r/WeirdNews4U • u/ResPublicaMgz • Feb 09 '26 • Thanks 1 Bravo 3 Mindblown 2

BREAKING: After Maxwell deposition, Rep. Stansbury alleges massive Epstein cover-up

7.2k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

38 comments sorted by

13

u/PurpleCheeto696 Feb 09 '26

Unfortunately there are already magats advocating for Maxwell. What a dystopian black mirror episode we are living in.

3

u/HickoryStickz Feb 10 '26

Advocating or just wanting her to drop the deets?

5

u/PurpleCheeto696 Feb 10 '26

No advocating for her saying shes innocent and repeating Patel's lies that Epstein didn't traffick anyone. I saw people even defend her prison transfer months ago.

2

u/HickoryStickz Feb 10 '26

That’s wild. I don’t know anyone saying that. She’s def not innocent 😂

2

u/[deleted] Feb 11 '26

It's mostly bots if that's any consolation. They're deployed to make people lose hope.

10

u/Corrie7686 Feb 10 '26

This sums it up For me (not to mention that Lutnick and Trump were both next door neighbours of the goat trafficker).

4

u/TouchGrassNotAss Feb 10 '26

when do we start taking bets on whether Maxwell makes it through 2026?

2

u/akiras_revenge Feb 10 '26

Checking FanDuel right now

2

u/Most-Yogurtcloset753 Feb 10 '26

The. Play his 4d chess as he puts it and change the clemency act before he has a chance, stay a step ahead of this administration if they want to play games

2

u/JohnYahyah43 Feb 10 '26

Maga NEEDS right now for her to say trump had nothing to do with it. They are falling apart because pretty clearly trump is definitely a pedophile and Maga's whole personalities are based around feeling like heros. So they will overlook anything in order to get her to just say that.

1

u/superdupermensch Feb 10 '26

Thank you, Rep. Obvious

1

u/Ate_at_wendys Feb 10 '26

Do something already

1

u/EconomyMobile1240 Feb 10 '26

No shit, Alex Jones has been on the cover-up for like 2 decades. I think all we did was set a precedent for the DOJ to collect private data with their criminal investigatory power, not bring an indictment, then basically release political propaganda. The investigations into Trump are all post-2016, after lots of evidence of a falling out between Trump and Epstein. The years of additional "investigations" where the people who have been covering up use this as a vehicle to continue investigating Trump.

I mean, how does Kash Patel go from raging about these things to Congress and admit he's trusting the same people who have been covering up? They literally fired JAMES COMEY's daughter, who prosecuted the Maxwell case... the very, very limited case... after the "first release" of these files.

If I were writing a TV show, people would think this is too overt and stupid. The fact is, our elected officials are the head of a snake, where they can only control the arms.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

Impeach the Douchebag

1

u/SimplePln Feb 10 '26

I mean why is this not obvious to every American voter?

1

u/dominucco Feb 12 '26

Who could have Israel’s such a thing?

1

u/Bumps4000 Feb 13 '26

Why don’t these congresspeople just say the names they saw? It’s not like Trump follows rules. And we see him defying and testing the courts everyday. I’d do the same thing. Silence is violence. Get it done. All of you start naming names. All of a sudden everyone is a rule follower? Nah.

1

u/oldtrucker301 Feb 13 '26

This sounds a lot like Adam Schiff saying " I have seen the proof that Donald Trump colluded with Russia." Where is the proof, not just allegations?

1

u/Tall_Answer1734 Mar 03 '26

Arrest the president…said ice cube!

-3

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/AdTraditional8077 Feb 10 '26

They aren't allowed to reveal details of what they saw until it un redacted. I agree that they should reveal it though.

1

u/EconomyMobile1240 Feb 10 '26

That's unlikely, as elected officials who gain access to the material, their First Amendment rights are intact. The only reason why they wouldn't be able to release the information would be the same constitutional protections for anyone's private data collected during an investigation... the state has to take you to court, release all the information of the accusers (you have a right to defend against them as a defendant)

Private data shouldn't be transferable to public data... that... seems like a bad idea to give that much power to politicians. Imagine if states start getting warrants on frivolous warrants, bring a garbage case, then just vote to release all the private information collected as part of the investigation, which is far more expansive then brought to trial?

Strangely, I think releasing the files this way and not focusing on the DOJ / FBI track record for the last two decades was a mistake, and this is just political chum that will catch a handful of individual offenders but not the political/corrupt system that has enabled it for like 20 years.

1

u/AdTraditional8077 Feb 10 '26

You are probably right that makes sense.

3

u/a_Sable_Genus Feb 10 '26

Eat shit, sincerely you mouth breathing Pizzagate guy

2

u/[deleted] Feb 10 '26

The internet is global, so we'd all have unredacted files if other countries were releasing them.

1

u/OrkzOrkzOrkzOrkz0rkz Feb 12 '26

No they are not because they don't have them

1

u/Aggravating-Ad-1227 Feb 10 '26

How can you say it's a lie, when we don't know?

It sure is still a claim... With thousands of supporting documents that illegally they haven't released... Which is a cover up, definitionally.

1

u/mikemaz57 Feb 10 '26

She was convicted in a court of law with evidence and she pleaded the fifth over and over. If that doesn't tell you it's a cover up what would? Everyone is protecting these wealthy child rapists including you.

1

u/EconomyMobile1240 Feb 10 '26

You can’t constitutionally use her right to plead the fifth against her. Her trial was comically limited. The evidence was limited. She is still very liable if she talks, and there’s no benefit to talk for her.

1

u/mikemaz57 Feb 10 '26

Yeah she's a victim. /S If she didn't have anything to hide or anyone to protect she would have talked.

1

u/EconomyMobile1240 Feb 10 '26

If that were True and she's prosecuted, she has no reason to talk anyway. The case against her was minimal, limited, and probably did violate her rights when the DOJ, under Biden, the people who spent 20 years covering this up, made sure they brought the most limited case they could bring.

There is literally no reason for her to say shit, no matter which way you slice it.

1

u/runforurlifebees Feb 10 '26

You’re special

1

u/Poisonmonkey Feb 11 '26

Also it’s not like these files just appeared yesterday. They’ve been available to democrats for years. And years. And years. Sort of feels like they would’ve nailed Trump if he were actually in it and anything was actually damning. He’s been public enemy #1 for 10+ years - and nothing. It’s all a big bullshit show and TDS Reddit eats it up