No victims or associates testified in the proceedings that led to indictments in the cases, which have been the subject of conspiracy theories pushed by President Trump’s supporters. VP

Archive - https://archive.is/rQSDX

  • AmidFuror@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Reporting the facts = peddling conspiracy theories.

    The department’s filing was submitted to two federal judges who are considering recent requests by Attorney General Pam Bondi and her deputy, Todd Blanche, to unseal grand jury transcripts in the Epstein and Maxwell cases.

    • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Its misinformation at best. So what if SA victims didn’t testify directly in the grand jury proceedings? This would be like reporting “No murder victims testified in Ted Bundy grand jury proceedings - only investigators”

      A grand jury’s only purpose is to see if there’s enough evidence to proceed with charges and an actual trial. Their headline and byline are worded as if they were charged based on manufactured claims made by government employees. As if some egregious violation occurred here rather than standard procedure.

      They’re lending credence to these conspiracy theories by reporting on them as if theyre real news and not just bullshit made up by a certain guilty party that happens to currently be president of the United States.

      • AmidFuror@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        There have been conspiracy theories concocted, and this article addresses what the filings say about it. It also gives the context that the investigators’ testimony matched up with what witnesses would later say at trial.

        Not every piece of news needs to come as part of an opinion piece on how you should feel about it.

        • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah buried down below the headline in small font. We all know most people only read headlines and then walk away. Why even put that garbage in the headline if the body of the article refutes it?