Some Trumppers do not believe this is true.

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor

Has Trump’s Name Been Redacted from the Epstein Files?​


Yes. The FBI did, in fact, redact former President Trump’s name (along with several other high-profile individuals) from documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.


  • The redactions were conducted by the FBI's FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) review team. It was reported that Trump’s name was removed due to privacy protections, as he was a private citizen at the time the investigation began in 2006.
    The Times of IndiaBloomberg GovernmentWikipedia

The Department of Justice (DOJ) publicly defended the redaction, pointing to legal obligations to protect the privacy of individuals who were not charged or implicated and to safeguard ongoing or sensitive investigations.
The Times of India

From Chat GPT, links included.
 
Jarod said:

Has Trump’s Name Been Redacted from the Epstein Files?​


Yes. The FBI did, in fact, redact former President Trump’s name (along with several other high-profile individuals) from documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.


  • The redactions were conducted by the FBI's FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) review team. It was reported that Trump’s name was removed due to privacy protections, as he was a private citizen at the time the investigation began in 2006.
    The Times of IndiaBloomberg GovernmentWikipedia

The Department of Justice (DOJ) publicly defended the redaction, pointing to legal obligations to protect the privacy of individuals who were not charged or implicated and to safeguard ongoing or sensitive investigations.
The Times of India

From Chat GPT, links included.
Click to expand...
Well...protecting privacy is a decent goal. We will have to see what the documents say about the individuals...what they allege the protected individuals did.

If the documents say that several of the women interviewed reported reported being fucked and handed off to others to be fucked while between the age of 12 and 15...we sure as hell should get the name of that redacted individual. Especially if the women give hints like, (The guy was once the president of the United States...and is now, again the president of the United States.)
 
Ross Dolan said:
Well...protecting privacy is a decent goal. We will have to see what the documents say about the individuals...what they allege the protected individuals did.

If the documents say that several of the women interviewed reported reported being fucked and handed off to others to be fucked while between the age of 12 and 15...we sure as hell should get the name of that redacted individual. Especially if the women give hints like, (The guy was once the president of the United States...and is now, again the president of the United States.)
Click to expand...
Its more than the names that are redacted. What is said about those names is also redacted.

The most powerful people and the crimes they committed have been "redacted".


Pam Blondi got to decide.
 
Jarod said:

Has Trump’s Name Been Redacted from the Epstein Files?​


Yes. The FBI did, in fact, redact former President Trump’s name (along with several other high-profile individuals) from documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.


  • The redactions were conducted by the FBI's FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) review team. It was reported that Trump’s name was removed due to privacy protections, as he was a private citizen at the time the investigation began in 2006.
    The Times of IndiaBloomberg GovernmentWikipedia

The Department of Justice (DOJ) publicly defended the redaction, pointing to legal obligations to protect the privacy of individuals who were not charged or implicated and to safeguard ongoing or sensitive investigations.
The Times of India

From Chat GPT, links included.
Click to expand...
Did the brandon administration report this in 2020?
 
Ross Dolan said:
You do not care if there are people in public life who have molested little girls???

Really, TA?

Really?
Click to expand...
I don't care to the extent that it is salacious gossip. I do to the extent that someone who has is charged and prosecuted for it. Right now, all you have is the salacious gossip portion of that, so, yes, I don't care.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I don't care to the extent that it is salacious gossip. I do to the extent that someone who has is charged and prosecuted for it. Right now, all you have is the salacious gossip portion of that, so, yes, I don't care.
Click to expand...
The issue being discussed is the demand to have the files released. What makes you think the files are just salacious gossip? Are you suggesting that there can be no leads in those files that might lead to information that shows a great deal of this stuff is anything but salacious gossip? Especially since two people have been convicted of felony charges on the issue already.

You are dismissing this rather cavalierly, TA.
 
Ross Dolan said:
The issue being discussed is the demand to have the files released. What makes you think the files are just salacious gossip? Are you suggesting that there can be no leads in those files that might lead to information that shows a great deal of this stuff is anything but salacious gossip? Especially since two people have been convicted of felony charges on the issue already.

You are dismissing this rather cavalierly, TA.
Click to expand...
Until they are released, they are salacious gossip. After release they may still well be the same. That's why I don't care. The odds are against them being anything criminally indictable against anyone. Hell, they're likely less evidence than Hunter (Bagman) Biden's laptop or his sister's diary.

Those convicted of felony charges in the Epstein case weren't convicted using those files...
 
So, the DOJ redacted his name because he was a private citizen that was not charged or implicated.

I just want to emphasize the last four words of that...

So, the 2006 DOJ redacted his name because he was a private citizen that was not charged or implicated.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Until they are released, they are salacious gossip. After release they may still well be the same. That's why I don't care. The odds are against them being anything criminally indictable against anyone. Hell, they're likely less evidence than Hunter (Bagman) Biden's laptop or his sister's diary.

Those convicted of felony charges in the Epstein case weren't convicted using those files...
Click to expand...
What a fucking sad bunch of traitors now call themselves MAGA...or American conservatives.

Anyone with any self-respect at all would avoid those two designations like they were the plague.
 
Damocles said:
So, the DOJ redacted his name because he was a private citizen that was not charged or implicated.

I just want to emphasize the last four words of that...

So, the 2006 DOJ redacted his name because he was a private citizen that was not charged or implicated.
Click to expand...
I repeat my post #16 to you, Damo.
 
Jarod said:

Has Trump’s Name Been Redacted from the Epstein Files?​


Yes. The FBI did, in fact, redact former President Trump’s name (along with several other high-profile individuals) from documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.


  • The redactions were conducted by the FBI's FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) review team. It was reported that Trump’s name was removed due to privacy protections, as he was a private citizen at the time the investigation began in 2006.
    The Times of IndiaBloomberg GovernmentWikipedia

The Department of Justice (DOJ) publicly defended the redaction, pointing to legal obligations to protect the privacy of individuals who were not charged or implicated and to safeguard ongoing or sensitive investigations.
The Times of India

From Chat GPT, links included.
Click to expand...
1757160347691.png
 
Ross Dolan said:
Well...protecting privacy is a decent goal. We will have to see what the documents say about the individuals...what they allege the protected individuals did.

If the documents say that several of the women interviewed reported reported being fucked and handed off to others to be fucked while between the age of 12 and 15...we sure as hell should get the name of that redacted individual. Especially if the women give hints like, (The guy was once the president of the United States...and is now, again the president of the United States.)
Click to expand...
It's not "being fucked", my friend, it's being raped!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top