this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2026
153 points (99.4% liked)

politics

28633 readers
2546 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
 

The sex offender could exploit these masters of the universe ​because, despite their privilege, ​they still felt short-changed by life, says Guardian columnist Emma Brockes

One of the things that has been frequently puzzled over as the effluent of the Epstein story flows on, is how a college dropout who thought it was cool to do typos managed to persuade the world’s most powerful into his lair. What, precisely, was the nature of his “genius”? Was it blackmail? Was it the social pyramid scheme of using one big name to reel in another? Nothing has come close to explaining it until, with the latest crop of details from the Epstein files, something has become suddenly clear: that it wasn’t the trafficked girls and women who Jeffrey Epstein groomed. The man’s real talent, if we want to call it that, was in the grooming of his cohort of associates.

This isn’t to say, of course, that the men and occasional woman who threw in their lot with a man we must straight-facedly refer to as “the dead paedophile” weren’t culpable. Nonetheless, if you study the huge amount of Epstein-related material, from the New York Times’s deep dive into his finances to the vast cache of correspondence contained in the files, a picture emerges of a man who did the kind of number on his peers that you would more commonly see directed at victims. While multiple survivor testimonies indicate that Epstein regarded the girls and women he trafficked as of such low consequence he didn’t even need to bother to groom them – per Virginia Giuffre’s account, Epstein raped her the first time they met – all of his resources, via a variety of tactics, went into capturing the allegiances of powerful men.

MBFC
Archive

all 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shittydwarf@sh.itjust.works 23 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Interesting. Who is the most entitled and insecure man in modern history? First one that comes to mind

[–] OldQWERTYbastard@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

Oompa loompa doopidy doo....

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Is this a surprise to anybody? The 70s to 2000s was filled with movies and rock stars showing what a badass looks like. And it's often a womanizing macho dude with 6 women around his hands.

It still looks like that to the insecure tech bros.

[–] breakfastmtn@piefed.ca 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Hey now, the 90s had a thing or two to say about rich dicks and sellouts...

[–] ruuster13@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 days ago

I wonder if the optimism of the 50s matched the optimism of the 90s.

[–] SpicyLizards@reddthat.com 9 points 3 days ago

Probably helps if they already have no moral compass entering that relationship. They went along, got their STDs, inflicted their PTSD, and didn't wonder if there was something wrong either this... in fact, it must have been a turn on for the sick fucks.

[–] JayK117@aussie.zone 5 points 3 days ago

He pretty much just needed to be prepared for the worst humanity had to offer and no matter what filth came from their mouths he would just say "Yes. And?". Give these rich fucks permission to be as evil as possible then take it one step further. Anyone who spent any time with him would progress from 'massages' to rape to murder.

[–] Whostosay@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 days ago

I couldn't get through the first two seconds of this article.

Let's ask ourselves. Who gives a fuck?

Before or after you read, were you expecting more information that will let you make a decision on what you should do and who it should be done?

I've known enough for 6+ years. A lot more info has come out, so you're likely not far behind.

What more do you need to know to realize it's you and your family versus the ultra rich?

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

His security nicknamed Mountbatten „the cunt“.

We should stick with this.

[–] pigup@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

One of the overarching traits of narcissism a bottomless sense of entitlement.

[–] dizzle18@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 days ago

I’m sure his training from fucking Mossad was pretty helpful too.