Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Washington Post editorial board comes out against releasing the Epstein files [View all]
dpibel
(3,984 posts)48. Archive link
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/11/20/jeffrey-epstein-files-trump-justice-department/
Put generously, I'd say the twitterer who's quoted in the OP is engaging in clickbaitery.
For instance, the actual bit about Clay Higgins is:
I don't believe Higgins is right, but I also don't think that graf constitutes praise.
In my defense, I'm not slightly in the habit of defending the WaPo. It mostly does wicked. The fact that it comes up short of wicked in this instance does not excuse any other misbehavior.
Put generously, I'd say the twitterer who's quoted in the OP is engaging in clickbaitery.
For instance, the actual bit about Clay Higgins is:
The lone congressional objector, Rep. Clay Higgins (R-Louisiana), has a point when he says this indiscriminate release “abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure in America” and could “result in innocent people being hurt.”
I don't believe Higgins is right, but I also don't think that graf constitutes praise.
In my defense, I'm not slightly in the habit of defending the WaPo. It mostly does wicked. The fact that it comes up short of wicked in this instance does not excuse any other misbehavior.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
87 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Washington Post editorial board comes out against releasing the Epstein files [View all]
mahatmakanejeeves
Nov 2025
OP
From the editorial: Now that the law has passed so overwhelmingly, it is essential for the government to promptly comply
Celerity
Nov 2025
#51
I have $5 that says Bezo is on the list of "inner circle" of Epstien...any takers?
NotHardly
Nov 2025
#34
Yep. That was my first thought. Also, who else among the so-called elite are in the documents?
Texin
Nov 2025
#46
This makes me suspicious. There is something there the Post does not want revealed.
CTyankee
Nov 2025
#4
"A public man has no right to let his actions be determined by particular interests.
Ping Tung
Nov 2025
#11
Is the WP just left open as a loss leader for Bezos to pump out propaganda and misinformation at this pont?
NCDem47
Nov 2025
#13
Sniffs of Bezos calling the shots. Especially like the bit wherein "the Justice
allegorical oracle
Nov 2025
#15
The ONLY reason I can think for for WAPO to be this irresponsible is that someone on their board...
Trueblue Texan
Nov 2025
#23
Jeff Bezos is making a strategic strike to pay for his billion dollars in government favorable decisions.
Baitball Blogger
Nov 2025
#25
I cancelled my digital subscription to the WaPo earlier this year. Here's hoping Jeff Bezos
generalbetrayus
Nov 2025
#30
I cannot verify this claim. Does anyone have a valid link?Yahoo had brief references.
33taw
Nov 2025
#32
Yes, it's just a long way of saying "we have to protect powerful men who use young girls for sex
Walleye
Nov 2025
#55
You should delete or at least update this post. Here is the opening of the editorial:
RandomNumbers
Nov 2025
#40
So they're saying the crimes of paying to rape children have "no public interest". I tripple dog dare them to go
Hotler
Nov 2025
#44
Praising Clay Higgins? Please let me modify and mis-quote two oft mis-quoted phrases:
Bo Zarts
Nov 2025
#47
We normally agree, but I think his post IS misleading due to this quote from the editorial:
Celerity
Nov 2025
#69
I see your point, but I took it as the Post opposing their release in principle
Ocelot II
Nov 2025
#71
Not exactly true or accurate, but that's never stopped anyone from posting. Here's some actual quotes from editorial.
Silent Type
Nov 2025
#56
The basic idea that it isn't in the public interest to release DOJ materials in this case
RockRaven
Nov 2025
#59