this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2026
226 points (99.1% liked)

News

35256 readers
3313 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Department of Justice left multiple unredacted photos of fully nude women or girls exposed as part of Friday’s dump of more than 3.5 million pages of files related to the investigations and prosecutions of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Unlike the majority of the images in the released files, both the nudity and the faces of the people were not redacted, making them easy to identify. In some of the photos, the women or girls were either fully nude or partially undressed, posed for cameras, and exposed their genitals.

The files include more than 2,000 videos and 180,000 images, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Friday in a press conference, including “large quantities of commercial pornography and images that were seized from Epstein’s devices,” some of which were taken by Epstein, according to Blanche.

Archive: http://archive.today/2isdD

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 10 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

They spent how long and how many tax dollars paying federal employees overtime to redact this stuff?

[–] AnnaFrankfurter@lemmy.ml 15 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

There job was to redact names of criminals not victims

[–] lithiumground@lemmy.ml 3 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

we cant access website,but this is typical life of oligarchs/rich. they are money,they are power

[–] jaaake@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

I don't want to see these images, but I want to know the context of them. Is there any article that describes the scenario taking place? I really don't want to start searching for this.

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 106 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Does that mean we can charge these agents for distribution of CSAM.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 49 points 2 days ago (2 children)

No, I think the idea is now if you download the newest epstein files they can charge YOU with CSAM. Even if you didn't know it was there when you downloaded it.

[–] Johnmannesca@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

Seems to be the only logical reason; a way to criminally indict any opposers who have records kept against them. Did something similar before by releasing misinformation then deleting it from their server if I recall correctly. It's all despicable, definitely maddening to see our tax dollars fund this.

[–] ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 days ago

You may have a future career in the DOJ. "We need clever people like you!"

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 53 points 2 days ago

In a just world, yes.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago

Generally no, laws like that are written with exceptions for law enforcement in the course of their normal duties. It'd be trivial to argue in court that that's what this is, and the reason for the redaction failure is the deadline Congress set.

[–] unmagical@lemmy.ml 80 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Busy redacting Trump's name, federal government publishes CSAM.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Trying to excise any CSAM (if they really were trying) is hard to do with only Ctrl-F and the use of LLMs, most likely.

[–] digitalFatteh@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 days ago

FBI agents have really hit the bottom of the barrel in recruitment.

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 63 points 2 days ago

This administration is comic book levels of both evil and incompetence.

"The citizens are screaming at us for taking too long redacting everything, so just release everything."

Proceeds to publish CSAM

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 51 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't believe this was missed at all. Even if it's a bad look for the admin it'll still soak up hundreds of hours of talk time when we should be talking about the depraved shit the victims statements accused Trump of doing to them.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Let's not get hyper focused on Trumpy to the point that rest of the fuck wits, nonces, and pieces of shits get to skate by.

[–] orbitz@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

Well perhaps decent to focus on the dude with the US nuclear arsenal at his whim a little bit....

Not that I think it diminishes any other mentions there.

Their whole goal, flood the zone with everything, few people keep up with one thing.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 24 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I thought they were stalling on this so they could protect the victims. Or at least that was their bullshit narrative.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

This was done purposefully and to inflict pain.

[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Idk about to purposely inflict pain, but more because they don't give a fuck about who they hurt, but I do agree it was on purpose. That way they can claim it's the public's fault for demanding these files.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Personally I believe that they were forced into it, kicking and screaming, and they wanted to make it painful. They didn't care who got hurt, only that someone did get hurt.

[–] leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They've got a different definition of victim, and they are doing their best (which isn't very good, frankly, they're very incompetent) to censor any mention of him. Or to take it down after accidentally posting it. Again, they're very incompetent.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

I don't disagree that they're incompetent. But in this particular case what they're doing isn't incompetent at all. Surely you've noticed that anything in there that has Trumps name next to it is all things that couldn't be corroborated. Or things that couldn't be followed up on for one reason it another.

They took his name off from anything that was potentially investigated and proven, and left the "she says.." statements that have had no investigative follow-up so they can say "look how honest we are. Yes he's in there but none of it is actually provable"

Its a greasy, and slimy and frankly pure evil scheme. But its not an incompetent one.

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 43 points 2 days ago

Amazing how much more consistant they never miss to redact people listed as co-conspirators... but so frequently miss the one thing they are actually supposed to be redacting

[–] stupidcasey@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Glad we were able to get all that Trump stuff out we might have missed something important.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

If you still believe they only held back enough to protect Trump, you're not paying attention.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm honestly surprised they haven't said, "calling it CSAM is woke."

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

i saw cnn using "sex with underage woman" in relation to epstein files, instead of...you know...raping children

[–] Jumbie@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago

They did this on purpose.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Man, the disintegration of Trump's base is fascinating to watch. The DOJ just gave up censoring things and released a shit load of unredacted files. Yes, there is CSAM but importantly the files are wide open and showing everything. And boy does it look really bad for a lot of people who were all wrapped up with Epstein.

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And boy does it look really bad for a lot of people who were all wrapped up with Epstein.

I look forward to the infighting.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's interesting that allegedly the "pizza" code talk was in there.

Go figure - it was Donvict's BFF that is the sex trafficker talking in code referencing pizza.

Not Podesta, not Hillary Clinton and not Obama, operating out of the basement of Comet Ping Pong or whatever the fuck...

[–] tonytins@pawb.social 5 points 2 days ago

Sure does explain why that conspiracy theory was so highly specific.

[–] kungen@feddit.nu 4 points 2 days ago

I wouldn't be surprised if it was intentional. "Why are you wanting to see all the files instead of just reading the normal news? Are you a nonce or what?"

[–] DaMummy@hilariouschaos.com 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Can we just start a world war already so I can get distracted from......this.

[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 0 points 12 hours ago

I prefer alien invasion. Been waiting to have my speech about alien probe and independence day or something.

[–] not_that_guy05@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And we can secretly take them out? I'm in

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

would probably be more effective if it wasn't secret