General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBoebert and Mace claim that they will not be removing their names from the discharge petition.
Rep. Lauren Boebert says that there is “NO WAY†she will take her name off the Epstein files discharge petition.
— Yashar Ali 😠(@yasharali.bsky.social) 2025-11-12T20:23:07.091Z
President Trump and his administration are pressuring her to remove her name.
Via Manu Raju
Nancy Mace also says she won’t be removing her name.
— Yashar Ali 😠(@yasharali.bsky.social) 2025-11-12T20:26:45.869Z
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Irish_Dem
(78,071 posts)
demmiblue
(38,983 posts)Irish_Dem
(78,071 posts)
ananda
(34,033 posts)like he did with the pope.
PJMcK
(24,468 posts)These two know what's in the files and they are distancing themselves from Trump. The stuff in the files is so bad that they don't want to be associated with the pedophile rapist.
Neither Mace nor Boebert are particularly principled people, to say the least. But they are ruthless survivors. Their decision may be one of self-preservation. After all, if Trump is going down, they wouldn't want any of his shit in their laps.
Bettie
(19,138 posts)around being a survivor of sexual assault.
If she were to back down on this, it would essentially be telling everyone that her entire persona is a lie.
She's far to self-centered to do that.
GusBob
(8,078 posts)Last week it was reported that the DOJ informed some GOPers what was in the files was worse than what Wolff reported
They know whats in the pudding
uponit7771
(93,414 posts)
nolabear
(43,841 posts)I hope the women take his slimy ass down.
BannonsLiver
(20,128 posts)She damn near lost it in the 2022 cycle and given that this is a sensitive issue with some Trumptards (him not wanting the files released after promising to during the ‘24 race) it could be curtains for her. Same for Mace and her gov campaign in SC.
Leghorn21
(13,994 posts)Also looking forward to watching the rest of them vote “NO!! WEEVE MY SAVIOR PRESIDENT ALONE WHANHH!!”
GOOD TIMES
BeerBarrelPolka
(2,164 posts)
Torchlight
(6,152 posts)they can play it any way they want to, though my guess is Boebert or Mace caves before 5pm tomorrow and calls a press conference to explain why it really wasn't a cave.
MarineCombatEngineer
(16,951 posts)they signed the discharge petition.
Being wrong on this is a good thing.
karynnj
(60,693 posts)Today's emails might dislodge a few more Republicans and if so, Mace and Boebert would not be able to stop it. Even if he has a few willing to sign if needed, he certainly is better off not announcing it.
( I assume he is the sponsor more likely to talk to Republicans )
Wiz Imp
(8,284 posts)on the legislation when it comes to the floor. Many are actually terrified of having to vote NO and the implication that comes with it - that they approve of protecting actual pedophiles.
Response to Wiz Imp (Reply #15)
SSJVegeta This message was self-deleted by its author.
Wiz Imp
(8,284 posts)The purpose of the discharge petition is to force a vote on the house floor for this bill:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/4405/text
To require the Attorney General to release all documents and records in possession of the Department of Justice relating to Jeffrey Epstein, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
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.—
(1) No record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of 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) depict or contain 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) depict or contain 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).
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/12/house-epstein-files-vote-00647392
The completion of the discharge petition, a rarely used mechanism to sidestep the majority party leadership, will trigger a countdown for the bill to hit the House floor. It will still take seven legislative days for the petition to ripen, after which Johnson will have two legislative days to schedule a vote. Senior Republican and Democratic aides estimate a floor vote will come the first week of December, after the Thanksgiving recess.
The discharge petition tees up a “rule,” a procedural measure setting the terms of debate for the Epstein bill’s consideration on the House floor. This gives the effort’s leaders greater control over the bill, which will still require Senate approval if it passes the House.
Senate Republican leaders haven’t publicly committed to bringing up the Epstein measure if the House passes it. Republicans expect it will die in the Senate, but not before a contentious House fight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discharge_petition
In United States parliamentary procedure, a discharge petition is a means of bringing a bill out of committee and to the floor for consideration without a report from the committee by "discharging" the committee from further consideration of a bill or resolution.
Between 1931 and 2003, 563 discharge petitions were filed, of which only 47 obtained the required majority of signatures. The House voted for discharge 26 times and passed 19 of the measures, but only two have become law. However, the threat of a discharge petition has caused the leadership to relent several times; such petitions are dropped only because the leadership allowed the bill to move forward, rendering the petition superfluous. Overall, either the petition was completed or else the measure made it to the floor by other means in 16 percent of cases.
Response to Wiz Imp (Reply #22)
SSJVegeta This message was self-deleted by its author.
Wiz Imp
(8,284 posts)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
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolution/581
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.
If you read the Politico article I linked to you would know that and you would quit trying to argue otherwise. Wherever you got your impression of how all of this will work is 100% wrong. I've laid it out for you 3 times now. Please don't try to argue it again.
Response to Wiz Imp (Reply #22)
SSJVegeta This message was self-deleted by its author.
Wiz Imp
(8,284 posts)Besides, there is no need for the House to do an investigation. Investigations were done by the FBI and DOJ, the results of which already exist in the files. What needs to be done is a public release of those files.
The House Oversight Committee is in control of this and to this point the Republicans on the committee have essentially refused to release anything of significance that wasn't previously released. That is until the stuff they released today. But while there are some significant implications from some of the documents released today, there's still nothing incriminating against anyone. They have not and by all indications will not release documents which actually name the people involved until or unless they are forced to.
Response to Wiz Imp (Reply #40)
SSJVegeta This message was self-deleted by its author.
Wiz Imp
(8,284 posts)
11 Bravo
(24,253 posts)
kimbutgar
(26,510 posts)The orange turd is dissolving in his dementia more everyday and people are waking up to the fact his is nuts!
sop
(16,943 posts)
MarineCombatEngineer
(16,951 posts)Fil1957
(419 posts)
Marcuse
(8,727 posts)The vote becomes a 217-217 tie and the cover up is complete.
highplainsdem
(59,088 posts)BREAKING: Rep. Adelita Grijalva has officially signed onto the Epstein discharge petition. That means there are now 218 votes — and a full vote must come to the floor.
— MeidasTouch (@meidastouch.com) 2025-11-12T21:22:40.558Z
niyad
(128,648 posts)MarineCombatEngineer
(16,951 posts)I see what you did there.
MarineCombatEngineer
(16,951 posts)angrychair
(11,526 posts)They are Republicans first. They have no morals or ethics or souls. They will bend the knee to their orange master.
llmart
(17,145 posts)and see that they could have many more years in Congress while he's on his last legs. Self-preservation moreso than ethics.
bucolic_frolic
(53,335 posts)so he's losing his leverage.
slightlv
(7,083 posts)in Permitted Withholdings...
So, because it would be obscenity under the U.S. laws, they're permitted to withhold the materials? Isn't the point of this to root out the corruption and obscenity, obtain justice for those so used, and (wishfully) adjudicate, judge, and march to prison those, like trump, who took part in these horrible crimes?
I don't know what material is available in these situations... but I kind of see this akin to refusing to show the horror of mass school shootings. If people could see the aftermath, we might actually get legal changes. While it's all just words and thoughts in the mind, we sit in a shooting gallery.
I just don't want to see what these people (girls, young women, and boys) be hidden behind legalities like gun crimes. It seems we "forgive" the worst of the worst, while locking up law-abiding citizens who may have missed a court date, etc...
Scrivener7
(57,888 posts)AllaN01Bear
(28,082 posts)onenote
(45,874 posts)There are very specific, and very detailed, rules governing discharge petitions.
Specifically, the procedure is as follows:
After the 218 signature threshold is reached, an additional seven legislative days must elapse before a Member who signed the petition may notify the House in a floor statement of an intention to offer the discharge motion on the floor. The motion may then be called up by that Member at a time or place, designated by the Speaker, in the legislative schedule within two legislative days after the day on which a Member whose signature appears thereon announces to the House an intention to offer the motion. The discharge motion is debatable for twenty minutes, equally divided between the proponents and an opponent and is not subject to a motion to table. If the motion to discharge a bill is adopted, it is in order to move that the House immediately consider the bill itself.
Thus, it will be at least a week before the discharge petition is brought up for a vote. One wild card is that a "legislative day" is not the same as a "calendar day" and I wouldn't put it past Johnson to muck around with the designation of a "legislative day" to delay a vote. In addition, my understanding is that the vote on the underlying bill is subject to ordinary parliamentary procedure, so a "motion to table" would be in order.
And, in the end, even if the bill passes, it has to go to the Senate and get 60 votes to be considered. And unless their is a seismic change in the repub caucus, that unlikely to happen. And in the event the bill does make it through the Senate, it can and almost certainly would be vetoed by Trump. Finding enough repubs that would vote to override that veto is yet another hurdle.
In the end, the likely benefit of the discharge procedure isn't going to be the release of the Epstein files. It's going to be forcing repubs in the House and, hopefully the Senate, to go on record opposing the release of the Epstein files.
Wiz Imp
(8,284 posts)It can be delayed until then because of Thanksgiving . The House is scheduled for recess the entire week of Thanksgiving. (There's a mandatory 7 work day delay on votes resulting from discharge petitions and then I think another 2 day delay which will take us through Thanksgiving to the first week of December)
onenote
(45,874 posts)I suspect that if the Speaker wants to move the bill to a floor vote more quickly, he can do so.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/12/politics/epstein-files-house-vote
popsdenver
(1,075 posts)would go around Denver and Colorado truck stops and take her name off all the toilet stalls and urinal walls.......the name she uses for her alter-ego is Bang-Bang Boebert