Two of the House lawmakers who reviewed the files—Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Ro Khanna of California—said the redactions appeared to include one “high up” foreign government official and other prominent individuals whose names and photographs were obscured in the versions previously released to the public.
“There are six men, some of them with their photographs, that have been redacted, and there’s no explanation why those people were redacted,” Massie, a Republican, said after spending roughly two hours reviewing the documents inside a secure reading room at a Department of Justice satellite office.
I hate how the lawmakers in the US still follow the old decorum where they pretend to give administration officials the benefit of the doubt. They pretend the redactions were in good faith, when they supposedly arrived at the justice department already redacted, supposedly for grand jury reasons, even though the bill said the whole documents were to be reviewed and redacted to protect witnesses and ongoing investigations.
We all know these redactions weren’t done in good faith. Why keep the old decorum, the administration isn’t. It just makes it easier for you to fail when you afford them the courtesy that they don’t return.
We need a new bill that gives all the unredacted information to an independent monitor, one that is trustworthy, but whose identities are kept secret even, to redact to protect witnesses. Forget investigations. They only investigations they are doing are to protect the co conspirators of Epstein. Keep the id of the people redacting secret to prevent desperate rich powerful people from threatening them.
The other way is to leak it all, all of it, to multiple news organizations, and let them redact to protect victims. If some, like the New York Times, improperly redacts to protect their favorite rich guys, and Israel and their Israel connections, the other organizations that receive the leaks might not and the NYTimes would be exposed for what they are, less trustworthy than they were, less brave than they were, and in league with fascists in Israel even as they champion a final solution for millions of people.
There are enough breadcrumbs within the 3 mil pdfs to accurately deduce the identities of these [redacted] individuals
The difference is so stark. UK the guy hired someone two years ago who was in the files and fired him last year and they are asking for his resignation. Just for that. US guy is in the files multiple times and crickets.
I think the whole country assumed it before the lawmakers alleged it.
Why can’t they just tell us who they are?
I believe, and I may be wrong, that they can say it on record in Congress and not get sued for it.
I’m hoping they’ll lay it all bare given that opportunity.
Firstly, it doesn’t matter how prominent a person is.
Secondly if any person is so stupid to allow their picture to be taken with Epstein, etc, then they absolutely deserve to be named and shamed for that stupidity.
Prominent pedophiles
FTFY
Their goal is to smear victims and hide perpetrators.
Of course, that’s why they redacted the perps and left victim’s names unredacted which was also a warning to other women who had not come forward that they would not get any protection.
And…
Epstein and associates held a lot of sway over officials of many countries. Redacting those foreign officials gives the US control over that leverage.
I’m not sure why this never comes up in articles.
It doesn’t give the US control, it gives a specific cohort of misanthropic scumbags leverage to accomplish their misanthropic scumbag agenda.
There is no good reason to redact this information. Giving extra ammunition to the class of people that has been fighting to the nail to cover this all up is in no way a benefit.
It gives Israel continued control over everyone in the files not the US.
Paid for by our votes and tax dollars.
We’re so stupid!
Think lots of people who grew up around sexual predators understands this, they see the victims as vindictive and ungrateful, in their minds they did nothing wrong. They always twist their actions to be the fault of the victim, so releasing information to hurt the victims is 100% predictable.
did you expect anything less?
Wait, are you telling me that releasing the files with the email senders redacted but the victims names unredacted was to protect the assholes and not the victims?!
I’m shocked! SHOCKED I say!
well how about we dont. They should account.
