Submitted 8 hours ago by SharkyAttack@lemmy.world to nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
And if they are digital, how has there not been any sort of hack? ‘Anonymous’ or foreign actors would surely love to have a chance to air the dirty laundry, no?
Remember when the Panama Papers were leaked, that exposed many celebrities who were involved in tax fraud and other criminal activities?
Remember how much it affected the involved people?
I remember the people who leaked them were killed.
Probably to keep them legitimate. If leaked nobody is would believe them.
Make them release it officially and people might take it seriously.
Officially released by the current administration? I can’t think of any other avenue that would make the release less legitimate
I will honestly take it less seriously if it is released officially
Turns out it’s generally hard to hack something but occasionally there is a mistake allowing someone else in. Just don’t count on it.
Assume the files have been marked and that they would know it’s you who leaked it. You’d probably get prosecuted at the very least and if there is a vote to release the files you’ll go to prison for nothing.
I don’t know if this is true, but I think it’s because they’re really old. If you look at all of the previous documents, they’re photos of text, emails, and some of them books. They’re not transcribed, so hard to search.
Also, you have to have levels of trust that the docs are real. These have been in a bunch of people’s hands, but who do you send it too where it gets the biggest bang as being legit? NYT isn’t all that trusted. Maybe The Guardian?
But then, you’re also putting your own life on the line. What’s Snowden or Reality up to these days? I can see why it’s complicated.
Blackmail material is only powerful as a threat. Releasing material from it makes the remainder less powerful. If you raise the stakes a little by adding some small details, an association here, a plausibly deniable link there, you can enhance the fear of the person on the other end of the blackmail without ruining the value of what you have. So depending on what people want they can get better results by keeping that information hidden.
On top of that most people who get dirt on one person get dirt on many people. You may want to take down one person but by if you release some stuff from the files then someone on the other side can burn people on your side. Mutually assured destruction will paralyse everyone.
As an outside to everyone I want all of it released because in my mind anyone implicated is either an active predator or someone who tolerates predators. But if you have paid good money to have a specific member of congress get into office and they are able to act in your favour then it doesn’t matter if they have a D or an R, they are yours. It is very expensive to get someone who understands the game into office and under your thumb. Much better to prevent the whole system from becoming unpredictable due to lots of sudden new blood and to keep known actors in place. Members on both sides of the aisle want the files locked away forever, meaning they want to protect predators. The failure to act is a choice, not an accident.
To be clear, I am including foreign actors, massive companies, all sorts of people. If you have an asset that can protect another asset without knowing then you generally would do so.
A lot of the Epstein files has been released. However, there are some things not released. Something I'll refer people to HR 4405
Now in that, let's look at section C of that bill:
would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary
This is a big deal, because Judges ordering things to not be release CAN NOT be released no matter who says so. This is a separation of powers thing. A lot of things are withheld from the public because it's part of various legal cases. The most recent one I can think of is JP Morgan paying out that $290M to victims and there was like some amount paid to the Virgin Islands.
Now the stuff that's wrapped up by the Judges, if someone leaks any of that, they are going to prison. And the people who are handling those files are very well aware of the consequences of if they say peep about what they've seen.
This is the part where people are like "what if Trump destroys some evidence?" Well a lot of that evidence was turned over to the courts during Biden. So if the DoJ suddenly made things start disappearing, it's not going to match up with what the court already knows about.
Many people already know what's in these files. They know what's going to be brought in legal cases. They also know what would happen to them it if they leaked anything they've already seen. And a lot of this information has been steady released to the public.
So this brings up, what the fuck is Congress bitching about then? What Congress is attempting to do, is code into law a requirement for the information to released to the public no matter what might be contained, WITH A FEW EXCEPTIONS AS NOTED IN SECTION C. What this law would do, is not just ensure that justice if done but also ensure that the public is aware of all the details behind the case.
You know how like some court cases will happen and not everything presented in court is released to the public? Well this would codify into law the requirement to release all of that to the public. Of course, AFTER any kind of trial it was used in, if it wasn't released before a trail began.
So how about this scenario: someone with a terminal illness has access to the files. Said person sticks their copy in a timed release, so when they die, the documents are distributed everywhere.
At this point, enough people have access to the files that such a thing is feasible.
Of course, it’s also possible that enough of the files are so boring and inconsequential that nobody would see the value in releasing them like that; the main power is to leverage the innuendo to direct public opinion in a timely manner.
Just seems like there is such universal interest in ‘releasing’ them that something should have leaked by now. You hear the argument about the moon landing or other conspiracy theories that it would take so many people colluding to hide the truth it would be impossible not to leak, how many people have access to “the files”, and if there is a vote to release them, who just pushes the button or whatever to make that happen? (And in no way am I suggesting they are not real and only a conspiracy theory, just giving an analogy)
With the names that have already been released, the ringleader dead under mysterious circumstances, and lack of whistleblower protections… I’m assuming no one is stupid enough to leak/hack the information when there are legal paths to release the information (ie FOIA). Groups you cited like Anonymous act when no one else can or will.
Bits of them are being made public all the time. There’s so much incriminating stuff out there, it’s pretty damn obvious that nothing will affect Trump.
These are documents pulled in an investigation and are probably mostly paper (digital was less prevalent during the heyday of his abusive stage). Digital comms were likely less used in commitment of crimes for obvious reasons. Paper documents are rarely digitized unless someone has a reason to disseminate them to others.
My guess is that they’re not particularly outrageous but embarrassing to both parties. Maybe the unreleased information is about Epstein’s work with intelligence agencies, something that neither Democrats nor Republicans would want to release and individuals with access wouldn’t feel a moral obligation to leak.
But that still doesn’t explain why Trump doesn’t just say so without revealing any details - it seems less damaging than total stonewalling.
Would you intentionally piss off Putin/Pinochet/Capone/that one German guy? And for anyone close enough to have access, fear (and billionaire money) reaches across international borders.
BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 hours ago
They already faked a suicide for a dude in prison to keep that info from getting out, that’s a hell of a warning.
it_depends_man@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
Worse, Snowden did leak an absurd amount of gov details and documents and info and it did nothing to stop what’s happening. People barely acknowledged it.
Maybe someone would martyr themselves. But doing it for nothing? Not appealing.
birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 hours ago
It did actually have some effect, though. The GDPR and countries reducing their dependence on the USA’s intelligence services are part of it.
I’m also reminded of the Panama Papers, which did make some bankers in Iceland step down.
shalafi@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Epstein was allowed to kill himself. Someone whispered in his ear that he should do the right thing, hint, hint, or face monstrous consequences.
frizzo@piefed.social 7 hours ago
The monstrous consequences more than death? This is a bad take. Zero people have been arrested and charged with soliciting the humans he sex trafficked. Maxzine gizzwelle is in a Texas prison with special privileges , he is rich and connected he would have been innocent or pardoned eventually.
Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
This is one of the dumber conspiracy theories I’ve ever heard
Randomgal@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
You mean the consequences that all his rapist friends faced? Oh… Wait.