this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2026
520 points (99.8% liked)

The Trump-Epstein Files

997 readers
1089 users here now

We keep track of the release of the files, but also to explore what’s already available, and why – with enough exposure – this could bring the man down, and who knows even his regime or the empire.

Want to start digging yourself? Check out our sticky post

Our Rules

(Subject to Change)

Our Justice System

This community is run by volunteers so please don't test the justice system, as with all justice systems it is critically underfunded.

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 37 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Well, there is the candid footage captured of her saying there are "thousands of videos, all little kids". And I have no reason to believe that particular statement was a lie. We know there was a ton of porn on there, and a ton of CSAM. Videos take up a lot of space.

As I said, there is also going to be a ton of material that's withheld because it's incriminating. That's pretty much confirmed. But not all 14 TB are going to be proof of Trump's crimes in black and white, a lot of it is just going to be CSAM.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 11 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

a lot of it is just going to be CSAM.

A lot of it can't be just CSAM. CSAM isn't something that just naturally happens. Someone had to be the abuser in those videos. There's no such thing as just CSAM, it's all incriminating material. How to release those is a whole other topic because you can't just release the video because it's pretty much guaranteed to contain the victims. But they can blur out the victims, they can just release the audio and cut out the victims names, they can release transcriptions of video etc. We could have a whole comment chain on what would be the best way to release the information in the videos but that's currently not the point. The point is that they could release it if they wanted to, they're simply hiding behind the "it's just CSAM" argument to not release the actually incriminating materials.

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago

You're right, just commenting to add there's plenty of redacted CSAM in the released files alone. I explained in a comment elsewhere in the thread, with links.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

And fair enough, but I think the legislation that requires it all to be released either accounts for this or doesn’t. And if it doesn’t and they don’t have to release it, let’s hear it, because that was not what the news told me.

One of the only non-budget-critical pieces of legislation to actually pass and be signed.