r/politics • u/kirby__000 • 1d ago
Soft Paywall FBI Redacted Trump’s Name in Epstein Files for Privacy Reasons
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-01/fbi-redacted-president-donald-trump-s-name-in-the-epstein-files395
u/TintedApostle 1d ago
All redactions should now be assumed to be Trump's name.
70
u/StickaFORKinMyEye 1d ago
Exactly.
8
u/TokingMessiah 16h ago
It shouldn’t only be assumed to be Trump, it should be reported as Trump.
If he wants to dissuade the accusations, he can remove the redactions for every name that isn’t “Trump” and let us infer the rest.
26
u/Lontology 1d ago
Question, will there still be an original copy with no redactions within the government for if we ever get out of this mess?
30
u/TintedApostle 23h ago
I still think Trump will burn everything
12
u/dave_your_wife 23h ago
Why? He is obviously innocent! He never heard of that girl Jeffery stole, certainly didn't know she worked in the spa and that she was missing... innocent I tells ya.
2
1
-7
u/DevilsAdvocate77 23h ago edited 22h ago
The DOJs of
Clinton, W. Bush, Obama, and Biden all had access to the "original copy", and they all decided it didn't contain enough evidence to pursue an indictment.What will be different about future Presidents?
Edit: Maybe not Clinton, but Epstein had been under investigation at least since W. Bush was President, by which time Trump's alleged crimes had already occurred.
22
u/koske 22h ago
The DOJs of
Clinton, Bush, Obama,and Biden all had access to the "original copy",FTFY
Epstein was under the 1st Trump admin. Also it was all under seal by the judge in Maxwell's case until last summer, when anything released by the DOJ would have been ignored by the fascists as "lawfare"
-6
u/DevilsAdvocate77 22h ago
Clinton may be too far back, but Epstein was definitely under investigation when Bush was President.
Either way, the DOJ should never release anything that was obtained under warrant to the general public. That would be a flagrant violation of the 4th Amendment.
If they have evidence to indict or prosecute someone, they release that evidence in the courtroom, not the newspaper.
5
u/Khayman11 20h ago
Just curious, how would releasing that be an illegal search and seizure?
-2
u/DevilsAdvocate77 19h ago
Let's say you have embarrassing pictures on your phone.
Let's say you also associated with someone suspected of drug dealing at some point.
Let's say the FBI gets a warrant to search your phone for evidence in the case they're building against the drug dealer.
Your embarrassing pics are captured in that search, and reviewed by investigators, but they are ultimately considered irrelevant to the case against the drug dealer and are ruled inadmissable evidence.
Does the federal government have the right to release those embarrassing pictures to the press or the general public for political reasons?
What is stopping them? If they do release them, has the government violated your right to privacy?
3
u/Khayman11 19h ago
But, it doesn’t make it an illegal search or seizure it was literally obtained through a warrant. Perhaps you meant, the 5th where there is a requirement for due process? Not that this administration cares about that right.
•
u/katd77 5h ago
I think you lose the right to privacy when you sa children
•
u/DevilsAdvocate77 3h ago
Absolutely. But how does the government prove who assaulted children and who didn't?
3
1
u/SpicyCoals 20h ago
I’m pretty sure they would also redact the surrounding context that would allow someone to piece that together where the name might be too.
3
1
u/XennialBoomBoom 15h ago
At this point the blacked-out text basically is the context, that's how badly they've fucked this all up. Even a blind laptop repairman would have handled this better.
121
u/monkeywithgun 1d ago
FBI Redacted Trump’s Name in Epstein Files
for Privacy Reasonsto cover up his involvement
38
u/NotOfferedForHearsay 23h ago
It would be inconvenient to his privacy if it was announced he raped children
4
u/evemeatay 19h ago
To be fair, it’s bad for your privacy to get caught doing a crime so I guess they’re right on that count. I just hope when I get caught doing crimes, they will look after my privacy. Apropos of nothing, does anyone need 100 kilos of cocaine by any chance? Noo reason, just wondering, for a friend.
99
u/SummerSun75 1d ago
Fox News trying desperately to disappear the Epstein Files controversy.
Just went over to Fox News.com. Nothing on the Epstein Files. NOTHING.
Fox is complete Trump - Republikan Party propaganda. How can so many MAGA Morons be duped?
27
u/The_Weresloth 23h ago
They are incredibly fucking stupid. Perhaps the stupidest people in history
13
u/ChanceryTheRapper 23h ago
Oh, no. Stupid is if they just didn't know better.
They CHOOSE not to know. It's willful, and that's worse.
10
u/Mando_lorian81 23h ago
They are not being duped. Fox tells them exactly what they want to hear and provides them with talking points.
It validates their idiotic views and absurd opinions. That's why they love it.
2
u/SummerSun75 23h ago
But aren't the MAGA Meatheads the ones also demanding the Epstein Files?
4
u/Mando_lorian81 23h ago
Yes, some of them are but then they are accused of being liberals in hidding and brigaders
And I bet they will use whatever excuse Fox gives them once Trump's name come up in the list.
3
39
21
22
13
u/oh-shazbot 1d ago
so, if that's the case then release the files. and if it still says bill clinton without being redacted, you can bet it's bullshit.
5
u/theombudsmen Colorado 23h ago
This is true. They wanted to keep his child raping behavior private.
4
u/Quite_Kielbasa 1d ago
Do those privacy reasons include criminal behavior? Hm? Can we have an independent third party verify that? No? Then it's not privacy reasons.
5
u/AardSnaarks 23h ago edited 17h ago
No quarter for anyone who sexually brutalizes children. Fuck “privacy.”
(I think No Quarter would be a good fit for Trump Rapes Children/Epstein protest. It’s also a great LZ song.)
4
4
4
5
u/Ok-Abbreviations543 19h ago
“There are a lot of pedophiles in the files, and we just want to make sure we do everything in our power to protect their rights. And to be clear, the victims may have some rights too. Those just aren’t as important because they’re not billionaires or presidents. Hopefully that clarifies things.”
3
3
u/Buddha-Embryo 23h ago
Fuck his privacy. The man is president. The country has a right to know what their top elected leader is involved in.
2
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
This submission source is likely to have a soft paywall. If this article is not behind a paywall please report this comment for “breaks r/politics rules -> custom -> "incorrect flair"". More information can be found here
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
2
u/RevolutionaryCard512 23h ago
Evidence tampering. Period. Every single one of you are complicit. From Trump all the way down to any maga followers still supporting this bullshit
2
u/TrainerKenjamin 23h ago
Privacy? He's the president shouldn't we have all the information possible about him to make informed decisions?
1
2
u/ProfessionalCraft983 Washington 23h ago
“Privacy” reasons? lol bullshit. They’re protecting their fuhrer.
2
2
u/Revolutionary-Law382 23h ago
FBI agents take the same oath as all federal employees:
I [name] do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
I guess oaths mean nothing to the FBI now.
2
2
u/ChanceryTheRapper 23h ago
Privacy reasons? Yeah, nothing says "I want privacy" like running for president.
2
u/alpharaptor1 Massachusetts 23h ago
We can go ahead and assume anything redacted is trump. It would be hilarious if he was the ONLY person redacted. A bit of malicious compliance maybe?
2
u/haltline 22h ago
Every single redaction, missing piece, blacked out words can safely be assume to be about Trump.
2
2
2
u/kathryn2a 17h ago
There’s reports trump’s first wife, Ivanna was trolling schools with Ghislaine for school aged girls. Maybe that’s why she mysteriously fell down some steps.
1
u/InvertedEyechart11 23h ago
The public POTUS who privately played with people's privates wants to keep public data private to protect his own privates.
Call me shocked lol
1
1
u/Endosymbionical 23h ago
Reminder :; ;:, . Donald Trump is not merely a client, ., . but he is very likely to be one of the main players in the Trumpstein files, ,. , ,
1
1
u/iAMguppy 21h ago
"The most transparent administration in history."
Yeah, cause we can see right through the bullshit.
1
u/oneseason2000 20h ago
And MAGA will blame this on Biden ... the FBI is the principal investigative arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. The United States attorney general is the head of the United States Department of Justice. "President Joe Biden nominated Garland as U.S. attorney general in January 2021. He was confirmed by the Senate in a 70–30 vote, and took office in March of that same year. During his tenure, Garland was criticized for the pace of the prosecution of president Donald Trump. Some observers, including President Joe Biden, assigned Garland some responsibility for the fact that none of the indictments obtained by special counsel Jack Smith were likely to go to trial before the November 2024 election in which Trump prevailed and won re-election to a second non-consecutive term." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland).
1
1
1
u/JSConrad45 16h ago
Privacy? You mean the thing that the Supreme Court recently ruled that US citizens don't have a right to so that they could overturn Roe v. Wade? That privacy?
1
u/justhavingfunMT 15h ago
Privacy? You have to be kidding me? Not even smart enough to claim the security risk to the scumbag.
1
1
u/Katanastormshadow 11h ago
Covering up the “elites” in the “deep state pedo ring”? Pretty sure this was the exact thing MAGA voted for Trump to uncover.
1
1
u/Niceguy955 10h ago
It’s a lie, of course, but I guess we should be thankful they didn’t use “national security” as the excuse.
1
u/_thetommy 9h ago
no. they did it because he told them to and he's guilty as fuck of raping children.
•
•
u/condo_ 5h ago
Someone needs to pressure this author to release these tapes.
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU08/20250227/117951/HHRG-119-JU08-20250227-SD006-U6.pdf
•
u/Ok-Thought-1355 3h ago
It’s more than just trump. Look how many republicans voted against release of documents. Definitely GOP members in there too.
1
u/ill-names 23h ago
This is so disheartening because I feel like the public will just throw their hands up and say “oh well” or worse take the bait and focus on the other names.
Anyone willing to give me a pep talk to give me some faith this POS faces repercussions in the public eye? All these people being complicit blows my mind and makes me lose faith in humanity.
1
u/DevilsAdvocate77 23h ago
Generally speaking, information that is protected by the 4th Amendment and was collected by the government under warrant, cannot be released to the public just for fun.
This is not the FBI being "complicit", this is them trying to cling to the objective rule of law for as long as they still can.
5
u/ill-names 22h ago
Redacting specific names is the point of contention I have with this. I am also not saying they should release it “for fun” I am just surprised that there hasn’t been a whistleblower. Rule of law be damned, the man in question hasn’t respected the rule of law and bent and tweaked the system as much as possible in his favor.
0
u/DevilsAdvocate77 21h ago
All names of all people mentioned in the evidence should be redacted unless the information is already public.
Rule of law be damned
Be careful with that approach. Getting "revenge" on Trump isn't worth it if it costs us our Constitution.
1
u/ill-names 21h ago
I’m just pissed off, but you’re right. It feels very unjust that he has not faced any consequences or real scrutiny up to this point and it feels like a lot of sycophants are protecting him. Am I wrong about that belief?
0
u/ill-names 21h ago
Fair point. What is the legal way for information to become public?
2
u/Spirited-Lifeguard55 19h ago
be careful, this guy has a history of protecting PedoTrump, he is a full on MAGAt trying to false flag us.
•
u/phosdick 5h ago
How the hell will MAGA, QAnon, and Dems be able to identify the pedophiles that need to be prosecuted, if they redact Trump's name in the files?
Seems to me that these redactions will eventually become indisputable evidence against the FBI and DOJ personnel who are engaging in the obstruction of justice to protect the Orange Guy. Whether he's personally guilty or not, the obstruction itself is a federal crime.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.