This message was self-deleted by its author

[Anxy]

This message was self-deleted by its author (Anxy) on Thu Nov 13, 2025, 11:06 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[BeerBarrelPolka]

1. That gives

Trump perfect cover to say he wanted them released, but the Senate stopped it. It's a game they're playing.

[mucifer]

2. I believe if it's released they will edit trump out of everything. Why wouldn't they??

[Wiz Imp]

10. If they could do that so easily, they would have already done it and released them.

I can state unequivocally that this will not happen.

[mucifer]

17. Unless it is part of their plan to eventually release it and it will only implicate guilty democrats

I do want all guilty to go down.

I just believe they are getting us all hyped up and will release a whole slew of lies and say "we told you so!"

[Emile]

3. If Lindsey or Sue Collins can sue the government for

something, they might have 60.

[Wiz Imp]

7. The only thing the Resolution requires is forcing a vote on HR.185. That is it. Nothing else.

HR. 185 is the legislation which requires the release of the Epstein files, but like all legislation, needs passed by both the House and Senate and signed by the President before it becomes law. Any action on the Epstein files is only required once it becomes law (which will not happen).

[Wiz Imp]

18. OMG. You are wrong. You have been proven wrong again and again yet you continue to deny it.

Sorry, but whether you admit it or not, you are wrong.

What part of this don't you understand??????

The resolution (H. Res. 581) is strictly a procedural mechanism to amend and force the vote on HR 185 which will carry the requirements for the files to be released.

The discharge petition is for H.Res. 581 because it is the resolution that provides the procedural mechanism to bring a bill (H.R. 185) to the House floor for a vote, not the bill itself. A discharge petition is used to force a bill from committee to the full House for consideration. In this case, H.R. 185 is the bill being discharged, but H.Res. 581 is the resolution that will be discharged by the petition. HR 185 will be amended by H Res 581

There is no "broader direction" in H Res. 581 (NOT HR 581 which is a completely unrelated bill).

Notice the title:

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies.

The purpose of H.Res 581 is strictly to consider H.R. 185.

First paragraph of H.Res 581:

Resolved, That immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute specified in section 4 of this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Everything that follows that first sentence refers to the BILL HR 185. The SOLE purpose of H. Res 581 is to force the vote on the Epstein Transparency Act. Period. There is nothing else to it.

Call your Representative. They will explain to you that you are wrong and I am right. If you continue to deny reality, then in a couple weeks when the vote takes place, you will be proven wrong once and for all at which time I expect an apology from you and an admission that you did not know what you were talking about.

Here is the full text on H.Res. 581
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolution/581/text

H. RES. 581

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 15, 2025
Mr. Massie (for himself and Mr. Khanna) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies.

Resolved, That immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 185) to advance responsible policies. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a substitute specified in section 4 of this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 2. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX and clause 8 of rule XX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 185.

Sec. 3. The Clerk shall transmit to the Senate a message that the House has passed H.R. 185 no later than one week after passage.

Sec. 4. The amendment in the nature of a substitute referred to in the first section of this resolution is as follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

“SECTION 1. Short title.

“This Act may be cited as the ‘Epstein Files Transparency Act’.

“SEC. 2. Release of documents relating to Jeffrey Epstein.

“(a) In general.—Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall, subject to subsection (b), make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the possession of the Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and United States Attorneys’ Offices, that relate to:

“(1) Jeffrey Epstein including all investigations, prosecutions, or custodial matters.

“(2) Ghislaine Maxwell.

“(3) Flight logs or travel records, including but not limited to manifests, itineraries, pilot records, and customs or immigration documentation, for any aircraft, vessel, or vehicle owned, operated, or used by Jeffrey Epstein or any related entity.

“(4) Individuals, including government officials, named or referenced in connection with Epstein’s criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigatory proceedings.

“(5) Entities (corporate, nonprofit, academic, or governmental) with known or alleged ties to Epstein’s trafficking or financial networks.

“(6) Any immunity deals, non-prosecution agreements, plea bargains, or sealed settlements involving Epstein or his associates.

“(7) Internal DOJ communications, including emails, memos, meeting notes, concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates.

“(8) All communications, memoranda, directives, logs, or metadata concerning the destruction, deletion, alteration, misplacement, or concealment of documents, recordings, or electronic data related to Epstein, his associates, his detention and death, or any investigative files.

“(9) Documentation of Epstein’s detention or death, including incident reports, witness interviews, medical examiner files, autopsy reports, and written records detailing the circumstances and cause of death.

“(b) Prohibited grounds for withholding.—No record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of any of the following:

“(1) Embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.

“(c) Permitted withholdings.—

“(1) The Attorney General may withhold or redact the segregable portions of records that—

“(A) contain personally identifiable information of victims or victims’ personal and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;

“(B) depicts or contains child sexual abuse materials (CSAM) as defined under 18 U.S.C. 2256 and prohibited under 18 U.S.C. 2252–2252A;

“(C) would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary;

“(D) depicts or contains images of death, physical abuse, or injury of any person; or

“(E) contain information specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order.

“(2) All redactions must be accompanied by a written justification published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress.

“(3) To the extent that any covered information would otherwise be redacted or withheld as classified information under this section, the Attorney General shall declassify that classified information to the maximum extent possible.

“(A). If the Attorney General makes a determination that covered information may not be declassified and made available in a manner that protects the national security of the United States, including methods or sources related to national security, the Attorney General shall release an unclassified summary for each of the redacted or withheld classified information.

“(4) All decisions to classify any covered information after July 1, 2025 shall be published in the Federal Register and submitted to Congress, including the date of classification, the identity of the classifying authority, and an unclassified summary of the justification.

“SEC. 3. Report to Congress.

“Within 15 days of completion of the release required under Section 2, the Attorney General shall submit to the House and Senate Committees on the Judiciary a report listing:

“(1) All categories of records released and withheld.

“(2) A summary of redactions made, including legal basis.

“(3) A list of all government officials and politically exposed persons named or referenced in the released materials, with no redactions permitted under subsection (b)(1).”.

[SSJVegeta]

21. Okay. You are right. I'll delete my misinformation.

I keep getting contradicting information from Google but alas I think I can conclusively say you are right. I am wrong.

I concede...




Thank you for being proactive at helping me understand this. Believe it or not typing "you are wrong" repeatedly can sometimes help a person realize they were wrong.

[Wiz Imp]

25. Thank you! I'm sorry to be such a jerk about it, but I know from your posts that you are generally

a very reasonable person and know what you are talking about. I really wanted to make you understand. Once again, I'm sorry for being so hard on you but I'm glad I finally convinced you.

[SSJVegeta]

29. Nah you are awesome. I was genuinely confused and took no offense.

Last edited Thu Nov 13, 2025, 09:00 PM - Edit history (3)

At first I was sure it was how it is, as you described it. Then I think DU misdirected me to think it was just a resolution and nothing more. Then Google seemed to give me the same misdirection. Then you redirected me back to the truth, and I was confused when google gave me conflicting answers... ultimately rereading the actual resolution over and over made it resoundingly clear you are right.



I wonder: is there something massive brewing behind the scenes? The white house seems to be oddly freaking out over a bill that might not even be considered in the Senate.

[Arazi]

5. It's a resolution. Does it have to pass the Senate and get signed?

I admit I’m fuzzy on the rules but I thought the House resolution was enough.

Anyone have a link to Congressional protocol on this?

Edited to add, just checked and yes it’s gotta pass the Senate and Traitor

[Wiz Imp]

6. The resolution (H. Res. 581) is strictly a procedural mechanism to amend and force the vote on HR 185 which will carry

requirements for the files to be released.

The discharge petition is for H.Res. 581 because it is the resolution that provides the procedural mechanism to bring a bill (H.R. 185) to the House floor for a vote, not the bill itself. A discharge petition is used to force a bill from committee to the full House for consideration. In this case, H.R. 185 is the bill being discharged, but H.Res. 581 is the resolution that will be discharged by the petition. HR 185 will be amended by H Res 581.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolution/581

This resolution provides a special rule for consideration of H.R. 185 and amends that bill to direct the Department of Justice (DOJ) to make publicly available certain records related to Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.

Under H.R. 185, as amended by the resolution, DOJ must publicly disclose all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in its possession that relate to Epstein or Maxwell. The records include unclassified records referring or relating to Epstein's detention and death; flight logs of aircraft owned or used by Epstein; individuals named in connection with Epstein’s criminal activities, civil settlements, or immunity or plea agreements; immunity deals, sealed settlements, or plea bargains of Epstein or his associates; entities with ties to Epstein’s trafficking or financial networks; and internal Department of Justice communications concerning decisions to investigate or charge Epstein or his associates.

However, under the amended bill, DOJ may withhold or redact portions of records with written justification that such portions contain (1) victims' personally identifiable information; (2) child sexual abuse materials; (3) images of death, physical abuse, or injury; (4) information which would jeopardize an active federal investigation or prosecution; or (5) classified information. DOJ may not withhold or redact records on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.

Further, within 15 days of completing the required disclosures, DOJ must provide Congress with a report listing all categories of records released and withheld, all redactions made and their legal basis, and all government officials and politically exposed persons named or referenced in the released materials.

H.R. 185, titled the "Responsible Legislating Act," was amended by the language of the separate "Epstein Files Transparency Act" via a procedural resolution (H. Res. 581) to force a vote in the House.
This "Epstein Files Transparency Act" , originally introduced as H.R. 4405, mandates that the Department of Justice (DOJ) publicly release all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials related to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.

Ultimately the Discharge petition is forcing a vote on HR 185 which will include the language from HR 4405 (the Epstein Transparency Act). Passage simply moves the bill onto the Senate for consideration. It does not force any action. A resolution can't be used to force action by the DOJ - that can only be done by a bill. In this case HR 185, but it needs passed by both the House and Senate to become law. Passing the House by itself forces the DOJ to do absolutely nothing.

[Anxy]

12. And if by a miracle the Senate passed the bill, Trump would have to sign it

Last edited Thu Nov 13, 2025, 11:00 AM - Edit history (1)

And he will veto it.

[allegorical oracle]

16. He will veto it. Wonder if that would toss more Dem votes our way in the

midterms. Keep hoping for a future impeachment that sticks.

[Wiz Imp]

22. Right. He will never sign it. But each step along the way weakens him further and turns more of public opinion

against him. Could that eventually lead to Congress overriding a veto or impeachment? Still seems unlikely at this point but time will tell.

[Bluetus]

31. All this commentary is wrong.

This is a resolution that empowers a committee To subpoena those records. it has nothing to do with the Senate and nothing to do with Trump's signature .it is a house action that requires no additional Votes beyond the house.

If it had to go to the Senate and also pass Trump's veto would not be freaking out.

[Jersey Devil]

8. What if the Epstein files release passes the House with a big number?

I have read that as many as 100 Repubs in the House may vote AYE if they know there is a majority to pass the bill. Suppose they do and the vote in the House is something like 314-121. Don''t you think that would put tremendous pressure on Senate Republicans to vote for the files to be released, particularly for those up for election in 2026 (over 20 as I recall)?

[Wiz Imp]

13. Yes, that is possible

It's likely irrelevant because Trump would still need to sign it to become law. He will never do that.

[Jersey Devil]

15. Doesn't matter if Trump signs or not

because with every step in the process he will look worse and worse, engaged in a coverup and his base, to whom he promised over and over again to release the files, will begin to abandon him and stay home next November, which is the opening we need to retake Congress. The steady drip, drip is what we need, not necessarily the files themselves, though that certainly would be nice.

[Wiz Imp]

20. I agree with all that.

Particularly if the Senate would pass the bill (which I still consider unlikely but depends on how much pressure is created from the House passage). Each step weakens Trump further and makes it clear there is something really devastating he is hiding. I would hope that turns even a significant part of his base against him. I don't expect Trump to ever agree to release the files, but could public opinion turn enough to where congress could overturn a veto or even impeach him? Time will tell....

[librechik]

9. Offramp ahead.

Will they take it? We need 10 to make it happen.

Terrifying.

But we can never give up. No matter who does.

[Prairie Gates]

11. No shit

[SocialDemocrat61]

19. Forgive me, I don't know all the rules

But would it need 60 in the Senate. I thought the 60 vote threshold was only to end debate on bills and everything else was simple majority? As I said I don't know all the rules.

[Wiz Imp]

23. It would need 60 votes for cloture (which I'm sure some Republican would require).

Once cloture passes, it would only need 51 votes to pass the actual legislation.

[SocialDemocrat61]

27. I think that is my question

Would it need a cloture vote? Why did they go to so much trouble to not seat Grijalva if they knew the whole thing could be easily killed in the Senate?

[Wiz Imp]

32. That's a really good question.

I believe a lot of Republicans are really terrified of having to take that vote. They're afraid of going against Trump, but they're also afraid of being labeled as pedophile protectors which will happen if they vote NO. It's for that reason that many are rumored to be ready to vote YES. It wouldn't surprise me if there end up being very few NOs on the vote. People who don't want to say YES, have an alternative of abstaining or voting present.

[Torchlight]

24. Until last week, I thought it unlikely the House would vote at all on it, let alone vote yes.

nt

[Kingofalldems]

26. So should we give up and stop talking about Trump and Epstein?

[Anxy]

30. Not give up, of course. This will hurt Republicans no matter what

With some people were under the impression that the files will be released if the house passes the resolution. It is good to have clarity. That’s all.

[bucolic_frolic]

28. It's like the impeachment votes

None of them will look the public in the eye, they'll just turn their heads, wave their hands side to side palms down in a nothing-to-see-here visual, and walk away.

The silence is the cover up.

[Wiz Imp]

33. I think we will get an good gauge of the impact of this once the vote happens in the House.

If a significant number of Republicans vote for it, it tells us that the party as a whole are really afraid of the repercussions of the Epstein Files. Time will tell.