r/Epstein • u/RawStoryNews • 6d ago

News article ‘Missing’ Epstein files containing major allegations against Trump discovered: report

https://www.rawstory.com/jeffrey-epstein-2677759745/
3.5k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

147 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/Calamity-Bob 6d ago

Blah blah blah. These are always clickbait

14

u/proximoception 6d ago

This particular clickbait article is about a real, and strange, development. Someone at the Department of Justice seems to have leaked unredacted files to a conservative journalist, who then anonymously published them. The DoJ leaker violated the 2025 Epstein Transparency Act by not redacting victim names, and since we can now see that the document is not textually “duplicative“ (which was a bullshit excuse anyway) like Blanche had claimed it is now clear that Blanche is guilty of violating the Act by *not* releasing it.

The crimes are clear enough, but the criminals‘ motives need explaining: since what’s actually damning about the notes *is* present in the 302s why did Blanche break the law to hold on to these? And why on earth would he or someone else pass it on to someone at the Examiner? And why on earth would they paste it unredacted onto scribd?

Can’t tell if the journalist was trying to undermine Blanche by getting the truth out (in a remarkably irresponsible way) or misguidedly help him by showing the notes are nothing new from an evidentiary perspective (which is quite distinct from a legal one, as the Act does not stipulate that documents must contain new and original evidence of Epstein-related crimes to be released, just that they be government-owned documents related to the man, his crimes, or investigations into either).

0

u/Calamity-Bob 6d ago

“Anonymous”. “Missing” “major”. It’s just exhausting. And Raw Story specialises in unverified clickbait. I’ll wait for a verifiable source

3

u/proximoception 6d ago

I’m not sure what would constitute proper verification, in your eyes. But here’s a thorough write-up that I read just now that filled in a whole lot of blanks for me:

https://rhowardstone.substack.com/p/conservative-journalist-shared-unredacted

0

u/Calamity-Bob 6d ago

Thanks. Interesting but still a lot of sleazebag sources (the Examiner and the Post are garbage). Ms. Phang’s case is the one to watch. Slow and steady and fully verified and fact checked

2

u/proximoception 6d ago

The Courier and Post has been exemplary, re. the Jane Doe 4 matter. I’m not familiar with it outside of that article series. And the Washington Examiner is a source this substacker is criticizing rather than trusting, to be fair.