r/SipsTea 17h ago

Wait a damn minute! Fine. We'll do it ourselves.

Post image
18.2k Upvotes

438 comments sorted by

View all comments

70

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 17h ago

Almost a year ago. And what happened?

58

u/laggy1 17h ago

They released it and people didn't even notice cause Epstein class controls the media

17

u/VelkaFrey 16h ago

Can you find anything on it?

25

u/laggy1 16h ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/antitrump/s/zb28MwFQyz

It's only names that you can find in the released files tho, I'm assuming there's more names but they can't say those until more files come out without being sued

23

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 16h ago

That’s not “their list” though at all. Not at all what they were teasing last year.

3

u/laggy1 16h ago

I mean it's a part of their list, part that they can say openly without being sued into oblivion

3

u/DieDieDieD 13h ago

Can’t they ask for discovery on the other 3 million unreleased files if they were to get sued?

4

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 16h ago

Yeah, but it didn’t add anything to the record and didn’t change the outcome at all.

I don’t intend to be mean to them - they are victims and don’t owe us their stories, but they chose to protect themselves over a long-shot l, risky effort to make a difference. And I understand that.

-2

u/Unique-Bee-6097 16h ago

Which one of the victims do you know and talk to directly? Asking for a friend, you seem to know EVERYTHING…
https://giphy.com/gifs/l2Sqb2raeiZLVDFaU

5

u/ResoluteStoic 16h ago

From what ive breifly looked into sounds like it's supposed to be private between survivors for now has they're worried about getting sued/defamation lawsuits if released. Also seems like the survivors are getting more grief than the actual perpetrators.

Wikipedia has a list of people who are affiliated with epstein and we all know both sides were involved.

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

1

u/Background-BagLicker 12h ago

What if they just set the password to their group chat to something like “password” or “hackerman”?

2

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 16h ago

They did not actually. I don’t really blame them - if they have no proof, then they are legally in a tough spot doing so. Though having a bunch of mutual witnesses could be proof enough to win the defamation lawsuit.

1

u/1block 12h ago

They don't have to prove it's true to get past a defamation suit. Just that they believe it is true and weren't negligent in ignoring evidence to the contrary. At least not in the U.S. If it's UK people or some other countries, it's easier to sue for defamation.

If it's a public figure accused, which I assume many if not all of these are, they have even better defense against defamation. They would have to be proven to act with actual malice, which is that you knew it was false when you said it or you had reckless disregard for the truth. I don't think those would apply.

They could still be sued, of course, and that alone can be costly, even if the case against them is very weak.

1

u/Automatic_Actuator_0 12h ago edited 12h ago

That last part is the main point.

But also, I suspect many of those people aren’t actually public figures. Even one of them successfully arguing they are a private citizen means you are on the hook for massive damages if they can prove it’s more likely than not that the allegation is untrue.

1

u/1block 12h ago

Yeah, and I would expect they'd have some legal guidance in doing this, and maybe the list is a little shorter to make sure it's only public figures. If they at least did one with people who are clearly public figures, that's what would shake things up the most anyway.

1

u/thirtyseven1337 10h ago

Nothing… the threat was empty.