Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

AZJonnie

(3,952 posts)

9. Can you show me an instance of one of them saying the name of a rich man who raped them personally was redacted?

Reply to questionseverything (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 27, 2026, 01:04 PM

Apr 27

I mean I know what you're talking about generally with their names being exposed, but not the names of men, but I've not seen any of them explicitly say the name of someone who raped them was redacted. That would be a pretty big development I don't think I'd have missed

In any case, the topic at hand is the existence of "rape videos". I don't think Garland's DoJ would've just sat on such things. Apparently you do, that's your right. I disagree. I don't think they would've, or did

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

24 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Katie Phang Sues DOJ Over Alleged Violations of Epstein Files Transparency Law [View all] riversedge Apr 27 OP

What is the punishment if they still refuse to release all files? Fla Dem Apr 27 #1

But she is Whip-poor-will Apr 27 #4

You think there are literal rape tapes, and Biden's DoJ just sat on them and didn't pursue anyone appearing in them? AZJonnie Apr 27 #6

The victims have said, repeatedly that their names were published while questionseverything Apr 27 #7

Can you show me an instance of one of them saying the name of a rich man who raped them personally was redacted? AZJonnie Apr 27 #9

Team Bondi & Blanch seem to have been instrumental in this particular protection racket Attilatheblond Apr 27 #18

President Biden was not involved in the day-to-day decisions of then AG Garland. Justice matters. Apr 27 #8

And I don't think AG Garland would've just sat on videos that proved a child was raped AZJonnie Apr 27 #10

Not sure of that. Garland waited two years before seriously looking at the insurrectionist-in-chief's Justice matters. Apr 27 #13

That's not what I recall re: when Trump's role in Jan 6. began to be looked at by Garland's DoJ AZJonnie Apr 27 #16

We all saw the felon's speech and INCITEMENT live or on streaming... Justice matters. Apr 27 #21

Video of the Jan 6th public speech would never have been enough to make federal charges stick AZJonnie Apr 27 #23

There's a lot of years between Epstein's first Florida conviction questionseverything Apr 27 #20

If I'm not mistaken, there was a long investigation ongoing Justice matters. Apr 27 #22

But how EuterpeThelo Apr 27 #2

Rape tapes are coming Whip-poor-will Apr 27 #3

They would be very seriously breaking the law if they did this AZJonnie Apr 27 #12

That's right Whip-poor-will Apr 27 #14

S/he stole copies of illegal child-porn videos from FBI evidence? AZJonnie Apr 27 #15

Bravo Katie! DemocracyForever Apr 27 #5

I am saddened to say......... popsdenver Apr 27 #11

Sometimes you just have to do the right thing....win or lose. democrank Apr 27 #17

👍 Figarosmom Apr 27 #19

Good for her Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 28 #24