NYT is outraged that pedos were outed
Login to reply
Replies (33)
lol is this a real article 😳
I should check how my torrent downloads are going.
Backing up all of it, for when the elite infighting stops and the memory-holing begins...
😂😂
😂😂
Is that the content of the article? I'd imagine it's somewhat more nuanced, and likely related to people taking snippets and running wild with them.
Now that's a clever idea because once the dust settles they will do a JFK on it and even remove some files too
Files keep being retroactively re-classified and removed already, especially the ones that mentioned Trump.
DoJ is incompetent, sabotaging their boss, or both.
Hard to re-classify a .torrent in the wild, though :)
Please share torrent
You greatly overestimate the #NYT in 2026.
Waffle, special pleading, and concern-trolling about "re-victimising" the victims by shaming the abusers.
The NYT scolds us at length for not trusting the govt, but also warns the DoJ can't be trusted to redact victims names correctly so the abusers should be secret, too.
Then something about #feminism.
Oh, you read the article I take it? I don't give the NYTs much credit at all, but if that is the take in there, that's laughably bad. So maybe I was STILL giving too much credit.
Hehehe torrents are like waves that have gone out and can't be called back. Keep up the good work. Posterity will thank you
Very surprising coming from them! 😂
Dataset 1 just reported for duty. Dataset 2 coming up... :)
They are probably hiding something serious 🧐
If someone shows me a NYT hit piece about Bitcoin, I’ll reply this back and say nothing.
View quoted note →
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/23/opinion/epstein-files-justice-department.html
Yes. I wonder what religion Richman practices.
Something something lucifer
You got that right!
AKA, “The Jew York Times.”
Epstein files are like a fart they can’t take back.
Sulzberger family own the New York Times
The **exact number of times the Sulzberger family is mentioned in the Epstein files is not publicly disclosed**, as the full collection of documents has not been fully digitized or analyzed for precise mention counts. However, based on **available reports, court filings, and journalistic investigations**, the Sulzberger family—particularly **Arthur Ochs "Pinch" Sulzberger Jr.** (former publisher of *The New York Times*)—appears in **multiple emails and communications** within the Epstein files.
### Key Estimates and Context:
- **At least 5–7 direct references** have been identified by journalists and researchers:
- **Epstein's emails** to journalist Michael Wolff (2017) include **multiple mentions** of "Pinch" Sulzberger, calling him “my favorite” and listing him among “big names on the horizon” for potential exposure.
- In **one email**, Epstein writes: *“I have two more friends up to bat… Big names on the horizon: Michael Douglas, Larry Gagosian, and still my favorite, Arthur Sulzberger.”*
- Another email from **December 2017**, shortly before Pinch Sulzberger stepped down as publisher, references him: *“Sulzberger — told you”*—implying that Epstein believed Sulzberger would be exposed.
- There are also **references to Sulzberger’s role as a media figure** and **his potential vulnerability** during the #MeToo era, with Epstein speculating about public downfall.
- **No evidence of direct contact** or meetings between Epstein and Sulzberger has been found. The **New York Times has stated** that Arthur Sulzberger Jr. **never met Epstein**, and the mentions appear to be **speculative or based on social circles**.
- **A.G. Sulzberger**, the current publisher, is **not directly named** in the files, but is **indirectly referenced** through board affiliations—such as the resignation of Joi Ito (a former MIT Media Lab director with Epstein ties) from the *New York Times* board in 2019.
### Summary:
> While **no official count exists**, the Sulzberger family (mainly **Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger Jr.**) is mentioned in **at least 5–7 notable instances** in the Epstein files. These references are **not evidence of criminal activity**, but rather reflect **Epstein’s interest in high-profile media figures** and his **speculation about their reputations**.
> There is **no proof of direct contact** between Epstein and the Sulzbergers, and the family has **denied any association**.
muh, muh... MAPs are people too!
People that should be placed at gitmo
WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT. THERE IS ZERO DEFENSE OF EXPOSING FUCKING AND EATING KIDS 🤣
wtf are YOU talking about? Stop shouting at me, GFY.
If you read the rest of the replies, you'll see I was under the misapprehension the OP was blindly dunking on NYTs without reading the article. I was wrong. No biggie, turns out he's in the minority of people who actually posts headlines they've read, who knew 🤷♂️
Incidentally, are you certain kids were eaten? I know of an email here and there which mention it, but would you say you're 💯 sure?
I DIDNT READ THIS REPLY EITHER BUT ILL TRY TO CALM DOWN 🤣
It's the name and all caps. I feel you're bullying me anytime you come through. Oh, and the super serious pfp.
I would like to know answer to last question, if you would. Are you 💯 sure babies were eaten? You might guess I'm leaning towards it's crazy to assume that's 💯 true without extreme evidence. But, I haven't spent that much time with files, and have only seen a mention here and there, so maybe I'm missing something. You're claiming it like you're certain, and I'd like to get a joking-aside response
NOH HUE
We knew Trump was a pedophile back in 2015
NYT know ragebait makes them more money
Ok, good talk