Release All Files! - Part 2

[UltraBudgie]

List of All Government Officials and Politically Exposed Persons

Also note the tiny disclaimer at the bottom of page 4: "Individuals whose names were redacted for law-enforcement sensitive purposes are not included."

Note that doesn't say "ongoing investigations". Just, you know, "purposes". Like, maybe they might want to investigate or something. Not that they are, or have to. But we're not going to tell you who those are, of course, or even what if anything is being done.

Quite a little loophole. Redact names and documents because of potential investigations that may-or-may-not exist, allowing all that to remain undisclosed—if any evidence was even collected in the first place. Instead, focus on these nothingburgers...

[Vermilion]

Also note the tiny disclaimer at the bottom of page 4: "Individuals whose names were redacted for law-enforcement sensitive purposes are not included."

Note that doesn't say "ongoing investigations". Just, you know, "purposes". Like, maybe they might want to investigate or something. Not that they are, or have to. But we're not going to tell you who those are, of course, or even what if anything is being done.

Quite a little loophole. Redact names and documents because of potential investigations that may-or-may-not exist, allowing all that to remain undisclosed—if any evidence was even collected in the first place. Instead, focus on these nothingburgers...

So you’re saying Massie and Khanna put that “loophole” in that act?
Interesting.

[UltraBudgie]

So you’re saying Massie and Khanna put that “loophole” in that act?
Interesting.

No. Read section (2)(c)(1)(C) of the Act:

"(c) Permitted Withholdings.— (1) The Attorney general may withhold or redact the segregable portions of records that— (C) would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary"

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-cong.../4405/text

And note that it says "active", "ongoing", and "temporary" and requires a specific finding of jeopardy.

[Kurokage]

They released a list of all political and famous people who were in those files, as per that stupid law that Massie and Khanna, and now you think the DOJ is covering something up? LoL

I said it makes it appears as though they're cover up something, I'll refrain from using your insult about reading comprehension!! 

The majority of the general public feel the Epstein files have been very poorly handled and I tend to agree with them.  All redactions should have been seen by a commission of both parties to authenticate them, and agree on reasoning.

[Vermilion]

No. Read section (2)(c)(1)(C) of the Act:

"(c) Permitted Withholdings.— (1) The Attorney general may withhold or redact the segregable portions of records that— (C) would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary"

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-cong.../4405/text

And note that it says "active", "ongoing", and "temporary".

Are you saying “law enforcement sensitive purposes” is something different?

[Vermilion]

I said it makes it appears as though they're cover up something, I'll refrain from using your insult about reading comprehension!! 

The majority of the general public feel the Epstein files have been very poorly handled and I tend to agree with them.  All redactions should have been seen by a commission of both parties to authenticate them, and agree on reasoning.

That’s a pretty long list of names.
Pam Bondi even lists herself.
It doesn’t get more transparent than that.

If they truly wanted something real, they wouldn’t have done the things they did…

Rushed the release(a laughably impossible 30 day timeline)
Denied more resources(more lawyers and reviewers)


It was all a political OP.
The whole thing.

[Kurokage]

500 different DOJ attorneys were involved in the redaction effort of at least 3 million pages of documents.

Do you suppose that one person came along behind all of them to inspect their work and said "Ohhh, I need to redact [ ] name on this one”?

Or do you suppose all 500 attorneys had an instruction to "Redact [ ]’s name anyplace it links him to sex trafficking" and those 500 attorneys executed those instructions flawlessly and ONLY redacted him this one time, as specifically instructed?

They released a list of all political and famous people who were in those files, as per that stupid law that Massie and Khanna, and now you think the DOJ is covering something up? LoL

Here’s your list you wanted….
https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/c...letter.pdf

List of All Government Officials and Politically Exposed Persons

Below is a list of all government officials and "politically exposed persons" named or referenced in the released materials. The term "politically exposed persons" was not defined in the Act, but consistent with Section 3 of the Act, Department reviewers were directed to notate
"all government officials and politically exposed persons named or referenced" in any document, including videos and images, reviewed during this process.
This list includes (as directed by the Act) all persons where (1) they are or were a government official or politically exposed person and (2) their name appears in the files released under the Act at least once. Names appear in the files released under the Act in a wide variety of contexts. For example, some individuals had extensive direct email contact with Epstein or Maxwell while other individuals are mentioned only in a portion of a document (including press reporting) that on its face is unrelated to the Epstein and Maxwell matters.

As Member Carpy said, do you think the DOJ just allowed these people in and willy-nilly redact names?

Then you also have add in all the rumours of certain people ordering redactions of names for other purposes. Like I said, it hasn't been handled well, which leads to questions of cover up.

[guyfriday]

This is not the Guy I know when Q was trying. Yeah been a setback once Hollywood got involved, Some direction has been made since with the way is going now, surfs up.

It's been a setback once Alex Soros started dumping out disinformation and feeding it through folks to make it seem like -Q- posts and others. It's why I say we need to be vigilant and not assume that just because a name is listed means that that person is a suspect in a crime.

The closer we get to ending this mess, the more desperate the cornered are going to become. let's not all get sucked into the mess of misinformation and keep a clear ever rotating head on our shoulders.

[UltraBudgie]

Are you saying “law enforcement sensitive purposes” is something different?

"I guess we'll never know."

It's a nice little upper-bun on the imaginary nothingburger, isn't it?

I wonder if it has sesame seeds.

[Kurokage]

That’s a pretty long list of names.
Pam Bondi even lists herself.
It doesn’t get more transparent than that.

If they truly wanted something real, they wouldn’t have done the things they did…

Rushed the release(a laughably impossible 30 day timeline)
Denied more resources(more lawyers and reviewers)


It was all a political OP.
The whole thing.

Well, they gave themselves 30 days after being pushed to reveal how much was being held behind closed doors. If they'd of been transparent from the beginning instead of screaming hoax maybe the 'Epstein files' wouldn't have caused such a fuss?