this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
166 points (99.4% liked)

news

816 readers
521 users here now

A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.

Rules:

  1. Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
  2. Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
  3. Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
  4. Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
  5. No link shorteners
  6. No entire article in the post body

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
dude@lemmings.world
166
Melania director Brett Ratner pictured cuddling woman in Epstein files (www.bbc.com)
submitted 2 months ago by dude@lemmings.world to c/news@lemmings.world
13 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KingGordon@lemmy.world 40 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Thats a girl. Not a woman. A child.

[–] stressballs@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

And if they weren't a victim their faces wouldn't be hidden. Having your arms around a victim in your lap "isn't evidence of wrongdoing"?? Wow and just like that, "fact checking" is back in style.

[–] HandMadeArtisanRobot@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

And if they weren't a victim their faces wouldn't be hidden.

That's not true given the current administration.

[–] artyom@piefed.social 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

How do you know that?

[–] KingGordon@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Im going to assume you are being serious. I looked at the picture using my eyes.

Also why would the face be blocked if she was a consenting adult? The redactions were done reportedly to protect victims. Victims of child sexual abuse and trafficking.

[–] artyom@piefed.social 5 points 2 months ago

I looked at the picture using my eyes.

Are you serious? You determined she's definitively <18 by looking at a photo of exclusively her body?

why would the face be blocked if she was a consenting adult?

You'd have to ask Pam Bondi. They redacted all sorts of things, with no explanation provided. It would be completely reasonable to block out the faces of any women who were not involved in any way.

[–] EisFrei@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

It might be Melania, as somebody pointed out here: https://lemmy.zip/comment/24360899

[–] stressballs@lemmy.zip 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There is no indication of wrongdoing from the files. The BBC has contacted Ratner's representative for comment.

Really? Why can't we see the faces of these "women" then? Isn't the point of blocking their faces to hide the identity of VICTIMS?

[–] artyom@piefed.social 7 points 2 months ago

There were many hidden identities that were not women. For instance, Donald Trump.

[–] Gerudo@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So..how much was he paid for the documentary? Sounds like an easy way to slip a bribe.

[–] artyom@piefed.social 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

$75M in total. $40M for the rights. $35M in marketing. $28M went directly to Melania.

Disney offered $14M

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/jan/31/melania-trump-amazon-documentary

Sony Pictures Classics co-president Tom Bernard says this typically costs $5-7M

So yeah, a not-so-subtle bribe.

[–] Anarki_@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 months ago

:O

[–] BlackLaZoR@fedia.io -3 points 2 months ago

Careful, BBC isn't reliable source. They do manipulate material to push their narration