Trump is probably on the list, so he has to protect that. The Democrats had it during their entire presidency; even if they didn’t want turmoil during their time in office, they could have released it after their presidential defeat and before Trump took office.

  • Shotgun_Alice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because I suspect most of the rich and famous are on that list and both (dems and rep) are now blackmailing the people on the list for money.

    • Salamanderwizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s kills me inside…like I grew up being told, “Don’t cover for your friends if they do something stupid.” I learned that includes things like rapes and assault, or child molestation or anything that proves they are not a good person.

      How is it that so many people in power don’t have that type of mentality? How is it that somehow none of em, not one, has the balls to actually stand up and say, “A, B, ans C have done this and this and that.”

      I’m lost for words on how to describe my feelings towards the Democrats that let this through.

      • locuester@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Because information is power. They can use knowledge of another’s wrongdoings to buy support for things.

      • admin@lemmy.todayOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        If people can come together on this, it could be the moment the USA tears down the entire establishment and probably gets rid of the two-party system.

        • Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sadly, that won’t happen if both D’s and R’s have people or large financial supporters on the list. Best case I can imagine is that those top people end up in jail which shakes up both parties. The 2 party system is a result of our voting system (winner takes all for most positions), so it’s bad to have a 3rd party similar to your own (which gets your own voters potentially siphoned off), or have be a 3rd party similar to another party (which means you’re weakening the party closest to your own, and helping the party most different from yours). regardless of whether it affects the 2 party system, getting that list published is important for justice.

          • Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s likely heavily reinforced by your voting system but 2 party systems aren’t unique to that system, even in theoretically better voting systems you frequently end up with very similar results. Australia as a case in point. That said if current electoral trends continue we could be seeing the end of that here and at least our system theoretically allows that to happen.

      • chingadera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is also the same thing that makes them vastly different.

        We call for the heads of the corrupt on our side instead of worship them.

        • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ive heard that many Republicans are pissed at Trump and Co about the lack of progress here since child trafficking was a big part of the QAnon bullshit. On the left, many people were willing to forgive genocide to get a paltry win at the ballot box so I can’t say either side really has the high ground.

          • chingadera@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Forgive may be a bit generous, at least in a lot of cases, I’d even argue most cases. We knew it was an inevitability with the only choices we had.

    • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Wouldn’t those that are not paedophiles want to clean house on both sides of the aisle. I mean , I get playing politics, but protecting paedophiles goes far beyond that.

  • TommySoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The same reason every politician and government will never release them, because they are trying to protect themselves or someone else. As long as money and power remain the only things politicians care about this will never get released. And I find it absolutely infuriating that these people will always prioritize reputations over the literal r*ping of children. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of people just blatantly getting away with it because apparently every single elite is in on it.

  • njm1314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The obvious is that Dems are on the list too. Which is undoubtedly true. Even more omportantly than that donors. But the fact that Merrick Garland was involved and he’d never to anything to make Trump look bad ever should also be remembered.

  • hperrin@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Tbh, probably because a lot of their donors are on the list. Also, Bill Clinton.

    • Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t think Bill Clinton has that much pull honestly. But important Democrats or important donors maybe.

      • Christian@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I agree, but I think Hillary does, and it would be a personal embarrassment to her.

  • FunkyStuff [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The obvious answer is that the Clintons are heavily implicated, but in a more general sense, the point of blackmail is to extort someone into doing something on the condition that you don’t release the blackmail. That’s why they got Epstein to connect with so many academics, celebrities, and other public figures. If they were to just release the blackmail, it would lose intelligence agencies all their leverage.

  • BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because the list DOESNT EXIST as our Truth Telling Administration has TOLD US! All you STUPID LIBTARDS who thought the CLINTONS WERE RAPISTS were WRONG!

    • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is all you fucking do. These shitty little comments that are supposed to look like irony, but are empty and mindless.

      What’s the deal? Why have you put in that much time on lemmy making essentially the same comment over and over again? Like, often enough that I don’t even have to look at the user name when there’s a comment like this, it’s going to be you.

      There has to be a reason behind it, some kind of thing in your head that makes you think it’s a beneficial hobby, so what is it? Help a motherfucker out, I don’t like blocking people unless there’s no other choice, so show me the human behind the blathering.

    • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Its more clear than ever. I don’t understand how more people don’t see it atleast amongst those who follow politics like this.

      • ssroxnak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        One side plays the good guys and one plays the bad guys. When the curtains close they shake hands and hang out together.