19
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A new investigation examining emails sent between federal investigators and prosecutors has raised fresh doubts over the Department of Justice’s claim that it has released the full cache of Jeffrey Epstein files, suggesting the material made public amounts to just 2% of the data gathered by federal agents.

Channel 4 News reported that internal emails seen by its journalists show federal investigators expected to process between 20 and 40 terabytes of data seized from Epstein’s properties, including his Florida mansion, New York townhouse, and private island.

The broadcaster added that emails between investigators discussed the data “totaling” up to 50 terabytes from the “earliest stages” in June 2020.

In another internal email from 2025, the report continued, officials said that they were “looking at approximately 14.6 terabytes of archived data.”

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

I think they've only released the least damaging actual "documents/files"

They are holding the ones that outright depict powerful men and women abusing their power. (Yes even sexually.) and also holding things like videos and auto "files" 14 terabytes of data isn't just emails and forms. There's probably evidence in there so damaging Trump and anyone else involved would be shot on the Whitehouse steps if any rational person knew the truth.

[-] Formfiller@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

We all know that members of congress are in there so we’re going to need them all

[-] someguy3@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So what's the possibility that they can delete all the files so that the next administration doesn't have them? Is it possible at all?

[-] village604@adultswim.fan 1 points 1 month ago

It's possible, but not probable since I'm sure someone made a backup for that reason alone.

[-] U7826391786239@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

i think it's pretty safe to assume that anything any of them says is a fucking outright lie

[-] kadu@scribe.disroot.org 0 points 1 month ago

A lot of the data is composed of child abuse videos though, not evidence the videos existed, the videos themselves, so in that regard I do expect and hope they're never publicly released.

But yes, of course, everything else was withheld or censored just to protect the abusers, and those do need to come out, we just don't know the exact ratio or numbers as being shared by this article.

[-] redsand@infosec.pub 0 points 1 month ago

We run into a lot of trust problems that are not going to be solved here. There are likely hundreds of people Jeffrey and Ghislaine didn't write down but know are on video. And it's the CIA and Mossad blackmailing world leaders. I can't even think of a country to attempt the investigation

[-] kadu@scribe.disroot.org 0 points 1 month ago

didn't write down but know are on video

Investigators need to see them, not you. And even if you did, the fuck are you going to do about it? And if you're going to do something, why are you waiting for child abuse videos instead of doing it now?

[-] pivot_root@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I am a different person. For the record, I don't condone making the uncensored videos public either.

Investigators need to see them

The ones at the DOJ, which is led by a corrupt loyalist?
The ones at the FBI, which is led by a different corrupt loyalist?

The public doesn't need to see them, but investigators won't do shit if/when they see them.

[-] redsand@infosec.pub 1 points 1 month ago

You misunderstand. The current investors can't be trusted and this conspiracy is so far reaching it's hard to think of anyone who could. That's the root issue and I don't have a solution.

this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2026
19 points (100.0% liked)

News

36987 readers
559 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS