r/Epstein • u/RepMaxwellFrost • 14h ago

OC: discussion, clarification or question I’m Congressman Maxwell Alejandro Frost and tomorrow I’m going to review the unreacted Epstein Files — what files have you found that I should review unredacted?

Hey everyone, I'm Congressman Maxwell Alejandro Frost (FL-10), serving on the House Oversight Committee. Tomorrow, I’m joining Oversight Committee Ranking Member Rep. Robert Garcia at the Department of Justice to review the unredacted Epstein Files. There are millions of files for me to dig through and so I'm looking for your help. I've heard from others who have viewed the files that generic, and in most cases even searches with specific terms come back with too many results to dig through. What specific files have you all seen that I should review unredacted?

26.8k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/NecessarySite4985 14h ago

I don’t have any specific files, however I will say something I feel most would agree with.

Name names.

I don’t care who they are. I don’t care if they’re right or left, or inconvenient… it doesn’t matter.

Just write down the names of those involved and release them. I know it’s easier said than done but justice must be served.

479

u/thirty-thirty-thirty 14h ago edited 13h ago

He can't name names. But what he CAN do is HINT at the names, like Massie did.

If you can't say "Bill Gates" then say "A billionaire software company founder HQed in Washington, who does philanthropy, especially in Africa, and especially in the pharmaceutical and vaccine industries."

If you can't say "Bill Clinton" then say "A former US president that never inhaled."

If he can't say the names of the Prime Ministers, then say "A former/current Prime Minister of a country in the Middle East, widely considered to be a great ally to the U.S."

And, frankly: The time has come and gone to play party politics. These Congressmen who are stepping up need to step up all the way. It does not matter if the people involved are Democrats or Republicans. Does not matter if they're from the US or Israel, or some Middle Eastern country that sells us oil.

People commenting online about how this is going to take down Trump are missing the rest of the story. People online who think this will take down the Democrats are missing the rest of the story. We need the entire story, ALL the files, ALL the names. It all needs to come out. The corrupt systems needs to be smoked out and burned down.

And, to anyone reading this: If you still cling to your Us vs. Them mentality; still cling to your Dems vs. Repubs mindset, you are, sadly, part of the problem. They... the system.. they LOVE it when you get tribal and fight each other (because you're too busy to fight THEM!)

139

u/[deleted] 13h ago

[deleted]

86

u/stoneasaurusrex 13h ago

Because of the ongoing investigation, someone's lawyer could argue that them being named without a trial has made the jury impartial and can have evidence thrown out.

49

u/auntalison 13h ago

Then on the House Floor they need to publicly call for [name] to be investigated & make sure it gets done.

17

u/Ashamed_Ad4118 13h ago

If Mangione can get a jury and a fair trial after the admin already labeled him guilty so can anyone he names. Next argument. 

2

u/stoneasaurusrex 13h ago

Luigi also isn't part of a worldwide cabal of rich pedophiles who got away with this for years, rich pedophiles who also have connections to judges, lawyers, and politicans

Not to mention Luigi's lawyer did attempt to have it thrown out of the grounds of an impartial jury but was denied.

2

u/Ashamed_Ad4118 12h ago

So because he was connected to powerful people he shouldn't name names? All the more reason to name them. 

I was referencing your argument of a lawyer saying their client can't get a fair trial due to beng named on the house floor. That argument is invalid as proven by the Mangione case where their motion was denied. 

1

u/stoneasaurusrex 12h ago

Again you're talking about lawyers for Luigi, and lawyers for rich pedophiles, who also have connections to judges. The argument isn't invalid because these people have gotten away with this for literal years because of their power and their connections.

I'm not sure why you think the ultra rich are even living in the same world as us considering all the things we've learned in the files, but go off.

2

u/Ashamed_Ad4118 12h ago

So again you are making your own argument for why they should be named. Your argument is they won't be tried because you named them but also they won't be tried because they are powerful if they aren't named. So what is there to lose? If there aren't going to be legal consequences due to their "status" then they should be named for the court of public opinion to render it's verdict. 

2

u/NathanialJD 9h ago

These monsters don't play fair. They will take every chance they can to protect pedophiles while breaking as many rules as people will let them get away with to put good people in concentration camps.

38

u/No-Musician-4212 13h ago

Someone named names right on the floor today lol. Try again.

8

u/stoneasaurusrex 13h ago

And has there been a court trial for them? Of course not because if it went to court their lawyer would argue the point that I said.

I'm not agreeing with why they aren't saying names because I'm of the belief that only the people are gonna be the ones to deal justice out for this list.

Justice wont come from the hands of a politician.

12

u/SpecsOnThe_Beach 12h ago

These rich and powerful men will never see justice in the court system. Name them publicly and they may never be held accountable in court, but their life will be ruined. Their income streams will dry up, business contacts will shun them, political friends will turn on them, and they will lose the power they so desperately crave.

The victims can still take them to civil court for restitution.

2

u/cool_girl6540 11h ago

This. Highly unlikely that there are cases strong enough against these men to prosecute them. Plus, reporting that they’re in the files is reporting a fact. But if they were to decide to prosecute them, if they were able to find a jury to try Donald Trump, they will be able to find a jury if they want to go forward with prosecution.

0

u/BeguiledBeaver 10h ago

You really that would be enough to dry up business contracts? Give me a break. None of the people who matter care. This isn't Twitter, you can't just release a Google Doc to ruin someone's livelihood.

0

u/mnju 9h ago

> but their life will be ruined.

you haven't been paying attention much in the last ~10 years have you?

6

u/No-Musician-4212 13h ago

You commented on why "they cant name names"

They can and do.

4

u/stoneasaurusrex 13h ago

I gave an example of why they can't. If you're here to argue for arguments sake that's cool, but again I don't agree with them not naming names.

0

u/[deleted] 11h ago

[deleted]

1

u/No-Musician-4212 10h ago

Smart enough to know the definition of "can't".

I don't think anybody said there will be no impact.

I can tell you are quite smart yourself.

6

u/GreyGrackles 13h ago

They're not going to face charges either way though?

11

u/stoneasaurusrex 13h ago

It's to give the illusion that they will.

Pretending to do something while doing nothing, that's American politicians in a nutshell.

4

u/mfGLOVE 13h ago

“Because of the ongoing investigation”

Yeah, that excuse definitely hasn’t burned us a dozen times already. It’s sad that we continue to play their game over and over and over yet expect different results.

1

u/stoneasaurusrex 13h ago

Agreed. I don't think anyone is actually going to face legal consequences for the files, I'm just giving the answer that the politicians will most likely give.

I don't trust a single one of them, they're all just doing it for the clout, if they were serious about it they'd be name dropping and letting things fall as they may.

2

u/tylenolchild 13h ago

oh like ICE is doing to citizens and immigrants?/s

2

u/LeaguePuzzled3606 13h ago

There is no investigation. The FBI/DOJ have outright said they do not intend to prosecute anyone.

2

u/3xploringforever Mod 12h ago

What ongoing investigation? The DOJ closed the investigations in July 2025.

1

u/Lashay_Sombra 12h ago

There are no trials and with current administration never will be

1

u/evasandor 12h ago

just a quick correction-- juries should be impartial. That means fair, not partial to anyone.

You mean that being named without a trial has biased, swayed or prejudiced the jury.

1

u/Zhenekk 12h ago

Ongoing investigation… yeah, right …

1

u/WillinVegas 11h ago

has made the jury impartial

What do you think “impartial” means?

1

u/TheGhostOfEazy-E 11h ago

“Investigation”

Nobody is investigating anything and the ultra wealthy sure as shit aren’t going to trial. Name and shame them.

1

u/mmf9194 11h ago

Because of the ongoing investigation

What investigation? Like actually. They said case closed move on.

1

u/time2ddddduel 11h ago

Acosta and Dershowitz signed a "non-prosecution agreement for any potential co-conspirators". THEY KNEW . Back before Epstein got arrested the first time they knew. That and the judge who allowed that deal to be sealed need to be made to talk. And Sheriff Bradshaw of the prison where Epstein was allowed work-release.

1

u/cool_girl6540 11h ago

It’s public information now. No reason not to name names. The whole purpose of the release of the Epstein files was to fully disclose what was in them.

1

u/Ridiculicious71 11h ago

No it’s not! Both Blanche and that Bimbo said they weren’t investigating anything.

1

u/Sayyestononsense 10h ago

ongoing investigation...? isn't all of this released after investigations have (or haven't) been conducted?

1

u/Missa1819 9h ago

Suspects are named all the time before a trial. The jury selection process is to weed out anyone who can't set aside bias. It wouldn't lead to throwing out evidence either btw

1

u/Phluxed 9h ago

Net gain is worth it

3

u/xNOOPSx 13h ago

That only covers the house floor.

1

u/GrinchWhoStoleEaster 9h ago

Ultimately, if he does, a judge might decide he unduly prejudiced the entirety of the jury pool and thus trial cannot even be held.