270
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

When the Justice Department released a first batch of Jeffrey Epstein files on Friday that included photographs of Bill Clinton, White House officials raced to amplify the importance of the new documents. But days later, amid a second trove that contains several references to Donald Trump, the White House is pushing a different view: Don’t believe everything you see.

Trump officials on Tuesday downplayed the latest disclosure of more than 30,000 files related to Epstein, dismissing the significance of the materials and suggesting that some that mentioned Trump were unverified or even outright fabricated. Even as the rest of Washington pored over records showing Trump repeatedly flew on Epstein’s plane, White House aides sought to highlight other matters the president is more eager to talk about.

The messaging shift — the latest in a largely unsuccessful effort by the administration to seize control of the story — has spawned frustration in Trump’s orbit and parts of the White House, where some saw the scrambled response over the last few days as just the latest stumble in a year of Epstein-related blunders and baffling communications mishaps.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] zarniwoop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 9 months ago

Truth is...difficult to ascertain at the moment regarding this. He is implicated in the files, there is a witness statement.

A generous reading would say something along the lines of, there isn't hard evidence and he hasn't been convicted.

A realistic reading would say something along the lines of, yep - he did it.

Take your pick. I'm more inclined towards the later.

this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2025
270 points (98.6% liked)

politics

31224 readers
2311 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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 3 years ago
MODERATORS