this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2026

350 points (99.4% liked)

News

35692 readers

2798 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

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. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

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

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

350

Epstein survivors say they felt 'degraded' and a 'lack of empathy' from AG Pam Bondi (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“There was no integrity in that room today, it seems like, when it came to Epstein and Maxwell,” Teresa Helm said after Wednesday's House Judiciary Committee hearing.

Six survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse and two members of another accuser’s family said they felt "degraded" during Wednesday's contentious House Judiciary Committee hearing, at which Attorney General Pam Bondi refused to face them and apologize.

Several Epstein survivors and relatives were on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers grilled Bondi for over five hours about several matters, including the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein case. She was specifically questioned about why released files were heavily redacted and why several survivors' names were not.

“There was such a lack of empathy today. There was such a lack of, honestly, humanity today,” Dani Bensky said on NBC’s "Hallie Jackson NOW."

top 46 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] smeenz@lemmy.nz 6 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

I'll just leave this here...

A psychopath is an individual with a personality disorder characterized by a lack of empathy, shallow emotions, impulsivity, and persistent antisocial behavior. While often charming superficially, they exhibit callous disregard for others' rights and feelings, frequently lying or manipulating to achieve goals. They generally do not feel remorse or guilt, and are prone to dangerous, irresponsible, or criminal actions.

Key Characteristics and Traits

Lack of Empathy/Remorse: Inability to feel guilt or genuine emotion, allowing them to exploit others.

Superficial Charm/Manipulation: Often appear normal, pleasant, or charming to mask their true nature.

Antisocial Behavior: Disregard for social norms, laws, and safety.

Impulsivity and Irresponsibility: Prone to boredom, poor behavioral control, and high-risk actions.

Grandiosity: Often have an inflated sense of self-worth.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Or in other words, she's a soulless monster who deserves shame, ridicule, and a lifetime of misery.

[–] nforminvasion@lemmy.world 2 points 53 minutes ago

Yes but not because she has psychopathic tendencies. We cannot allow ourselves to villainize people based off their birth conditions. There are a good chunk of people who due to no fault of their own were born with these tendencies, and a lot of them try very very hard to live a good and kind life, even without emotional connection.

If we start demonizing people who struggle connecting to emotions, either fully or partly, we will condemn many autistic and other neurodivergent people who happen to also struggle with expressing emotions, perhaps not as greatly as those with psychopathic behaviors.

On the front of empathy, yeah it's understandably scary to think about people without it. But again, we cannot decide that they are doomed to be cruel and malicious people without allowing them to learn and forge their own paths.

All this so say, Bondi is absolutely a despicable pile of garbage because of her actions and the role she has played in this regime. And I am absolutely never going to defend anyone even closely related to this administration. But, we must be careful not to simply decide someone's fate because of who society says they are, otherwise we form self fulfilling prophecies.

[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 70 points 10 hours ago

This hearing was a total disaster for Bondi. There was no hiding what a monster she is, and it's now come out that photographers captured images of her burn book which included info from illegal DOJ surveillance of members of Congress search histories of the Epstein files. Bondi is spying on Congress while they review the Epstein files, a blatant violation of the separation of powers.

[–] pinheadednightmare@lemmy.world 20 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

I don’t wish harm but to very few people, and Pam Bondi is one of them. I would pay big money to be able to punch that bitch right in the kisser.

[–] OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

I'd buy tickets to that show

[–] ebolapie@lemmy.world 7 points 7 hours ago

Funny you should say that. In this administration everything is for sale, you just can't afford it.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 hours ago

Just make sure you wash the shit off your fist afterward.

[–] ClownStatue@piefed.social 3 points 6 hours ago

Bondi’s the kind of person whose first response to hearing about the Epstein file, or any rape, is, “What were they wearing?”

[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 28 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

Was it because she started screaming about how much the DOW is up? (much less than it was projected to be under competent leadership)

[–] MojoMcJojo@lemmy.world 1 points 13 minutes ago

Never mind the child rape, have you seen the economy!

[–] boydster@sh.itjust.works 15 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Small nitpick, only because I see it repeated a bunch right now, I am so sorry for being annoying like this please don't hate me

It's the Dow, or Dow Jones, or Dow Jones Industrial Average, or DJI. But it's not DOW, those initials mean other things.

Again I am so sorry I hate that I even posted this I really do just mean to help and not be the ahctually person

[–] triptrapper@lemmy.world 2 points 33 minutes ago

Another nitpick I'm surprised I haven't seen: she said The Dow was up to 50,000 DOLLARS. She even hedged for a bit because she doesn't know what units we use to measure the Dow.

[–] U7826391786239@lemmy.zip 6 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

is dow up because tech is shitting the bed? or is GOP just rewriting reality again?

[–] Triton420@mander.xyz 9 points 9 hours ago

It’s up because the value of the dollar is falling

[–] FiniteBanjo@feddit.online 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

TBH with employment down and costs of living soaring I couldn't care why the DOW is up, the DOW has always gone up, I'm more interested in those Epstein questions she refused to answer in order to scream about the DOW.

[–] U7826391786239@lemmy.zip 4 points 10 hours ago

everyone working for trump is just a muppet, under direct orders from trump along the lines of "don't answer any questions, just talk about how great i am"

so..DOW. that's all anyone's ever going to get

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 5 points 8 hours ago

It's only a matter of time before Trump throws people under the bus, and hopefully she will be among the first.

[–] U7826391786239@lemmy.zip 18 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

if you have empathy/ a conscience/ a soul--trump is not appointing you to anything

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 hours ago

Pam Blondi the lapdog

[–] pinheadednightmare@lemmy.world 8 points 9 hours ago

Because that’s what she did, so it is right that they feel that way. DOJ don’t give a shit about them. Only the people in power.

[–] decapitae@sh.itjust.works 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

The lack of commom decency from these "federal officials" reveals their false claims of holding certain beliefs as their own, rather than just an advertisement to gain entry to these offices. So of course it's treason when their lies fall on un-groomed ears so they are 'performing' as their freedom depends on it. The flippant responses to seasoned congress members - the newly installed beligerant and farsical congress members - the lack of quality acting is only complemented with the actual white supremist beliefs echoed and chanted repeatedly, while kissing up to thier own in the most bizarre fashion of 'authority' worship I have seen outside of B-movie dialog.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Doesn't watching her speak at these hearings feel like watching a shitty instagram reel? Like, where did she learn her fake-ass behavioral cues and gestures?

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (5 children)

1 in 5 people you meet lack empathy. I got these numbers from reporting the US military made to the office of general accounting. The military gives everyone a psychiatric evaluation. Its the only place to get a accurate number on this. Due to the fact that almost all of them avoid any type of therapy. I can't find the link right now but if I find it later I will post it.

Edit: Here you are. For my not surprising number of doubters. This is where I started when I went down the path toward finding the numbers I'm using. I rarely bookmark anything on my phone as its barely useful when doing anything serious but I bookmarked these pages on it.

https://health.clevelandclinic.org/narcissist-signs https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/mental-health/narcissistic-personality-disorder/npd-statistics/

Its up to all of my detractors here to read through it. Here is a hint if you disagree and get upset reading it you may be one of the people I'm talking about. Not that you will admit it.

If you read this and notice that some of the people around you who cause you pain and stress act and do these things to you. You may be a victim. I encourage you to seek therapy. Those that have this problem will not want you to and try to convince you its not right to do so.

The most common thing they will do is try to scare you and embarrass you. The best thing you can do is not tell them until you have been in therapy for a while. There is no point in arguing with them. They will never admit fault. Its one of their most telling traits. A inability to admit fault and truly apologize. The best they can ever do is feel sorry you feel that way. Not sorry they hurt you but just sorry you hold them accountable for it. That is how they are crippled emotionally.

[–] AlDente@sh.itjust.works 1 points 59 minutes ago

20% of people outright lacking empathy is a lot. With such a large percentage, how can you be sure you aren't one of them?

Yesterday I helped to clarify why AIPAC fucked up in the NJ special election. When my response was followed with the joke "Ah, thank you for not explaining that while literally walking out the d", it started collecting downvotes. The "not explaining" seemed to stand out as negative, and I admit I was a little confused myself. However, instead of throwing shade or downvoting it myself, I just asked a simple question about what they meant. The response: "(I was walking out the door, like the author while writing the article)" put everything to rest. It was a joke about how the author of the posted article trailed off without coming to a clear conclusion.

Yet even after this clarification was posted, you jumped in with the worst negative assumption about the interaction. You weren't seeking clarity or offering anyone support, you were looking to attack. Even after being respectfully asked to re-read the conversation, you double and tripled-down on this incorrect negative assumption. I feel that this attitude is evident here, as you challenge your "detractors" and charge that they are the ones lacking empathy. Don't forget that every accusation is a confession.

Ultimately, I don't agree with your 20% statistic. Mostly this is because I don't believe in binary assignments, such as having or lacking empathy. We are all capable of making positive assumptions about each other's intentions. Some of us just choose not to in certain circumstances, but there is always room for change.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 3 points 3 hours ago

I am a detractor who read these sources. You can too if you have any interest in the subject.

The first one does not mention statistics at all, just describes why you shouldn't call people narcisistits because it has a specific definition that is overly applied. Ironically enough.

The second source does mention some statistics. But actually verifies the questions that were raised by other curious folks. It states that only .5 percent of the population experiences NPD and that 20 percent of the military does.

This verifies that the military survey is NOT the only source of statistics and that 20 percent of every one you meet doesn't necessarily "lack empathy".

So, a relief, I suppose, for now.

Although, the claim that anyone who questions a random internet comment are all the same person and are definitely controlling narcissistic a holes has not been verified.

But it's probably true. I will not look any further into it for fear of self reflection.

[–] chaogomu@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The military doesn't give everyone a psych eval.

Anyone seeking a higher clearance goes through one. But that's not a full accounting, the vast majority of people never need a clearance beyond the general Secret that almost everyone gets. No real psych eval for that.

Some specialized jobs get them as well. And I think some combat jobs get them by default... but mostly no. It's just the standard, "can this person both follow orders and be trusted to do the job they were hired for?"

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone who fucks up which most of the lower functioning ones with NPD get tested as well. It not a choice between the military and some other large sampling. Its the only place where its done at all other than in the field of psychology. which is a lot fewer people and well most of the time people in that field are victims of the subject matter we are discussing.

I know this because I have spent hours and hours reading and search for information on it and nothing you say will change it. I sure am getting a lot of push back about it here three 'people' trying tell me I'm wrong is kinda telling in and of itself. No argument you make changes anything.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 1 points 4 hours ago

Three " 'people' " huh. That seem to suggest a lack of empathy towards anyone who applies a minimum amount critical thinking.

No one should take a claim like that at face value, period, and the burden of proof is on those who make the claim.

Must be a part of that 20 percent to dehumanize anyone who questions you so easily.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The only place to get an accurate number on this thing you should totally believe about everyone you meet is a test that the military definitely doesn't give to everyone but can maybe be sourced probably.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Nope. The only place to get any idea about a true number is the military. Anyone who needs a security clearance gets tested. Which is more and more everyday. Anyone who fucks up gets tested. Which is most of them. There is no other place that can give you a accurate number due to the nature of people with no empathy. Instead of arguing with me go look for numbers on Cluster B disorders Particularly NPD. Anyone who lacks empathy exhibits it in some form. What you will find is a very low number of these people seek out help. Most of the testing done in the civilian world is court ordered. They will never seek out help for something they see as a superpower. What possible problem could there be for not giving a shit about others?

There is no other source with as large of a sampling of US citizens. I really wish I had time to find that site with all the information about it. It had a huge number of nested pages outlining the psychology of these assholes.

The only other place where testing is common is among people who are in a psychology field, either as a student or a practicing professional.

The number is 1 in 5 and its probably higher than that. I don't care what you believe I know I've developed a really good skill at spotting them. Plenty of tells with their sort.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Why would the military be a representative sample? Maybe when we had the draft, sure. But even then their were conscientious objectors, and of course women weren't drafted. And plenty of people voluntarily enlisted even in the Vietnam era.

Is it not reasonable to expect that those with high empathy levels would be less likely to voluntarily enlist? Knowing nothing else, I would expect the military to select for those with low empathy levels. It's an obviously useful ability if your job is to kill other human beings. And you're supposed to carry out orders without any consideration for the consequences of those orders or who they hurt. That sounds like an extremely low-empathy environment.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Anther pointless argument that ignores what I've said to try to tell me the military is a poor place to get that information. Totally ignoring its the only place it exists. Also another useless pointless argument to try to convince me that all the people that join the army are killers. They are not natural killers and if you actually knew any or any vets you would know that.

I suspect at this point I'm talking to the same people who just switch accounts to try to gaslight me. There is data from other sources but the military is the largest sample. The next being medical students. I think people from the psychology field are next and I haven't bothered to look again (why would I?) to see their exact percentage but I recall its around 14 percent. The number that is reported by trained professionals is absurdly low because people without empathy are terrified of and hate therapy.

I'm secure in my knowledge. My therapist and my psychiatrist have looked at the same information I do. Real people with real degree's agree with me and nothing some random person on the internet says to try to argue against it will change my mind.

Its amazing how many are jumping in here to argue against it. Its not the first time but the baseless incorrect assumptions are always the same.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

That's a really weird thing to say because you posted a source that provided statistics beyond the military survey, which pointedly proved that statement false.

Then you denied saying that the military was the only source when that fact was pointed out.

But you are now trippling down on that false claim.

It seems like you might have the inability to admit fault and truly apologize. Which is also what you accused others of.

Might be time to take a break and question some preconceived notions. Like, no hate. You are on one right now. 20 percent of people are not who you think they are. It's probably healthy to realize that.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Cool cool. And how does this source you wish you could find about a biased sample of the public, the only one possible of course, quantify "lacks empathy".

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Go away. when I have time and at home I will find it and post it but I'm sure you will find fault with it as well.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Until then I will remained convinced that 20 percent of the entire human population is some quantified amount of psychopathic.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

links in my original post. I drew three people or three accounts arguing against it this time. Not one in five but consider the subject and the subjects of the subject.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

First source says .5 percent of the population and 20 percent of the military. Which is exactly what you were questioned about.

1. The military is a biased sample.

2. The military is not the only source of statistics.

Also, kind of a shit source that doesn't appear to reference anything, to be fair.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I never said it was. I said its the largest. Your bias and probably your condition will always prevent you from considering it. Goodbye. Go away. Go feel right about everything somewhere else.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 2 points 3 hours ago

Yes you did, it was like a big point you made and doubled down on. But ok.

That source didn't verify that claim, either. And the other source doesn't mention statistics at all.

Nevertheless, you are right that goodbyes are in order.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

The only caveat is that people who want to be soldiers aren't necessarily representative of the general population. Plenty of people join the military because they want to kill people.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the number is around 20% of those who enlist.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world -2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure the military is a general slice of the population.

[–] KaChilde@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Men make up ~80% of the military in the US. Already we are off to a bad start if you think the military is a ‘general slice’.

Using the military as your source comes with a whole lot of biases. Military enrolment is not mandatory in the US, so your numbers are already skewed by factors of wealth, ‘patriotism’, and gender.

You can assume that people who are not open to the possibility of killing a human being are filtered from their ranks by default. And then being exposed to the life of a soldier (especially in a war zone) can skew the way that a person interacts with their world.

[–] slackassassin@piefed.social 1 points 4 hours ago

Not to mention that "lacks empathy" isn't exactly quantifiable in a meaningful way without further qualification.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world -2 points 4 hours ago

You can't possible be more wrong about anything you just said other than the rough makeup of the military. The number is 1 in 5 and its probably higher than that. You are surrounded by people who lack a basic human characteristic. To varying degree's these people have a reduced morality linked to a absence of empathy. They are the politicians, the CEO's, law enforcement and the clergy. They are trump and johnson. They are musk and zuckerberg. They are bondi and noem. That is just scum floating on top of the swamp. They are also people you work with. From my perspective they are possibly you.

One thing they do is take offense at anything indicating a problem with being that way and my numbers are sure to offend any of them. They seek power and don't care what they have to do to get it. They never consider any harm they may do to others in getting what they want. They never admit guilt or truly apologize.

They are evil as described by Gustave Gilbert. As I said the US military is the only place to get a large sampling of people on this hidden epidemic. You wont find another as large. Prove me wrong about that and find it. Easy bet on my part. It doesn't exist because the subjects of it avoid and decry any form of therapy.