r/videos • u/FlackoFonsy • 11h ago
Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie Introduce Discharge Petition to Force Epstein Files Vote
https://youtu.be/G4uF5010dJY?is=BkykSG_U28Mv7PKp282
u/FlackoFonsy 10h ago
I feel like there’s some confusion so I’m gonna post this and link the rest for anyone seeking more info on what they’re talking about regarding The Epstein Files Transparency Act II they’re introducing.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act II:
•Creates a private right of action allowing state attorneys general, district attorneys, other authorized State officials, members of Congress, and victims to challenge and sue the U.S. Attorney General for unlawfully withholding, redacting, delaying, concealing, removing, or failing to publish Epstein-related records.
•Gives victims the right to obtain full, unredacted records concerning themselves or the harm they suffered, including relevant FBI FD-302 reports.
•Enforces compliance with the existing law by subjecting DOJ and FBI officials to existing federal criminal penalties for knowingly concealing, destroying, falsifying, withholding, or misrepresenting files.
•Requires the Department of Justice to provide State and local prosecutors with unredacted records needed for investigations, prosecutions, and judicial proceedings, including secure access to classified materials.
•Explicitly prohibits the invocation of common law privileges, including deliberative process privileges, to evade disclosure requirements included in the original EFTA.
49
u/love2go 7h ago
I can't help but fear that this will either not pass or just not be followed just like anything else related to this has.
14
u/Tiek00n 6h ago
If the discharge petition gets enough signatures to force a vote on the bill, then it will pass in the House - because it needs signatures from more than 50% of the members. At that point, since it will pass anyways, GOP leadership will likely do the same thing they did last time - see the writing on the wall that it'll pass, and let Republican representatives vote in favor of it, simply so they're not seen as being against it.
We'll see what happens in the senate.
1
13
u/bucolucas 7h ago
The previous Epstein files act went through with only one vote against in the House of Representatives, 100-0 in the Senate
17
u/hiles_adam 6h ago
Yes, the final vote was 427-1 in the House and unanimous in the Senate. But presenting that as though Congress enthusiastically supported releasing the files from the beginning is incredibly misleading.
The bill was stalled for months, the House session was ended early to prevent a vote, and Mike Johnson delayed swearing in Rep. Adelita Grijalva for seven weeks. She held the final signature needed on the discharge petition that would force the bill to the floor. The Senate had also previously voted 51-49 to table an effort to force consideration of Epstein-file disclosure.
So yes, the final vote was nearly unanimous. That doesn’t erase the months of procedural roadblocks used to prevent that vote from happening in the first place.
3
u/joedotphp 6h ago
This. It won't pass, but if by some miracle it does, the DOJ just ignore it because they know that nobody will do anything about it.
1
u/DocAvidd 5h ago
Impotence at "never seen before levels."
The legislative and judicial branches there are just welfare jobs for rich politicians.
1
5
u/joedotphp 6h ago
Even if it passes, the DOJ can just simply not obey it. Like they've already been doing for almost a year.
311
u/beardedbrawler 10h ago
Didn't they already do this and made a law to force the release of the files and the Trump DOJ pretty much ignored it?
Feel like we need a new strategy.
261
u/ChiefStrongbones 9h ago
45
u/Intarhorn 8h ago
That is good, hopefully this forces them to actually release stuff this time even if they have to do it unwillingly.
7
31
u/Br0metheus 8h ago
Ok so basically it'll just be yet another court ruling that the feds ignore?
10
u/Worth-Jicama3936 7h ago
Anyone except the president ignoring the court has actual real world consequences (like jail and fines)
15
5
u/Br0metheus 5h ago
Who's going to put them in jail or enforce the fine? The Justice department that reports to Trump? And even if that happens, what's to stop Trump from just pardoning them?
→ More replies (4)2
2
u/Risin 5h ago
Executive order: pardon!
Now what?
1
u/Worth-Jicama3936 5h ago
You can only pardon for past crimes. Every second they refuse to do their job, that’s an un pardoned crime. I guess you could have an auto pen going constantly issuing new pardons to every single person involved, but it is not as simple as you are making it out. Also, you cannot pardon civil cases and it sounds like the AGs may be bringing civil cases?
2
u/AwesomeManatee 5h ago
And the president has no issues throwing an attorney general under the bus.
Putting the heat on Trump hasn't worked, but putting heat on enough of his enablers might get results
5
u/Ok-Computer-8726 8h ago
So as not a lawyer, could state AGs not sue the USAG before? Will this law actually stand up in court in allowing them to do so now?
Less lawyerly question: What happens if they just ignore the courts? Still feels like as long as GOP members of congress aren't willing to show any teeth, the admin will just...not do it.
5
u/Worth-Jicama3936 7h ago
They didn’t have standing. In most cases you can’t just sue someone who is breaking the law unless you yourself (or your state/citizens if you are the state AG) are suffering harm because of that law breaking. The federal government can press charges…but of they are the one breaking the law….
This bill specifically gives the state AGs standing so now they can sue.
2
u/Qbr12 6h ago
So as not a lawyer, could state AGs not sue the USAG before? Will this law actually stand up in court in allowing them to do so now?
In general, when acting within the scope of the government, government officials have broad immunity against personal lawsuits. And by default you can't sue the government itself for anything, there has to be a law where the government specifically gives you the ability to sue them.
Less lawyerly question: What happens if they just ignore the courts?
Historically nothing. President Andrew Jackson was famously quoted as saying “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” (although we now believe the quote apocryphal).
In theory if you have enough votes to pass a bill through the legislature without the president being able to veto it, you would expect you also have enough votes to impeach if that exact same law is violated.
3
u/captain554 7h ago
Allow them to sue anyone who ignores the order personally. Takes on a whole new meaning when the money is their own.
2
u/CosmicMabel 6h ago
come on, the people writing these bills didnt think that this would need enforcement? Is massie that stupid?
1
u/APRengar 1h ago
I was watching analysis on this, apparently they argued that the only reason it passed in the first place was there was no enforcement mechanism, and they believed Trump would buckle under social pressure regardless. So this is going up the escalation ladder.
Not defending the argument, just giving the argument they gave.
2
u/buffystakeded 7h ago
So states can waste money suing because even if they win, the Trump doj will still ignore it.
58
35
u/Xsiah 10h ago
They ignored it because the law was ignorance - there was no penalty for not following it.
This one is meant to have more teeth
12
u/_andthereiwas 9h ago
Well fuck me. Is this how I met your mother or some shit "show me where it says what punishment I get" so they get off breaking the law because no exactly repercussions was mentioned?!
3
u/johnp299 9h ago
Cut operating budget for Air Force One/Marine One by 50%? Cut the money spent by SS at Trump properties entirely?
4
u/sheikhyerbouti 9h ago
Oh, in that case, I'm sure the Trump administration will comply, knowing that there might be legal consequences.
(that was sarcasm, by the way)
2
u/Xsiah 8h ago
If Republicans even let this law pass (they won't)
2
u/Intarhorn 8h ago
Maybe with enough pressure like last time, they might.
2
u/Xsiah 8h ago
I'm pretty sure the only reason it passed last time was because it didn't actually have consequences.
And there's even less pressure now - a bunch of people think that the files have been released and it's over and everyone should just move on - just like Daddy told them to think.
1
1
u/johnis12 6h ago
Doesn't help that they just tried to delay the release of these files as much as they humanly can past the date at which it was suppose to e released, because of how long it took for them to redact a buncha shit, but even the redactions were piss poor and they either unintentionally or (more likely) intentionally leaked the survivor's details.
Hell, think I remember when this Act got brought up, Trump literally called his cronies to the Situation Room to handle this.
Goodness, this Admin is disgusting...
12
9
u/temporalmods 9h ago
They admit in the segment that the old bill left some things vague enough to allow it to be ignored by people acting in bad faith. This bill goes firther by explicitly stating documents pertaining to how the investigation and diaclosure were handled are also in the purview of what must be released. It also adds another component which is allowing state's AGs to sue over a failure to release. NM's AG has stated that would help him get the ball rolling on prosecutions as currently he is seeing no federal cooperation.
→ More replies (1)2
u/JohnTomorrow 8h ago
The thing is, if they ever fall out of office (which they're going to fight against tooth and nail, vote vote vote), thats when the hammer comes down. All of this is being stymied at the moment coz they control the majority, once that protection is taken away, all this will come down on them like a flood, and they're absolutely terrified of it. They've already been signalling to their followers "if we lose the midterms we'll be indicted/impeached/prosecuted". They're setting their followers up for the eventuality now so they have a groundswell of support when it happens.
34
10h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/gex80 8h ago
Massie was kicked out by voters because he challenged Trump and he flipped on him. So Trump started backing his challenger. So it may be bipartisian but the voters voted to get rid of the guy trying to release the epstein files.
8
u/monkpunch 8h ago
Not just Trump, the Israel lobby spent the most money in the history of congress to get a puppet elected. Almost excursively thanks to old voters
2
5
u/Desertcow 9h ago
Massie was primaried out by his party, he's doing whatever he wants until the next guy takes his seat in a few months
0
u/Enshakushanna 7h ago
do you live under a rock? massie is persona non grata to the GOP, this isnt bi-partisan in the slightest, if it goes to vote you already know what the split will be
47
u/phoenix64mbr 10h ago
Massie has a Cheshire grin these days. A man with nothing to lose is a dangerous foe. Like the honey badger, he just doesn't give a shit.
14
u/CypherAZ 7h ago
If the GOP brought this energy all the time we wouldn’t be in the position we are today. They are otherwise spineless cowards.
4
u/phoenix64mbr 7h ago
Agreed. I don't like his politics in general but on this issue he's been a bulldog. We will see him on the national stage again after January. He's earned my respect. As a card carrying liberal, that's saying a lot.
6
u/bickdiggles 7h ago
The guy who voted in line with the Trump admin 84% of the time, dismissed J6 as a protest, and only started speaking against corruption he was privy too after realizing his political career was at an end will never have my respect.
There’s absolutely no reason to believe he’ll continue doing the right thing as soon as he has other options.
8
u/redditClowning4Life 7h ago
I don't have a dog in this fight, but hasn't Massie been able to unveil the names for months now and he has yet to name names (specifically, names we didn't already know about)? So...what gives?
→ More replies (9)1
u/phoenix64mbr 6h ago
I haven't kept abreast of what is new or not. I just respect his tenacity. Ro's too.
2
u/CosmicMabel 6h ago
Its performative and not going to lead to any significant development. But it lets reddit admire Massie and forget all the times he voted along with MAGA so I guess its alright.
→ More replies (2)2
u/StrangerVegetable831 5h ago
you are everything wrong with the electorate. “i’m ill-informed but I like the man cuz he’s got gumption”
1
u/phoenix64mbr 5h ago
I'm a political junkie and I know not to look a gift horse in the mouth. You're giving off hateful Trump vibes. Begone evil spirit!
8
80
u/W0gg0 10h ago
This is an exercise in futility. There’s already a law in place that the Administration is ignoring and isn’t being enforced by the DOJ because it’s owned by them. What makes them think a second law would produce any different outcome?
162
u/Spectre197 10h ago
It forces it back into the news cycle so people start asking why the trump administration is not following the law.
1
u/HalfSoul30 10h ago
Who is asking that? Like seriously asking it?
36
u/Spectre197 10h ago
Like someone said below it gets people who are seeking re election on record and will also been seen by voters who vote in 4 months in the mid term.
10
2
1
u/Enshakushanna 7h ago
right? everybody stopped asking about that school for girls we bombed, at this point 'trump shooting somebody in the head on wallstreet and nothing happening' isnt a meme anymore
37
u/Boring_and_sons 10h ago
Gets the November candidates on the record with their vote. Fucks with Trump. That's about it.
16
u/IAmNotNathaniel 9h ago edited 9h ago
it's a different law. one of the "new" things in it:
•Enforces compliance with the existing law by subjecting DOJ and FBI officials to existing federal criminal penalties for knowingly concealing, destroying, falsifying, withholding, or misrepresenting files.
see this comment for more
Of course the question is, why wasn't this in the first bill? My assumption is that the other one probably wouldn't have passed if it had teeth. Hopefully that doesn't mean this one is doa; Ro seems pretty serious about getting the files fully released.
4
u/Sweaty-Power-549 9h ago
The first one passed, but it took more effort to even get it to a vote than it did to actually pass it. Think they knew that so they drew up a simple law to make sure it did pass in the low chance Mike "My son and I goon together" Johnson would actually allow it to come to the floor. He refused, so thats why the discharge petition, which also barely came together, was neccessary.
The first law was also probably known to have loopholes, or they had an inkling the DOJ would just refuse to follow, and this new one is a a counter to that strategy by imposing specific language and specific penalties; including some kind of enforcement mechanism if the states can start to file suit against the FBI and DOJ directly.
This one probably wont pass, because if the states get involved there will be another crisis because the Federal Govt still.wont comply; which will lead to a standoff waiting for the Supreme Court to again litigate it from the bench.
Shit is a fucking mess.
49
u/retains_semen 10h ago
So we should just give up and submit? I seriously hate this rhetoric.
→ More replies (1)15
u/Faera 9h ago
Yeah when politicians do nothing people complain about them doing nothing, and then when they try to do what's in their power people complain that it won't achieve anything. It's like they want politicians to come up with some magical solution that instantly solves the problem or something. There's really no magic solution except the general population voting intelligently. But if that had happened we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.
5
u/Arcticwulfy 9h ago
The second law has punishments for not releasing. The first one didn't have teeth.
3
1
u/Antique_Grapefruit_5 10h ago
I agree. The right answer here is to impeach the president and head of the DOJ. The justice department, which is part of the executive branch, reports to him.
1
9
u/tylerbr97 10h ago
It’s already the fucking law. They have to release it
4
u/0ne_Winged_Angel 7h ago
And the fucking law has no consequences for not following it. This adds those.
2
u/CosmicMabel 6h ago
And when those consequences are ignored? What then? Will we go back and pass another bill , and say "you guys have to release it for realsies this time".
And dont say anything about jail because we all know not a single soul in this administration will ever see the inside of a cell.
3
3
u/Vahuo89 8h ago
How many times will they need to force the files to be released...
for them to actually BE released?
0
u/CosmicMabel 6h ago
Idk, as many times as the news will keep reporting in it. Its like an infinite money glitch to them. Everyone knows this will never be resolved, but man it generates clicks.
3
u/PinocchiosWoodBalls 9h ago
the people and bots in the conservative sub are in full pedophile-rapist-protection-mode.
Its crazy how they twist.
7
u/baltinerdist 8h ago
Just a reminder: Thomas Massie voted the way Trump wanted 84% of the time.
He's pulling the "redeemable Republican" schtick now because the tide has turned. Don't allow ANY of them to get away with it.
16
u/Altruistic_Fun7038 8h ago
He was primaried and tons of money were pumped into his opponent because of the Epstein files and his lack of support for Israel, he lost his seat because of that
-6
u/baltinerdist 8h ago
Ask him if trans people should have full rights and then ask him how he's voted on it. Ask him if women deserve equal pay as men and then ask him how he's voted on it. Ask him if healthcare is a human right and then ask him how he's voted on it. Ask him if voter suppression is real and then ask him how he's voted on it.
Do. Not. Fall. For. It.
This is image rehabilitation. Many of them did it in 2021 and turned right back around and backed the orange nightmare in 2024. They're going to do it again right up until they've been exiled permanently. Don't let them escape the exile by pretending they have a conscious now.
6
u/wazzur1 7h ago edited 7h ago
Do you think there is just two monolithic sides or something? Just like how there are corporate dems and democratic socialists, republicans also have different factions. At least they did until MAGA takeover. Massie is one of the few Republicans that actually stands for something (conservative-libertarian) rather than playing the MAGA sycophant that everyone else is.
3
u/Tiek00n 6h ago
Yeah I think people get way too pigeon-holed into thinking "this person doesn't agree with me on everything and so therefore I can't respect them."
There certainly are things that Massie believes and stands for that don't align with my views. I'm ok with that, because I believe that his beliefs are a combination of things he actually believes in (as opposed to being influenced by "influential people") and things he understands that his constituents want.
I'll gladly take a pro-life, anti-universal-healthcare person in office if I think they're honest and enough of their beliefs line up with mine. I think the national debt and how much the US spends on foreign military intervention are far bigger problems for the US than most other problems people focus on.
1
u/0ne_Winged_Angel 7h ago
For sure Massie’s a shitheel (he was my representative for most of my voting life), but he’s not going to be a representative anymore. He has no image to rehabilitate. I don’t get why folks seem to be against giving the EFTA teeth just because Massie’s one of the folks pushing it.
At the end of the day, if a bad person does a good thing, even if they did it for the wrong reasons, the thing itself is still good.
→ More replies (3)1
u/The_Horse_Tornado 4h ago
The tide turned because people like him finally decided where and what was enough. Your order of operations is flipped. If you can’t even be honest about the situation then your vote is no better than any MAGA vote out there and just another bias in the bucket.
1
u/GildedDreams25 10h ago
there isn’t a need for a second bill. they need to fucking follow the first one
12
u/phxees 9h ago
The DOJ would say they complied with the first one. A second bill making it possible for victims to sue. Also at this point through leaks and accidentally redacting the wrong parts they disclosed victim information. Now they can just say, no redactions as the victims are no longer secret. This should mean that the DOJ can turn over the docs as is and there’s no reason to go through them one at a time. (Not sure if they are actually DOJ v that part)
This just put Congress people on the record again just as people go to vote. Plus Trump will be forced to address it again.
7
u/Godot_12 9h ago
Actually there are some useful things in the second bill that they should have included with the first one that make it worth it. Chiefly, it creates a private right of action for "state attorneys general, district attorneys, other authorized State officials, members of Congress, and victims to challenge and sue the U.S. Attorney General for unlawfully withholding, redacting, delaying, concealing, removing, or failing to publish Epstein-related records."
Also will help enforce compliance by subjecting DOJ and FBI officials to penalties for knowingly concealing, destroying, falsifying, withholding, or misrepresenting files.
Yes, the administration can and likely will continue to stonewall the release of the files, but there's more room to get the courts involved now and hold the underlings that don't have presidential immunity accountable. That's the main thing. I'd like to throw Trump in jail or worse for the treason he's done, but the real shit is holding all the people under him accountable. He can't get away with it without legions of sycophants putting their own freedom on the line. They've been emboldened to do so because we didn't effectively hold people accountable after Trump's first term. It's essential that we restore that fear in the hearts of his lawyers, cabinet, and everyone else up and down the chain at the executive.
→ More replies (4)
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/dextrousfuckery 7h ago
Epstein Files pt 2: The "Find Out" Phase
Now with real threats for government failure to comply.
1
u/mcc91 7h ago
lol boy they got y’all by the balls. They could have put 1/4 of this effort into releasing them under Biden but the 2 parties have to oppose each other regardless of the reason. Then these two smucks trick you into thinking they are heroes and doing the right thing to get re elected, meanwhile knowing fully it’ll never happen. The establishment protects the establishment.
1
u/light24bulbs 7h ago
You know I'm realizing we really need national ballot initiatives in the way that they have them for States
1
1
1
1
u/PlanetTourist 7h ago
So?
They’re already breaking the law by not releasing them. Do we think they’re worried about EXTRA breaking the law?
Nope.
Everyone’s just gonna have to accept the president and his friends can abuse kids. Thanks everyone who voted for this, you ruined the country.
1
1
1
1
u/kupka316 6h ago
It doesn't seem like Congress or the Supreme Court have any power and whatever they pass Trump won't do and they won't hold him accountable anyway. Does any of it actually matter; we basically are in dictatorship now just hoping he steps down or dies. We're cooked.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/lemon_tea 4h ago
The problem is the people responsible for enforcing the penalties in this bill are the same people responsible for enforcing existing federal laws.
1
u/aerdvarkk 3h ago
This doesn't matter.
Congress already pushed out a valid Epstein Files release bill AND TRUMP SIGNED IT which was supposed to force a full disclosure of all files. A new discharge petitiont isn;t going to do anything different.
Legally the files are suppose dto be made public. The DOJ is dragging its feet because either Turmp ordered them to hold back behind the scenes OR they are afraid of Trump if they do rlease the full documents.
1
u/DirtReynolds 2h ago
Ok secondary point about flock cameras: khanna was remarkably non-committal when discussing his opinion. I’m surprised by this, tbh. Wouldn’t come out and say we should ban them.
•
1
u/USDXBS 9h ago
The US military must be furious that he's exposing the names of their pedophile masters like this.
The US military are the proud sword and shield of the Epstein class.
In the last week I've had members of the US military:
threaten to murder me for saying it's wrong to kill innocent people (message hasn't been deleted, unsurprisingly)
expose their creepy pedo username
expose themselves as a fan of rape
Couldn't have scripted it better for the proud sword and shield of the Epstein class.
1
1
u/sapphire_onyx 9h ago
They passed legislation already and then they didn't do shit. They won't do shit. Another law isnt going to do shit against an administration that has no respect for law or order.
1
u/BestMicDrop 8h ago
You think the government works for you like it's meant to? These 2 pieces of shit wrote and signed a law that had no penalty for 'failure to comply' i.e. (releasing the unredacted trumpstein files). Now, they believe the public will champion them b/c they wrote a discharge petition that does nothing. The government needs immediate remediation. Including but not limited to replacement of all officials.
1
u/snidece 8h ago
Is this from this week? Or is this a post about looking back? Democrats were focused too much during hearings on presenting receipts and going fact per fact with Todd Blanche when they should have asked him questions like "are you not even curious about the other offenders? Set aside your limits, wouldn't you like to change what is holding back accountability? You don't even seem curious about the files and seem OK that somehow these offenders are protected?"
-1
u/slumvillain 10h ago edited 10h ago
Question:
Does anybody know why the surviving epstein victims just cant....idk...talk about it?
And I don't mean those weird pressers where they're all surrounded by politicians and cameras outside of gvmnt buildings. They did that and it was depressing in two-fold because it was ignored largely by society. And nothing really ever came of it.
Wouldn't enough people band together to protect them once they speak their piece and name their abusers?
Why hasnt any of these media publications turned it into a 3 hour special presented by Colgate or some crap?
(Its a legitimate question, like...are they bound by some weird NDA, what is the legal red tape thats preventing these victims from naming the names?)
15
u/jureeriggd 10h ago
Question: Have you ever gone looking for their testimony, because I'm sure if you look, you'll find it. One google search will show you plenty of testimony.
General answer is that in criminal cases, you have to convince prosecutors to prosecute if there aren't already charges, and your lawyer will generally advise you to avoid public speaking if there's any potential to go to trial.
The reason you only notice the testimony at congressional hearings is that they're trying to convince politicians to sway prosecutors.
1
0
0
1.2k
u/TheRexRider 10h ago
At this point I'm ok with anything that keeps Trump's blood pressure up.