When Justice Department officials reviewed what Attorney General Pam Bondi called a “truckload” of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein earlier this year, they discovered that Donald Trump’s name appeared multiple times, according to senior administration officials.

In May, Bondi and her deputy informed the president at a meeting in the White House that his name was in the Epstein files, the officials said. Many other high-profile figures were also named, Trump was told. Being mentioned in the records isn’t a sign of wrongdoing.

all 3 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

Trump: we're gonna release the Epstein files

DOJ: your name is all over these files

Trump: There are no Epstein files, it's a liberal hoax

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Is America great again, yet? Asking for a friend.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Wow with all the copious amounts of evidence that's out there already indicating this. He must really be sundowning hard to have needed to be told again.

  • source
  • 17 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 46 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    What surprises me is why you need so many people to perform a focused doc review. How many people does it take to perform a text search for “Trump” or “Donald”

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Was it 1,000 all at once or 1,000 putting in a few hours?

    I think there was 300,000 documents or something?

    There were probably more names they were looking for.

    Are the documents digital? Could they use & trust OCR?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Doc review is always digital now. You can trust the vendors because they would go out of business otherwise.

    You also don’t doc review just a few hours.

    The software is pretty advanced and makes getting through large amounts of discovery fast.

    1000 people is a lot.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    WSJ: "Oh, you're suing us? LFG."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 15 points 1 year ago

    I have a feeling this was the plan all along.

    They did the same thing with Theranos. You don’t throw all your cards out with one story. You wrote a story. Let it marinate. Follow up later. Rinse and repeat.

    I have a feeling there’s more damning info WSJ has that’s coming out in a week or 2.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Patel better make sure he works in slab on grade buildings.

    FBI Director Kash Patel has privately told other government officials that Trump’s name appeared in the files, according to people close to the administration.

    Patel declined to answer an inquiry from the Journal about the Epstein case, but said in a statement that the memo on the Justice Department website explaining why the department wouldn’t release more Epstein documents was “consistent with the thorough review conducted by the FBI and DOJ.”

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    I wonder who's leaking this. Probably someone near the top. There seems to be a schism in the administration between the absolute Trump supporters and the people who actually care about what they say they care about. Is it someone in the latter group?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Stevie Wonder could have seen that coming...

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    On Tuesday, Blanche said on X that the Justice Department was seeking to arrange a meeting with Ghislaine Maxwell in the coming days to discuss any possible information about anyone who has committed crimes with Epstein.

    I like that she was arrested years ago and now that they need a distraction, the DOJ is like "do you suppose we should actually question her?"

  • source
  • A name in there could mean absolutely nothing. We already knew they knew each other. But the longer it takes to release the documents the more suspicion they will have. How will we know they weren’t doctored?

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Can we say that this is like an oil spill, nuclear disaster, forest fire or earthquake in the political sphere?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments