Raskin said unredacted Epstein files indicate DOJ improperly shielded names

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: The Hill

02/09/26 3:21 PM ET


Rep. Jamie Raskin (Md.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, said after reviewing the unredacted Epstein files that the Justice Department (DOJ) appears to have flouted the law when concealing various names in documents. Lawmakers on Monday were permitted for the first time to review the unredacted versions of all DOJ files related to deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Several members of Congress had questioned whether the DOJ had fully complied with a law mandating the public release of the files, which allowed for only narrow redactions. Raskin on Monday said that in addition to revealing the names of victims that were supposed to be shielded, the files released to the public appear to wrongly conceal those who spent time with Epstein “simply to spare them potential embarrassment, political sensitivity or disgrace of some kind.”

“I was able to determine, at least I believe, that there were tons of completely unnecessary redactions in addition to the failure to redact the names of victims, and so that’s troubling to us,” Raskin said.

“There’s no way you run a billion-dollar international child sex trafficking ring with just two people committing crimes, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. No way. It doesn’t work like that. So we need to figure out what other conspiracies were involved, what other co-conspirators were involved? And I really do believe that listening to the survivors is going to be our pathway through this nightmare.”

Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5730137-raskin-unredacted-epstein-files/

[FarPoint]

1. Lets just say it out straight...

The DOJ intentionally shielded perpetrators names...

[Justice matters.]

17. It is now the DOI (Department Of Injustice).

Run by the GOP (Guardians Of Pedophiles).

[Wiz Imp]

2. That was always completely obvious.

So why doesn't Raskin go on the floor of Congress and read those names he identified as being illegally shielded?

[BumRushDaShow]

3. Apparently they won't let them out of the room with the unredacted docs

and I expect they don't allow them to "take notes" or bring a phone/camera in the room.

[Wiz Imp]

4. The info that was released over the weekend said that they could take notes.

No electronic devices though.

https://www.axios.com/2026/02/09/epstein-files-unredacted-congress-doj-review
Why Congress gets to see unredacted Epstein files and how they'll read them

The fine print: Lawmakers need to give the DOJ 24 hours notice before they are permitted to view the files.

Lawmakers cannot bring other electronic devices into the room, but they are allowed to take notes.

Only members of Congress can review the unredacted files — not members of their staff.

[BumRushDaShow]

6. Then I expect he might give it the old "Constitutional law professor" try

and reveal some names in a Committee meeting (perhaps even with a poster board)!

[Wiz Imp]

8. That's what I want to see some Democrats do.

Identify a few prominent Republicans whose names were redacted on documents that make them look suspicious. Then mention it on the floor including the whole context and make them try to explain it away.

[BumRushDaShow]

10. You'd have to be a regular CSPAN junky to catch them on the House floor

In the hearings, it's a bit easier to know who is on the Committee and would be giving remarks/asking questions (and putting up the poster boards), and the CSPANs will usually cover those hearings (and would give their feeds to places like PBS News, AP, and Forbes, who tend to run youtube streams of those hearings)!

[Wiz Imp]

11. House floor, Hearings - whatever it takes to expose them and put them on the spot is fine with me!

I figure someone will capture such moments and put them on YouTube.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. I remember, and it had to have been almost 40 years ago

being in D.C. and wanting to go sit in the visitors gallery in either of the chambers... and since I had entered the building on the Senate side and asked about it, they told me I needed to go to my Senator's office to get a free pass to go in there. At the time, Specter was the Senator and I was like um no...

So walked all the way to the other side of the huge building to the House side and they told me where my Congressman's office was (at the time Bill Gray, who was the (D) Whip back then). Popped over there, got the pass, and got to sit and watch the House. IIRC, of all people who was speaking - Dan Rostenkowski.

Except it was late afternoon and they were apparently doing "Special Orders" speeches where they can go on and on reading their written remarks "into the record" to an empty chamber and the chamber is basically in recess at the end of the "Special Orders" period. So that is basically what was going on.

If they ARE in there like that, CSPAN does have to cover them.

[mjvpi]

5. I have nothing to back this up, except 68 years of watching politics.

This will lead into Putin's lap. Russian mafia. Girls and young women from Eastern Europe being Fed into the Epstein machine. Putin has something on Trump. It's bigger than a pee tape. I would willingly pee on Trump, but we would have to suspend any hint of sexual satisfaction. For, me it would spiritually capture the last 9-10 years. I'd wager that
Putin could fill in the redactions on most of the released files. Before Trumps first political triumph in the US, I would hear mention of Putin as the world richest man. That alone would explain Trump's suck up. But if Putin turns out to be the main Pimp in this organization, to me, most things fall into place. Aquiring top secret information, compremont that controls a man's political future. Heads of state and industry under control. I'll let my soul fly on this conspiracy theory. It's what makes sense with known facts.

[durablend]

13. There's no damn pee tape

If there are any tapes it's with children. That's always been what it was.

[RainCaster]

15. I fear you're right

Sigh.
The Cantaloupe Caligula needs to be in prison.

[MW67]

7. Trump has changed the G O P so much

That, G O P now stands for Guardian's Of Pedophiles

[Aussie105]

9. It was (is?) a boy's club.

When a bunch of guys get together it is easy for them to collectively come to think that the common guidelines of morality and law are optional, that they can set their own rules in isolation from the rest of the world.

People - us commoners - really want to know who was in this particular pedophile boys' club.

Someone who reads the unredacted files needs to stand up and read out the names.
In a place where they cannot be silenced.
Without fear or favor for the current status of those people.

And that demoted British prince shouldn't be off the hook, either.
The British have a long history of turning a blind eye to the misbehavior of bored royal males.
Given proof of his involvement, he should at the very least be on a watchlist and be arrested if he sets foot on American soil.

[Clouds Passing]

14. Melanie Stansbury speaks truth

https://www.reddit.com/r/circled/comments/1r0j10f/breaking_after_maxwell_deposition_rep_stansbury/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

I love my Rep!

❤️ melts 🥶

[DallasNE]

16. I Have Read That There Is A Thumb Drive

Surely, there would be a backup of the thumb drive.

Game, set, match

First, give me the names of the 11 men who were most involved in this perverted crime spree. Why haven't they already been charged with sordid crimes?

[Skittles]

18. PREACH IT, BROTHER JAMIE

NAIL THESE PERVERTS AND PERVERT-ENABLERS