DocumentCloud
www.documentcloud.org
  • _number8_@lemmy.world
    541·
    11 months ago

    so i figure nothing earth shattering in here if we didn’t get 20 headlines about it?

    • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
      271·
      11 months ago

      no. it’s either being written up carefully or suppressed. I’m at page 134, and oooo boy it’s juicy.

      edit 326-343 are completely redacted.

      edit 2: I’ll have to dig through later. a lot of pages are corrections to testimony. Notably though, is a few sections on Prince Andrew. He was clearly involved and at least present at the time.

      • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
        152·
        11 months ago

        edit 326-343 are completely redacted.

        Probably implicates politicians and/or their owner donors. Can’t have the peasants know the atrocities of their lords.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        72·
        11 months ago

        What are the most interesting names on there? Feel free to just paste names in your comment so we can read along 1000 pages is a bit too much for me.

  • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
    31·
    11 months ago

    Anyone else have a bit of smoldering rage that everyone knows what went on, and so far no one but Ghislane Maxwell, Epstein himself and one prince have had even an ounce of trouble from it?

    Kinda how Trump will die of old age one day still living a 1% lifestyle and having never seen the inside of a prison.

    • pan_troglodytes@programming.devEnglish
      41·
      11 months ago

      when you have an extortionate advantage over someone, you’re dangerous - it’s much the same policy as a nuclear deterrent.

    • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
      24·
      11 months ago

      The trump lawyers, the judge, the jury and everyone at the trials…uhoo…and then what else did you do? Did you guys steal the money from those people too? Hmm, what about the pee pee tapes? Did you guys really do that for reals? How fun and interesting…funteresting!

      Day 300 of the trial…so you touched her private privately? And did she jump? Or just sort of moan a little? Oh tell us more! So you really think she liked it? Ma’am! Hold on, you’ll get your chance too, right now it’s "the president’s turn…so did you go for the boobies first? And how? We didn’t bring a dummy, could you show us on her where you touched? It’s for the public records ma’am… c’mon, you want a fair trial yes? Well this is pretty fair? How to we know if he really touched our there or not? Anyway, it’s done, let’s just take our seats…

    • OpenStarsEnglish
      222·
      11 months ago

      If I were a powerful douchebag, would I allow the release of one of the many documents that says that I did stuff… or the one we made earlier specifically to exonerates me that says that we did not?

            • OpenStarsEnglish
              1·
              11 months ago

              He has some newer stuff, rebooting that project apparently. I haven’t listened to it yet b/c I was going through the older stuff first to remind me of it, which is how I found this one:-P.

    • athos77@kbin.social
      123·
      11 months ago

      There was some kind of delay in the release, to allow people who didn’t want their names to show up to request they get redacted. So expect anyone that’s still named to be able to spin the narrative.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
        101·
        11 months ago

        There’s a handful of names from sexually abused women that remain redacted, and only 2 names that have additional time to justify why they should stay redacted. Source

        The judge said a handful of names should remain blacked out in the documents because they would identify people who were sexually abused.

        Two people whose name appears in the records have been given additional time to make arguments to the court as to why their names should stay redacted.