this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2026
361 points (88.5% liked)

politics

28242 readers
2700 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

The revelation about the sulphuric acid sparked wild speculation on social media as to what Epstein needed it for, including to 'destroy evidence or even human remains' - despite there being no evidence of criminal use.

I think you may be confusing "wild speculation" with reason.

What would be the other conclusion you draw when you hear a sex trafficking pedophile who murdered and tortured his victims, ordered multiple drums of sulphuric acid to be delivered to his private island the same day a federal investigation was announced?

But further emails in the documents, dating back to 2013, suggest Epstein used sulphuric acid on the private island to purify water.

RO stands for Reverse Osmosis - a water purification system - while sulphuric acid is widely used in water treatment, specifically to soften, adjust pH, and enhance the efficiency of other chemicals during purification processes.

Oh well as long as that's what he'd always been ~~dissolving bodies in~~ using to purify water, nothing to see here. Just like there was nothing to see in the entire decade between first being arrested for sex trafficking a minor in 2008 and charged with "soliciting prostitution of a minor," continuing to do insane business transactions with powerful elites and banks who still won't release records of those transactions, and ending up dead in his jail cell with a federal record date of death listed the day before he actually died at the exact time security footage resets itself, and both guards take a meal break so there are no witnesses. Oh and 2 minutes are missing because glitches happen.

There's no need for wild speculation because there's always some perfectly logical explanation for why none of this is what it looks like.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sulphuric acid is not particularly good at dissolving bodies. It's hard to believe that a bunch of billionaires on a private island with bodies to dispose of would chose that as a method.

Agree that Epstein was clearly murdered.

[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Hydrochloric acid may have been a better choice, but some interesting studies have found sulfuric acid is second most effective.

Postmortem tissue alterations induced by corrosive substances – a scoping review

Another study on human tissues dates back to 2011, where a group of researchers in America, represented by Hartnett, Fulginiti and di Monica28 examined the effect of household substances on five types of human tissues, namely bones, teeth, hair, nails, and skin/muscle/adipose tissue. However, the specific number of analyzed samples is not specified. The study involved the use of seven different substances including: hydrochloric acid (31.45 %), sulfuric acid (95–98 %), caustic soda (100 %), bleach (5.25 % sodium hypoclorite), organic cleaning substance (bacteria and enzymes – no concentration available), Coca-Cola (unknown concentration of phosphoric acid) and water (as a control). The duration of the study ranged from a few hours to 30 days for the submerged group. The authors assessed the macroscopic appearance and samples weight and concluded that hydrochloric acid was the most destructive agent, with tissue destruction occurring in less than 24 h. Sulfuric acid followed as the next most destructive substance. No notable changes were observed in tissues submerged in water or organic cleaning solution

I've actually had a bit splash in my face while working in a lab. Luckily I was wearing safety goggles, but the tiny bit that did contact my cheek was quite painful and immediately did some damage. It doesn't seem inconceivable that they would attempt to dispose of evidence by sealing it in barrels of acid, including human remains that may have already been in the process of decomposing. It also doesn't mean it was the only thing used to conceal evidence. Definitely don't believe these people have done much to earn the benefit of the doubt.

It’s hard to believe that a bunch of billionaires on a private island with bodies to dispose of would chose that as a method.

I would say it's harder to believe a sex trafficking pedophile island run by a bunch of billionaires to serve the world's elite, ever existed in the first place, or that it continued operating for as long as it did while victims of trafficking were flown in to be tortured and as some witnesses have claimed, murdered. And yet...

If a scientist famously attempted to do it, not sure why you would think these people wouldn't?

Larissa Schuster, also known as “the acid lady”, utilized her knowledge as a biochemist and access to professional laboratory substances to dissolve her husband's corpse in hydrochloric acid (HCl) and sulfuric acid “The People V. Larissa Schuster.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 2 points 21 hours ago

Definitely don’t believe these people have done much to earn the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt, even remotely.

I would say it’s harder to believe a sex trafficking pedophile island run by a bunch of billionaires to serve the world’s elite, ever existed in the first place

I don't find that hard to believe at all, that seems very consistent with the sort of things billionaires do.

If a scientist famously attempted to do it, not sure why you would think these people wouldn’t?

This is what you're not getting. It's not a question of whether they would or wouldn't do it based on morals. Absolutely no question that they would. The thing is they could've literally just dumped bodies into mass graves, what, are cops going to be snooping around? Or thrown them into the sea, whatever they feel like. It's purely a question of practicality.

There's simpler and more mundane explanations anyway, like desalinization. Again it's not a question of "giving them the benefit of the doubt."

[–] SeptugenarianSenate@leminal.space 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Why's that?

[–] m3t00@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

red herring minute. where's the other cameras?

[–] ChonkyLincoln@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago

They raped and killed. Now we are all out of rape and time to _____ the guilty

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 268 points 2 days ago (12 children)

The records seem to indicate it was used as part of the island's reverse osmosis water treatment system. There I saved you a click.

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 117 points 2 days ago (18 children)

I kind of consider that to be plausible. 330 gallons sounds like a lot but it's only 6 barrels and there's way more effective ways to get rid of bodies (which I think is the implication). Also, justice isn't being achieved, not because of lack of evidence here, but because disgusting crimes are being covered up, and disgusting people being protected. I'm ok focusing on "why aren't any men in jail for this right now?"

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What's funny is the UK? wants someone to step down cause they hired someone on the list. They fired him a year ago but they still want him to step down. Well US is like whatever. Who cares.

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I've been boggled by American inaction in this and I wonder if it's because there's no recall function in our system? Maybe folks are just waiting for the midterms, but we aren't seeing civil consequences (firings, boycotts, etc) either. It genuinely seems like there's something uniquely American about the lack of consequences here

[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’ve been boggled by American inaction

I mean it's pretty clear why: Trump's name appeared more than a million times in the unredacted Epstein files according to Rep. Jamie Raskin

The highest office in the country benefits from the inaction.

I know it's not really the same thing in the UK, but even within the royal family and public opinion, if it had been Charles instead of Andrew, do you think he would willingly be giving up his royal title and everything that goes with it, even if other members of the family were pressuring him?

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Definitely, but there should be systems in place like impeachment, no confidence votes, etc. in the US, Congress can impeach a president and remove them, but if they don't do so, we-the-people don't have legal recourse for removing members of Congress in the middle of their terms. A lot of the advice angry Americans are getting right now is "just vote them out in the midterms". This feels woefully insufficient

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 35 points 2 days ago

Also you’d buy in bulk because the cost of delivery is probably the same.

[–] epicthundercat@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

We wouldnt have to speculate if the DOJ would do their job in a way that allows the population to trust them. We dont get that though, so we have to be the justice ourselves to a degree by demanding total transparency and that also means questioning to ensure information comes out if its there. Thats my take.

People are being left to fill in the gaps and that causes mass confusion and makes people question real evidence. Its not okay

That is probably the point

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] lemming741@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (10 children)

The volume is a tote, aka an IBC container

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_bulk_container

Super common and readily available for both legitimate and/or illegal purposes.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ok. But how much? It's just used for that doesn't tell me if that's a normal amount for reverse osmosis or if it's triple the amount of a normal scenario.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It would depend on how much water they treated.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Correct. All this information plays a factor in why it was there in the first place.

[–] blitzen@lemmy.ca 26 points 2 days ago (9 children)

It’s also, like not even that much for this kind of janitorial purpose. To add to that, while it sounds insidious, sulphuric acid isn’t the nefarious thing it sounds like.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] idyllic@leminal.space 7 points 2 days ago

It may not be for dissolving bodies. But since the timing is suspect and indicative of some coverup, I would guess probably destroying trace DNA evidences.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 15 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Sulphuric acid does not dissolve humans.

[–] treesquid@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Sulphuric acid is a strong acid and in sufficient molarity will dissolve a Buick Roadmaster

[–] BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

I've never used sulfuric acid on flesh, but I can tell you that it works wonders on both plants and chicken shit.

[–] But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Be easier to just toss the bodies in the ocean, the acid is for pools

[–] Vile_port_aloo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I was skimming the article. Only saw mention of it being used for the pool. Then just general information we already know about the island.

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yes it does, it's a matter of volume, exposure, and time. Dahmer used hydrochloric acid which is more effective.

[–] Dearth@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's also used in desalinization. A technology that's pretty useful when you're on an island surrounded salt water

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Yep and far more likely the reason for the order.

[–] Gork@sopuli.xyz 44 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Good goddess that thumbnail is horrifying.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago

If only the current American administration could be bathed in it.

[–] statelesz@slrpnk.net 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Sulphuric acid is not the clean and easy method to dissolve a body as you might think and Hollywood might suggest.

[–] CarterH739@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I second this. Sulfuric acid was my entire job for eleven years. It would definitely do the job, but it's not as simple as dropping a body into a drum with it. You'd need a lot more of it, heat, pumps for a circulation system, filtration for the parts that it won't eat through right away (hair and fingernails, possibly teeth). There are much more efficient ways to get rid of a body. Especially on an island.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] apftwb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What was the point of the video?

[–] Zanathos@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

It was probably tied to the article. The video is meant to show potentially doctored footage of another inmate walking into Epsteins jail sector the same night and time of his death, but the jail record claimed no one else being in the sector at his time of death.

[–] Triumph@fedia.io 16 points 2 days ago
load more comments
view more: next ›