By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Justice Department briefly released additional documents related to Jeffrey Epstein on Monday, missing the congressionally mandated deadline. These documents, available online for a few hours, contained references to Donald Trump. One email revealed Trump was a passenger on Epstein’s private jet on at least eight flights, with Ghislaine Maxwell also present on several. Survivors have condemned the incomplete release, calling for congressional hearings to ensure full compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act and demanding accountability.
Read the original article here
DOJ Posts Thousands of Additional Documents from the Epstein Files on Website, Then Removes Them. The Department of Justice, in what many are calling a blatant display of either incompetence or deliberate obfuscation, briefly posted thousands of additional documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case on its website, only to swiftly remove them. This quick turnaround has sparked significant controversy and raised serious questions about transparency and accountability within the DOJ.
The sudden addition and subsequent removal of these documents suggest a concerted effort to control the narrative surrounding the Epstein case. The fact that the release was so short-lived has fueled speculation about what the documents contained and why their accessibility was so quickly revoked. The phrase “The law said we had to release them. It didn’t say they had to stay released” is being thrown around, a cynical reflection of this behavior.
Reports indicate that some of the released files contained potentially damaging information, including references to prominent figures. The documents might have revealed details of connections that some within the DOJ may have preferred to keep hidden. There’s also the suggestion that the initial release may have contained unredacted or poorly redacted information, leading to the rapid takedown. Some are positing that the redactions were so poor as to have been easily circumvented, which is adding to the impression of either willful obstruction or sheer incompetence.
Adding to the mystery, some documents were being discussed that contained extremely disturbing allegations of the worst possible crimes. One document details extremely disturbing accusations, including allegations of rape, infanticide, and the disposal of a newborn’s body. The claims are horrifying, indicating a level of depravity far beyond even the already appalling revelations of the Epstein case.
The rapid removal also lends credence to the notion that someone within the DOJ may be deliberately sabotaging the redaction process. The speed with which the documents were taken down, as well as the apparent failure to properly redact sensitive information, points to either serious negligence or an active effort to suppress certain information. This has led some to believe there might be individuals within the FBI with good intentions and moral compasses, who are acting to get information out despite their corrupt bosses.
The fact that the documents were allegedly downloaded and archived before being removed highlights the futility of this attempted cover-up. It’s likely that the information contained within them will resurface, making the DOJ’s actions seem even more futile and transparent. This has, unsurprisingly, ignited calls for a complete investigation, with demands for all the relevant files to be released and properly reviewed.
The fact that some of the files may have revealed new information about the individuals implicated, including potential new accusations against former President Donald Trump, has further intensified the scrutiny. The connections made between Trump and Epstein are not new, but this brief release has intensified the need to look closer. Some of the documents reportedly contain allegations of rape and other crimes.
The situation has also created a sense of distrust in the DOJ. The handling of the Epstein files, along with the seemingly deliberate attempts to hide information, has undermined the public’s confidence in the department’s ability to act impartially. This lack of trust is damaging to the integrity of the justice system and highlights the need for a thorough and independent investigation into the DOJ’s actions.
The seemingly contradictory actions – releasing the documents in the first place, then quickly taking them down – also suggests an internal struggle within the DOJ. The decision to release the documents might have been mandated by law, but the subsequent removal could indicate a desire to protect certain individuals or prevent the dissemination of certain information. The question of whether this was due to ineptitude or malicious intent is the central question, and both possibilities are concerning.
The swift removal of the documents, despite the legal requirements for their release, casts a long shadow over the DOJ’s commitment to transparency and justice. The implications of this short-lived release are far-reaching, and they serve as a reminder of the need for accountability and transparency within the government. The public deserves to know the full extent of the Epstein case and any potential cover-ups, and this latest episode only increases the need for continued investigation.