this country.

“online” = bluesky?

[frank ryan]

“online” = bluesky?

Yes, it's those zany liberals who overreact! Epstein Files are a nothingburger.


I don't know anyone who uses bluesky.

[dabrockster]

Yes, it's those zany liberals who overreact! Epstein Files are a nothingburger.


I don't know anyone who uses bluesky.

Even when it is not directed at you, you pop in offended.. You don't use Bluesky. Congrats.. None of us give a shit that you are a liberal who doesn't use Bluesky..



I am curious to know the online source or article of the statement.

[Northwestcoug]

“online” = bluesky?

why yes it was. I saw it from a guy who I follow, used to write for the Cato institute. He may also be on Twitter, but I wouldn't be surprised if he made a principled decision to leave.

And yes, I look at bluesky regularly. I'm happy to divulge the general political content of the people I follow, but you can probably guess which way it leans. Though I do follow a handful of libertarian leaning accounts that are disgusted with the current national libertarian landscape.

If it's a clever statement, what does it matter if it came from Bluesky?

[Northwestcoug]

Yes, it's those zany liberals who overreact! Epstein Files are a nothingburger.


I don't know anyone who uses bluesky.

It me.

There is a nice photography community there, and when I'm motivated I share pics. I also love me some wholesome pics and dog feeds. I round that off with comedy and political follows.

Jump on in guys, the water's fine. Just like the Nazi-adjacent stuff on X, the far left inhabits Bluesky. But you have to go looking to find it.

[frank ryan]

why yes it was. I saw it from a guy who I follow, used to write for the Cato institute. He may also be on Twitter, but I wouldn't be surprised if he made a principled decision to leave.

And yes, I look at bluesky regularly. I'm happy to divulge the general political content of the people I follow, but you can probably guess which way it leans. Though I do follow a handful of libertarian leaning accounts that are disgusted with the current national libertarian landscape.

If it's a clever statement, what does it matter if it came from Bluesky?

The way things role around here, I probably should've have retorted with a "Shoot the assumed messenger!" statement.

[Jeff Lebowski]

why yes it was. I saw it from a guy who I follow, used to write for the Cato institute. He may also be on Twitter, but I wouldn't be surprised if he made a principled decision to leave.

And yes, I look at bluesky regularly. I'm happy to divulge the general political content of the people I follow, but you can probably guess which way it leans. Though I do follow a handful of libertarian leaning accounts that are disgusted with the current national libertarian landscape.

If it's a clever statement, what does it matter if it came from Bluesky?

Haha. I knew it!

No worries. Just a little attempt at humor. No judgement here.

[Northwestcoug]

Haha. I knew it!

No worries. Just a little attempt at humor. No judgement here.

[Green Monstah]

Start a war to distract the electorate and vilify the opposition as unpatriotic for taking focus away from the evil enemy.

[falafel]

Even when it is not directed at you, you pop in offended.. You don't use Bluesky. Congrats.. None of us give a shit that you are a liberal who doesn't use Bluesky..

Even when it is not directed at you, you pop in to insult frank.

Brock, get a GD grip. You are losing it. frank is harmless, but to you he is the antichrist.

[dabrockster]

Even when it is not directed at you, you pop in to insult frank.

Brock, get a GD grip. You are losing it. frank is harmless, but to you he is the antichrist.

[frank ryan]

Brock, I genuinely try to ignore you and not engage with you. I make an effort not to throw out personal attacks around. Please ignore me, the personal stuff is old.

[frank ryan]

This alone should be a massive scandal. But we've arrived at the place where MAGA and more are 5th ave voters (meaning Trump could shoot someone in broad daylight on 5th avenue and get away with it).

The Justice Department has withheld some Epstein files related to allegations that President Trump sexually abused a minor, an NPR investigation finds. It also removed some documents from the public database where accusations against Jeffrey Epstein also mention Trump.

Some files have not been made public despite a law mandating their release. These include what appear to be more than 50 pages of FBI interviews, as well as notes from conversations with a woman who accused Trump of sexual abuse decades ago when she was a minor.

NPR reviewed multiple sets of unique serial numbers appearing before and after the pages in question, stamped onto documents in the Epstein files database, FBI case records, emails and discovery document logs in the latest tranche of documents published at the end of January. NPR's investigation found dozens of pages that appear to be catalogued by the Justice Department but not shared publicly.

The Justice Department declined to answer NPR's questions on the record about these specific files, what's in them and why they are not published. After publication, the Justice Department reached out to NPR, taking issue with how its responses to questions were framed. Department of Justice spokeswoman Natalie Baldassarre reiterated DOJ's stance that any documents not published are privileged, are duplicates or relate to an ongoing federal investigation.

Following NPR's reporting, the House Oversight Committee's ranking member, Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., released a statement about the missing files.

"Yesterday, I reviewed unredacted evidence logs at the Department of Justice. Oversight Democrats can confirm that the DOJ appears to have illegally withheld FBI interviews with this survivor who accused President Trump of heinous crimes," Garcia stated.

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee have already been investigating this allegation against the president and will now open a parallel investigation into the DOJ's decision not to release these particular documents.



Other files scrubbed from public view pertain to a separate woman who was a key witness for the prosecution in the criminal trial of Epstein's co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking. Maxwell is seeking clemency from Trump.

Some of those documents were briefly taken down and put back online last week, while others remain hidden, according to NPR's comparison of the initial dataset from Jan. 30 with document metadata of those files currently on the Justice Department's website.



When asked for comment about the missing pages and the accusations against the president, a White House spokeswoman told NPR that Trump "has done more for Epstein's victims than anyone before him."

"Just as President Trump has said, he's been totally exonerated on anything relating to Epstein," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told NPR in a statement. "And by releasing thousands of pages of documents, cooperating with the House Oversight Committee's subpoena request, signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act, and calling for more investigations into Epstein's Democrat friends, President Trump has done more for Epstein's victims than anyone before him. Meanwhile, Democrats like Hakeem Jeffries and Stacey Plaskett have yet to explain why they were soliciting money and meetings from Epstein after he was a convicted sex offender."

The White House has previously pointed to a statement from the Justice Department that says the Epstein files contain "untrue and sensationalist claims" about the president.

In a Feb. 14 letter to members of Congress first reported by Politico, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche insist that no records were withheld or redacted "on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary."

...


But a review of FBI case file logs and discovery documents turned over to Maxwell and her attorneys in the criminal case against her point to one place the claim could have come from — and how serious investigators took it.

The FBI interviewed this Trump and Epstein accuser four times. That is according to an FBI "Serial Report" and a list of Non-Testifying Witness Material in the Maxwell case that were also released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act

https://www.npr.org/2026/02/24/nx-s1...sation-maxwell

[frank ryan]

When is Trump and Melania going to go before congress and answer questions about Epstein?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Haha.

Embedded Tweet