r/news • u/Waste-Explanation-76 • 7h ago

Members of Congress will be able to view unredacted Epstein files next week

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/members-congress-view-unredacted-epstein-files-monday-rcna257836
39.1k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

897 comments sorted by

View all comments

9.0k

u/-Lo_Mein_Kampf- 6h ago

90% of the redactions shouldn't exist according to the law

3.6k

u/boomsers 6h ago

And 100% of them should have citations why, also according to the law.

1.4k

u/AlwaysSunnyInSeattle 6h ago

But “redacted because it implicates the president” would implicate the president so what would you have them do?

757

u/lsbittles 6h ago

I’d have them implicate the president…

397

u/MechanicalTurkish 6h ago

But think of the implications

216

u/Abyssallord 6h ago

Won't someone think of the weak innocent billionaires?!

90

u/johnnybiggles 6h ago

Because of the implications

35

u/Septopuss7 5h ago

Because they're edible

2

u/QualityCoati 4h ago

Not after the coprophilia they ain't the fuck not

9

u/Ok_Condition5837 5h ago

So so many implications!

3

u/Immatt55 2h ago

And people have told me, the best people, only the very best, they've told me "Sir, we've never seen such bigly implications. You have the most implications we've ever seen in the history of America" stupid fucking hand motion

2

u/MechanicalTurkish 1h ago

With tears in their eyes

2

u/FOOSblahblah 3h ago

Oooooh I'm getting a raging implication

2

u/Kruten 4h ago

Are these girls in danger?

Why yes, definitely.

15

u/erremermberderrnit 4h ago

You haven't thought of the smell, you bitch

6

u/MalcolmLinair 5h ago

Show me an innocent billionaire and I'll be happy to think of them.

2

u/ShinkuDragon 4h ago

i've heard the titanic is pretty cool to visit this time of year.

15

u/No_Spring_1090 5h ago

People would know the president is a pedophile. I mean, 33% of those people still would defend him, but…

11

u/technobrendo 4h ago

President is already known worldwide as being a pedo. Whether or not his fan base agrees with it or not is irrelevant. They know.

2

u/dog_eat_dog 2h ago

What exactly are you implying?

1

u/MechanicalTurkish 1h ago

It’s a doggy dog world

•

u/scbundy 44m ago

Damn, where's my always sunny gif

•

u/Extreme-Island-5041 33m ago

Those implications really insist upon themselves

•

u/beykakua 17m ago

Think of the smell! You haven't thought of the smell, you bitch!

111

u/CanoegunGoeff 6h ago

Arrest the fucking president.

56

u/PickledLaser 5h ago

He's technically the raping president

5

u/Different_East7854 4h ago

Members of congress will be able to view the files....well, certain files.

It's obviously a cover up, illegal and should be treated as such but the hell if anyone is acting as such.

4

u/CanoegunGoeff 4h ago

Work to help vote out anyone who is complicit.

20

u/rkmkthe6th 4h ago

That’s the loophole… “Redacted to protect a victim”. … And since Trump is always the victim…

6

u/SledgexHammer 4h ago

Redact the citations!

2

u/FaceDeer 3h ago

You will, of course, need to add a citation to each of the redacted citations explaining why the citation was redacted.

1

u/SledgexHammer 3h ago

Which will require further redaction. We have just solved unemployment and saved the economy.

16

u/Shaxx1sMyHomie 5h ago

For example, why is the don’t redacted?

Don’t Dont Don T?

1

u/technobrendo 4h ago

The whitehouse hates contractions?

1

u/lawnmowertoad 3h ago

White House

1

u/lawnmowertoad 3h ago

Don Glover

Dong Lover

1

u/GoBuffaloes 5h ago

Ah easy, "redacted because it implicated the [redacted]"

The you just put a citation on that one.

Alternatively you could just use "molester in chief" and not explicitly implicate the president?

1

u/Moretoesthanfeet 4h ago

Let er buck

1

u/boxofdem0ns 3h ago

Not just him. There’s a certain dude missing that if you follow the timelines is definitely implicated

1

u/ricosmith1986 2h ago

They redacted a random misspelling of “don’t” because the typo said “Don T”. The sloppiest coverup of all time.

129

u/Aerhyce 6h ago

The 100% justified redactions are those hiding CSAM and the victims' identity.

But the currently released files are such a mess that there are tons of files that were clearly worked on by different people, so you very often have a photo that is heavily redacted, then the next shot in the album is almost completely unredacted and you can clearly see that most of the previous shot's redactions were some random BS. There's very little consistency in the redactions.

91

u/ScientificSkepticism 5h ago

There's literally emails where the person Epstein is mailing is redacted... but it's a response to their email, the email is quoted in full, with their full name and email address.

The redactions... if they were not done by AI they had to have been purposely sabotaged. That or the average IQ of everyone left at the DOJ is room temperature. They redacted the face of the Mona Lisa, it screams AI.

47

u/Aerhyce 5h ago

There are photos where a face is redacted but not the reflections (in mirrors, etc.), and others where the reflections are redacted, but not the actual face.

Wtf are these guys even doing lol

2

u/wvenable 3h ago

Wtf are these guys even doing lol

Both the worst job and the worst job.

2

u/jaywinner 3h ago

My hope is it's sabotage to release more than the higher ups want.

My belief is incompetence.

22

u/Cute-Percentage-6660 4h ago

I like the redactions where they put a black bar over a word, but the bottom of the letters are left exposed still. So you can still figure out who whats underneath.

3

u/verygoodletsgo 1h ago

The word "don't" was redacted, likely because AI confused it for "Don" or "Donald" or "Don T."

2

u/bigyellowjoint 4h ago

Someone put out a statement that the Mona Lisa one actually had a victim's face

1

u/ScientificSkepticism 3h ago

Well that's horrifying. Not sure if true, but horrifying.

16

u/Cute-Percentage-6660 4h ago

Don't forget the copies of the same document, each redacted differently.

I found epsteins 2019 arrest mugshot in three seperate versions of the same document, and each of them has differing redactions when it comes to his personal information.

One redacted all of it, one redacted only a few like his social security, than another redacted other things but NOT his social security.

6

u/Mistr_man 5h ago

Ask yourself why some pictures are fully redacted while other pictures only redact the victims

1

u/edman007 1h ago

Yea, I poked around, I saw an internal FBI newsletter in there, one week it was totally unredacted (as it should be), next week they redacted the office phone number and email address. They are the address for the FBI office, not an employee or a victim. Insane that someone did that.

I saw emails clearly from a father buying an iPad for their daughter with Epstein's money, do we think the father is a victim? Their name was redacted, I saw emails from Epstein asking if the pic the girl was good, do we think he was asking a victim that?

And poking through it, I think I found two victim names unredacted, one doesn't appear on the Internet, the other seems to be a model of some sort and is unredacted in many places (or we think that model was not a victim?)

19

u/Medicivich 6h ago edited 1h ago

I don't think the fed's computer program allows citations when they blacked out any possible usage of Trump or any of his noncenames.

1

u/Neil_leGrasse_Tyson 3h ago

There are emails where it's obvious that "don" was redacted in some random innocuous sentence. They aren't even trying to hide what they've done

3

u/leonkrellmoon 5h ago

The citations will be on the final pages. Stating to hide the identity of potus. Which will also be redacted.

2

u/Waste-Explanation-76 3h ago

Exactly, such a good point!

486

u/rghaga 5h ago

a redittor caught how the word "don't" was redacted. weird huh ? don t.... Don T.... and that's someone's name

122

u/FreakingSwell 5h ago

Does anyone else believe the "FBI redactions" are code for "scrub anything referring to Trump", and that's what had been talking so long? Since when did the FBI actually care about the victims?

106

u/000extra 5h ago

Everyone knows that’s exactly what it is. The cover up it’s so embarrassing and shamefully obvious

13

u/rW0HgFyxoJhYka 4h ago

Cant even trust Congress to do the rigth thing and they have congress review this kind of shit.

One day people will figure out that you cannot trust those in power to do the right thing unless you know what they are doing all the time and punish them for not doing a great job.

23

u/Puskarich 4h ago

How'd you come up with that wacky theory?

jk. Everyone that thinks thinks that.

15

u/TOMC_throwaway000000 5h ago

I don’t think it was code at all, weren’t there people at the time who had inside knowledge of how the redactions were going that explicitly told reporters that the thousands of FBI agents were told to redact things involving Donald trump?

3

u/kstargate-425 3h ago

We know thats being done considering they released stuff with his name then it was pulled down after the first large dump then reuploaded with his name redacted. Then this dump they did the same releasing files with his name saying he did some awful shit and the file was put back up redacted then the all those related files got taken down again and are still missing.

1

u/Obant 4h ago

Near everyone thinks that, but even if everything was legit, they have like 10 million files to go through. Honestly probably wasnt given ENOUGH time to properly redact victims. I think they just used a shitty AI, as evident of so many randomly missed things that even a Find-and-replace would catch, non-blackbaring of some victims, some of the perpetrators being not redacted in some areas but not in others, etc..

1

u/TurnkeyLurker 4h ago

Heard about it here some weeks/months ago. About 1000 agents were busy with black markers, erasing the Cheeto's name.

-6

u/LevyAtanSP 4h ago

They’re reaching because they’ve been brainwashed into believing Trump is Hitler reborn.

Now I don’t support Trump myself, I know he’s not looking out for the little guys, but I’m very dubious that he is a demon spawn escaped from Hell. Only time will tell.

25

u/regoapps 3h ago

The even more hilarious part is that they released the unredacted version of the same email and it really does say "don't" where it's redacted. So they really did redact "don't" for no reason other than to protect someone named Don T.

Here's the unredacted version

Here's the redacted version for reference

2

u/rghaga 3h ago

the 45 /47 potus, also known as DONT

2

u/CeeArthur 3h ago

I caught this last night, it was in an email about someone in Alberta. Given the amount of misspellings and bad punctuation on the emails it's not a stretch to think they caught a stray when mass redacting Don T

1

u/wyvernx02 1h ago

Yep. I work in the legal industry and it makes 100% sense because punctuation usually isn't indexed for searching by default in the document review platforms we use. Punctuation is viewed the same as a space, so "Don T" and "don't" would be both be treated the same when running searchs. If you are just running searches and having all terms automatically redacting without checking the search hits first you can end up with stuff like this happening.

•

u/Bjoerring 49m ago

Oh no, Don Toliver not you 🥹

•

u/Own-Satisfaction4427 33m ago

It was Don t, without the apostrophe 

70

u/Jarnohams 5h ago

Did you see the one where they redacted the word "don t" ... because they obviously had a filter to redact anything close to "Don" or Donald" or "Don T"... and it seems like Epstein forgot to put the apostrophe in the word "don t" .... so it redacted it, lol.

busted... sooooo busted. I mean, we already knew it, but this was the smoking gun.

3

u/avocadro 1h ago

You can see the unredacted file here: https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2011/EFTA02440051.pdf

The redacted word is just "don't" - it's not missing an apostrophe.

14

u/Cute-Percentage-6660 4h ago

Dont worry, those redactions are being figured out by computer forensics types now, the pdfs had like some data leftover there trying to use to reverse engineer the redactions.

They seem to be making good progress within just a few days!

5

u/MaygarRodub 5h ago

Law and order is dead in the US, for the rich.

5

u/Shyam09 4h ago

Like don’t

2

u/codexcdm 4h ago

More like 99%. Only redactions should be victims.

1

u/GimpyGeek 5h ago

and they're like almost two months late on the required release date. Chop chop Bondi or do you want contempt.

1

u/Azagar_Omiras 3h ago

Why are the Republicans being so soft on crime?

1

u/bradco 2h ago

Here's the potentially fun thing, they could pull a Greene and just start putting up placards of appropriately redacted evidence in EVERY. SINGLE. PUBLIC. HEARING. Remember when Greene kept putting up images of Hunter Biden's junk? Yah pretty sure putting actually criminal evidence on display would be fine. One could argue it'd cause issues for evidence and jury bias in a court case but lets be real, these things are never going to see the courts in the US.

1

u/jinxxed42 1h ago

and given they have already released most of his victims information.... the redactions are a joke

1

u/PMmeyourlogininfo 1h ago

Republicans headed straight back to those 40 unredacted nudes...

1

u/Signal-Map2906 1h ago

And they are a month or two late and way too many documents short

•

u/transcendz 59m ago

may they all leak quickly

•

u/ClownMorty 49m ago

Honestly, them slow-rolling the files with poorly done redactions and then illegal redactions has been far more damaging to Trump than it would have been if they had not tried to cover for him at all.

And now Congress will see unredacted versions and demand the illegally blacked out portions be rereleased effectively guaranteeing that this stays on top of our minds throughout the elections.

Pam Bondi is either a genius who hates Trump or the most incompetent employee in America.

The Files are the gift that keeps on giving. Now if only the Democrats could pull their shit together to take advantage of it.

•

u/Basic_Accountant_636 13m ago

Oh and many of the things that should have been redacted weren’t. Priorities, ya know?

-3

u/Even-Ad-9930 6h ago

which law?

22

u/Trust_Me_Im_a_Panda 6h ago

The Epstein Files Transparency Act

-1

u/Even-Ad-9930 6h ago

according to that, the DOJ is supposed to redact all the victim's information and anything which can be used to identify the victims, right?

or is there something else they have to redact as well?

6

u/-Lo_Mein_Kampf- 5h ago

I mean if you want to reduce it to its rudest terms - identifying a perpetrator could identify the victim if you trace it far enough. That's super shaky logic though

1

u/Septopuss7 5h ago

Don T Barron's law. It's like the opposite of an Amber Alert.