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

(3,891 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

Monday

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 Monday OP

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

But she is Whip-poor-will Monday #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 Monday #6

The victims have said, repeatedly that their names were published while questionseverything Monday #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 Monday #9

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

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

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

Not sure of that. Garland waited two years before seriously looking at the insurrectionist-in-chief's Justice matters. Monday #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 Monday #16

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

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

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

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

But how EuterpeThelo Monday #2

Rape tapes are coming Whip-poor-will Monday #3

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

That's right Whip-poor-will Monday #14

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

Bravo Katie! DemocracyForever Monday #5

I am saddened to say......... popsdenver Monday #11

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

👍 Figarosmom Monday #19

Good for her Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Yesterday #24