General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDOJ Removed Record of Multiple FBI Interviews with Underage Trump Accuser, Epstein Data Shows
https://sollenbergerrc.substack.com/p/doj-removed-record-of-multiple-fbiThe FBI spoke at least four times with a woman who credibly accused Trump of sexually assaulting her when she was a minor, Epstein files show. That document is no longer accessible on the DOJ website.
Roger Sollenberger
Feb 18, 2026
On Sunday, I reported that the FBI interviewed a victim who accused President Donald Trump of sexually and violently assaulting her when she was 13-15 years old. I also reported that some of the Justice Departments case files for this woman who later sued and reportedly received a settlement from Jeffrey Epsteins estate for sexual abuse allegations in the same timeframe appear to be missing from the governments publicly searchable Epstein database.
However, I have now found DOJ records showing that the FBI did not just interview this woman once. The FBI interviewed this woman who claimed that Trump forced her to give him oral sex when she was in her early teens, then punched her in the head after she bit his penis and kicked her out at least four times.
But the DOJs file associated with those records a document cataloguing information that the government provided counsel for convicted Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell during her trial has apparently been removed.
This revelation adds to the mounting pile of evidence undermining statements from Attorney General Pam Bondi and other senior administration officials assuring the public that the Epstein file release has been transparent, complete, and bereft of any evidence implicating Trump in wrongdoing.
Lots more at link
Botany
(76,896 posts)
. won the 2020 election and then Bondi and Ka$$ Patel had those Trump acolytes go through
all the millions of pages in the Trump-Epstein Files and delete trumps name or any other incriminating
information about Trump and the Putin, Trump, Epstein, Musk, and Israeli international child sex trafficking
ring.
Escape
(426 posts)Aren't they all involved in highly criminal activity?
Will they be punished to the full extent of the law when (if) we return to a Democratic form of government.?
Martin68
(27,423 posts)multigraincracker
(37,290 posts)Those officials must be shaking right now. Jail for those crimes too.
Harker
(17,642 posts)malaise
(294,803 posts)Fake exoneration by erasure
Hmmmmmmm!
dalton99a
(93,219 posts)2naSalit
(101,516 posts)We are getting close to finding out what's in the casket with Ivana's ashes and or the bathrooms of magalaga.
Sneederbunk
(17,383 posts)haryn
(42 posts)possibly knew at one time for certain - but wouldn't the attorneys who represented her (and unfortunately, the likely too many others) have copies of their statements and what was submitted to the FBI - essentially, the paper trail that can take down the despicable, repellent bastards responsible for the cover up?
I told my doctor that my goal was to live long enough to see trump and his cabal destroyed -(that includes Putin) she is definitely on board - I was born and raised in S.F. and was out demonstrating in the 60's - had the mounted police and tac squad on campus at SFSC, and thought the country was perhaps irrevocably lost during those years, only to see what's happening now. Eternal recurrence sucks.
AZJonnie
(3,398 posts)Last edited Mon Feb 23, 2026, 04:44 AM - Edit history (1)
But my research suggests there's many reasons to doubt that assertion. His work is generally very good, but I think he has a blind spot on the most critical point of fact here, I'll leave it at that. Everyone already hates me when I subvert the dominant paradigm around the Epstein conspiracy.
Suffice to say, I half-expect a follow-up article clarifying whether he made some assumptions he maybe shouldn't have, and/or that he's not as certain that Spreadsheet Tip IS the Jane Doe 4 case as what he seemed to convey. But I guess we'll see. Hopefully he spoke to Bloom's firm (who represented JD4) before publishing and they gave the okay and/or I'm just misreading his point.
But if I am, he's not being very clear what he's actually asserting.