this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2025
94 points (99.0% liked)

politics

26418 readers
3078 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson said on Sunday he believed the approaching vote on releasing Justice Department files related to Jeffrey Epstein should help put to rest allegations that Donald Trump had any connection to the late sex offender's abuse and trafficking of underage girls.

"They're doing this to go after President Trump on this theory that he has something to do with it. He does not," Johnson, the Republican leader in the House, said on "Fox News Sunday."

Although Trump and Epstein were photographed together decades ago, the president has said the two men fell out prior to Epstein's convictions.

Trump has since instructed the Department of Justice to investigate prominent Democrats' ties to Epstein.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 78 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Bro literally closed the government and refused to swear in an elected representative just to prevent the vote on it. Then he says this.

[–] Flickerby@lemmy.zip 18 points 4 days ago

"We have nothing to hide", says 8 year old standing in front of 'no girls allowed' sign.

[–] JHRD1880@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

I'm sure the government was closed this long to give them time to scrub many of the files. There's a reason they're now all fine with releasing them.

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 22 points 4 days ago

So you're going to vote to release them, right? Right?

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Says the guy with a sub-basement full of murdered twinks.

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

Couldn't imagine what a sub-basement would look like so I tried imagining the opposite. A dom-basement. I need some sleep.

[–] vegeta@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Do you just spam that in every thread now?

Or do you legitimately think talking about the Epstein files is a distraction from the Epstein files?

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'd say anything that isn't a tangible move towards releasing them is distraction. So yes, just saying there's nothing to hide is a pathetic deflection. Especially from someone in a position to make some very large and meaningful progress on the release.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Tuesday. The vote is Tuesday.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

“We have nothing to hide and it’s the democrats who are evil!!”

So it’s in your best interest to release the files, then, right? Your base wants it, many elected you on the promise of seeing these things released even, and it would be great evidence against your enemies.

“No, we are not going to release the files.”

Hmmmmmm

[–] f1error@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago
[–] MuskyMelon@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

So they're done removing Trump and other Republican references, cause that's what I'm reading between the lines.

[–] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

Then. Release. Them. To. Shut. Us. Up. If. This. True.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

…the President has said that the two men fell out prior to Epstein’s convictions.

…tells us only that he didn’t sever ties because of the bad optics.

Epstein didn’t become a child exploiter when he was convicted. There’s documented evidence and witness testimony of him taking underage girls from Mar-a-Lago to his private island —which there is documented evidence of Trump having visited numerous times — where they were sexually abused.

I do say that I’m curious what they fell out over though. Did Epstein try to blackmail Trump? Vice versa?

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

They both tried to fuck over the other in a real estate deal.

The auctioneer actually talked about it, both tried to get him to break the rules of the auction in order to get a leg up, and both bad-mouthed the other to him.

Anyway Trump won, which Epstein took offense to, and then Epstein started poaching girls from Trump's properties.

Did you know that Trump had his own child sex trafficking organization separate from Epstein?

Look up Trump Model Management. It was only closed in 2017.