- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: DOJ Epstein files release site is live
Posted on 12/20/25 at 8:40 pm to Disco Ball
Posted on 12/20/25 at 8:40 pm to Disco Ball
quote:
A painting found at Jeffrey's estate.
Does the dress have a stain on it???
This post was edited on 12/20/25 at 8:46 pm
0
Posted on 12/20/25 at 9:26 pm to ddbnsb
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.This post was edited on 12/20/25 at 10:16 pm
Posted on 12/20/25 at 9:26 pm to dallastigers
quote:
Only 1 of those 16 was Trump related with a couple of pictures in drawer of a desk of some kind. Pictures were kind of at angles and overlapped instead of being focused on one at a time (at least what I saw that was described as the file).
The DOJ pulled a photo of just Epstein and Trump from their site. It’s clear the DOJ is under orders to hide anything connecting Trump and Epstein
Posted on 12/20/25 at 9:31 pm to cgrand
Redact city?
Posted on 12/20/25 at 9:48 pm to oldskule
Absolutely
Posted on 12/20/25 at 9:51 pm to VOLhalla
quote:
The DOJ pulled a photo of just Epstein and Trump from their site. It’s clear the DOJ is under orders to hide anything connecting Trump and Epstein
Do you even read the link you posted?
Your own link proves you wrong. It was one file with 2 pictures in a desk drawer. Whoever took picture did or even bother to take each out and photograph separately. I don’t know the the resolution of the pdf image before it was removed, but there are a lot of people and other info that seems pretty likely based on your article was removed due to being notified by an attorney of a victim(s) that something or someone was visible that needs to be redacted. Also, one of the pictures of Trump looks like something previously released to the public.
Why don’t you reread your link and rethink your argument?
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5658618-doj-redactions-epstein-files/
quote:
… attorney Gloria Allred, during an appearance on CNN Saturday afternoon, said she had been contacted by people who said their information should not have been posted.
Allred said in an email to The Hill that her firm’s legal team contacted DOJ on Saturday about names seen in the files, “which should have been redacted.”
“I can’t reveal where the names appeared, but we were told that the names will be redacted,” she said.
…One photo of the desk included two pictures inside an open drawer that featured Trump. The first printed picture shows Trump surrounded by a group of women in bathing suits. The second partially covered photo shows Trump with first lady Melania Trump, Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell in 2000.
I do see Bill is still on top of his desk and not shoved into a drawer.
This post was edited on 12/20/25 at 10:08 pm
Posted on 12/20/25 at 10:27 pm to cgrand
This is the president of the United States
This post was edited on 12/20/25 at 10:29 pm
Posted on 12/20/25 at 10:33 pm to Hobie101
Yes it is. A man. A horny man.
Posted on 12/20/25 at 11:40 pm to Hobie101
quote:You know things aren’t going as you had hoped with the files when you have to revert to that…
This is the president of the United States
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.This post was edited on 12/20/25 at 11:46 pm
Posted on 12/21/25 at 7:37 am to dallastigers
quote:
removed due to being notified by an attorney of a victim(s) that something or someone was visible that needs to be redacted
If there is an image of a victim then their image should be redacted. The entire document shouldn’t be pulled/withheld.
Pictures of Epstein with Clinton and victims are produced with the victim’s faces redacted. Pictures of Epstein and Trump and victims are being pulled/withheld. Why the difference?
Posted on 12/21/25 at 10:06 am to VOLhalla
quote:
If there is an image of a victim then their image should be redacted. The entire document shouldn’t be pulled/withheld.
Such an ignorant take. You need to stop following the Dem Oversight profile.
They have to remove it have the word or image redacted and make sure the word is no longer searchable, the image is for sure not viewable, and then later once cleared add document back if it contains items that can be posted.
Why do you think the did this to 15 other documents that your link admits had nothing to do with Trump?
And guess what, file 468 is back online with Trump’s 2 images in the desk drawer still there as well as Clinton’s and the pope’s pictures actually on top of the desk.
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%201/EFTA00000468.pdf
You should have just read your own link and not post your own ‘theories’ / politics that went against the info in your post.
This post was edited on 12/21/25 at 10:37 am
Posted on 12/21/25 at 10:35 am to dallastigers
quote:
Woman who filed a complaint against Epstein to Clinton FBI vindicated after DOJ release of files
A woman whose concerns about Jeffrey Epstein were brushed off by the FBI three decades ago was vindicated Friday after the Department of Justice finally made her complaint public.
Maria Farmer's complaint was buried in the thousands of files related to Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's sex trafficking cases that the DOJ published as part of its obligations under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
The document was dated Sept. 3, 1996, more than 10 years before Epstein first faced prosecution for sex crimes involving girls. In it, Farmer accused Epstein of stealing and selling photos of her young sisters. Farmer worked as an artist for Epstein and has long been outspoken about what she said was his abusive behavior.
Farmer has said the photos of her sisters cited in the 1996 complaint included nudity, and the complaint is labeled as a possible "child pornography" case.
… Farmer also sued the DOJ in July, alleging the Clinton administration FBI "chose to do absolutely nothing" with her complaint in 1996 and that, in the years since, Epstein was able to victimize more women. Farmer said she also complained again to the FBI in 2006 during the Bush administration.
… Names on the complaint were redacted, but The New York Times confirmed with Farmer that she was the person who filed it. Farmer told the outlet she felt "vindicated."
"I’ve waited 30 years. … I can’t believe it. They can’t call me a liar anymore," she said
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/woman-who-filed-complaint-against-epstein-clintons-fbi-vindicated-after-doj-release-files
Posted on 12/21/25 at 10:41 am to dallastigers
quote:
And guess what, file 468 is back online with Trump’s 2 images in the desk drawer still there as well as Clinton’s and the pope’s pictures actually on top of the desk. LINK
It’s back up after everyone started talking about the DOJ trying to hide Trump documents. And go look at your link - no redactions on the picture!
So the DOJ didn’t take the photo down for redactions! Why the hell did the DOJ take that doc away?
Posted on 12/21/25 at 10:52 am to VOLhalla
quote:
It’s back up after everyone started talking about the DOJ trying to hide Trump documents. And go look at your link - no redactions on the picture!
So the DOJ didn’t take the photo down for redactions! Why the hell did the DOJ take that doc away
Posted on 12/21/25 at 11:20 am to dallastigers
quote:
They have to remove it have the word or image redacted and make sure the word is no longer searchable, the image is for sure not viewable, and then later once cleared add document back if it contains items that can be posted.
The DOJ shat on this argument the minute they reposted the image without redactions
Posted on 12/21/25 at 11:28 am to Relham10
quote:
Can't you frickers post the direct photos without sending to to a blink link that asks us to download shite
I am not going thru all of that trouble when I am linking you directly to the DOJ website.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 11:28 am to Ingeniero
"trump Showing 1 to 10 of 625 Results.
You truly must be a moron.
You truly must be a moron.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 11:41 am to cgrand
This should make all the mouth breathers happy now. Until they don’t find exactly what they were convinced Justice was hiding.
“Aww damn! They coverin up the cover up! Sunsabitches!”
“Aww damn! They coverin up the cover up! Sunsabitches!”
Posted on 12/21/25 at 11:42 am to biglego
quote:
Well, he didn’t...
And if he did...
There it is.
Posted on 12/21/25 at 11:46 am to cgrand
What was the website that got hacked and a bunch of dudes email addresses was on it? Is there no one out there who can hack into the government's networks and take it? China and Russia is always hacking into the US government's networks.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News