The Department of Justice spoke four separate times to a woman who credibly accused Donald Trump of having sex with a minor he met through Jeffrey Epstein—but most accusations against the president appear to have been removed from the government’s documents on the alleged sex trafficker. 

A 21-page slideshow buried in the massive trove of Epstein-related documents included allegations that sometime between 1983 and 1985, Trump forced a woman to give him oral sex when she was in her early teens. When the woman bit down on Trump’s exposed penis, he allegedly punched her in the head and kicked her out. That same woman told the DOJ that Epstein had introduced her to Trump in 1984.

Yet last week, Attorney General Pam Bondi insisted that there was “no evidence” that Trump had committed any crime—adding to the growing pile of denials from Trump officials that constitute a sweeping cover-up of the president’s alleged wrongdoing. 

Justice Department records indicate that the FBI spoke to this woman not once but at least four separate times, according to independent journalist Roger Sollenberger. Now those records appear to have been removed from public viewing—despite the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires all documents relating to the alleged sex trafficker to be made public. 

Sollenberger discovered a record of four separate interviews, which took place in the summer of 2019, in a separate database of documents downloaded from the government’s public files on Epstein. That document indicated that the first of the four interviews was conducted on July 24, 2019, and the last conducted on October 16, 2019. That document was given to Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers as part of her trial, though the specific allegations predated Maxwell’s involvement with Epstein, Sollenberger wrote.

The woman’s first interview was entered into the FBI’s case files on August 9, 2019, just one day before Epstein was found dead in his jail cell. FBI agents typically have a deadline of five working days to file interview write-ups, indicating an abnormal 16-day gap, Sollenberger noted.

top 80 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 201 points 8 months ago (21 children)

Who wrote this shit, "...Trump forced a woman to give him oral sex when she was in her early teens.." so a teenager or child and not a woman then?

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    We need to have a simple check in the government and media. Everyone who thinks a 13 year old is a woman please stand on this side of the room. Everyone else please leave the room. Then we drone strike the room with the earthquake bomb.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    The 13 year ol side of the room opens up into a pungee pit and they all fall inside and have to slowly bleed out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Into a gaint woodchipper running at 1/4th the speed?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Actually ome of those metal shredders works better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    I think the intended meaning is that she was a woman when the allegations were made but the (alleged) events took place when she was in her early teens.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    I know we're all programmed to give people the benefit of the doubt. To try to find sense in any situation. To use Hanlon's razor.

    When it comes to Trump, please stop. He doesn't deserve this excess of leniency. He's a child rapist and murderer running the country. Do not try to find sense when there is nothing but cruelty and abuse. It makes a lot more sense when confronted by evidence of cruelty and malice at such a staggering scale to use a reverse Hanlon's razor with Trump.

    They're called women to purposefully obfuscate the fact Trump beat and raped a little girl. One of many.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I certainly wouldn't give trump the benefit of the doubt, but that's not what you're talking about. You're saying we mustn't give the people writing these reports the benefit of the doubt. I'd guess you'd also say we shouldn't give any republican supporters the benefit of the doubt (they might well echo the reporting after all), so that really it rapidly becomes only giving those the benefit of the doubt who are on your side.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    When it comes to stories about Trump, any evidence that he's being portrayed as anything but a child raping felon implies that the story is purposefully biased to help him.

    No reasonable person would hold a differing opinion.

    Now whether I give those same people the benefit of the doubt concerning non-Trump matters is a different story.

    Reverse Hanlon's razor applies to Trump and has a transferable property regarding anything related to Trump to at least 1-2 connections.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    She's a woman now, and was when the interviews occurred over 30 years after the sexual assaults.

    The woman was sexually assaulted when she was in her early teens.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    Loterally says "Forced a woman"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    As opposed to "forced a a teenager to have oral sex with him when washed was 30 years younger?"

    It literally specifies that she was a teenager when the crime occurred in the same sentence you're criticizing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    Trump didn't rape a woman, he raped a girl. Full stop. Stop playing word games so you can defend a fucking pedophile.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    He actually has raped girls and women both.

    And I'm absolutely not defending him. I'm saying that it doesn't make sense to go after the publication for not calling her a teenager by providing a sentence quote that clearly and directly says that she was a young teen when he forced her to give him oral sex.

    Focus your anger on the rapists, not a sentence you can't be assed to parse out.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 66 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    I don't even know what to say about how ham-fisted and just plain dumb this attempt to rewrite history is. What's depressing is that for far too many people, it'll still work.

    If we make it through this, history textbooks are going to need to have chapters on what cult-think does to people, and like half of it will be about MAGA.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    You mean like Hitler and Germany?

    We already have history textbooks about this..... there's even a pretty popular book that is a great allegory for what's going on. Based sometime in the 1980s I believe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    The internet has given us a nice archive of the thoughts of brainwashing victims that didn't exist in Nazi Germany.

    Personally I think Brave New World is a better representation of our dystopia than 1984. People aren't trying to avoid thoughtcrime because they're afraid of a boot to the neck (yet) but are instead lulled into complacency by a "keep your head down" culture and lulled into complicity by a "choose your own truth" media landscape.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

    Is there anyone from this administration that doesn't deserve to end up mulched and chummed?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Stephen Miller. He needs to be gassed and burned. 

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 86 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    mOsT tRanSpaReNt PreSiDeNt EvEr

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    tbf, establishment dems/R's have kept this shit under wraps much more tightly for...decades, obviously. with zero intention of ever holding anyone accountable

    unironically the most transparent president/administration ever, because he's too unawares/dementiad to even remotely control his projections and the jackals he's got running the place are so proud in their corruption they carry it out openly

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 31 points 8 months ago (15 children)

    Sometimes I wish I could be a believer in religion so that I might have solace that evil people will at least face divine justice in death even if they received no Earthly justice in life. Alas, the depressing truth is that evil coasts through life without facing justice all the time, and the good just as often fall victim to the machinations, crimes, and sadism of the evil and never find any justice, retribution or closure after it. It's one of the reasons that I don't believe unfortunately.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    what did the king say to the pope? you keep em dumb, i'll keep em poor

    the very idea that there is some space wizard that'll make everything right in the end is a tool to keep the downtrodden complacent. opiate of the masses

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (12 children)

    I kinda feel like the best part about being non-religious is the knowledge that everyone faces the same justice in the end. Entropy and all that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (11 children)

    I don't really see how ceasing to exist is justice, nor how the fact that your nana and Hitler had the same ending is a comfort. But to each their own, I guess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (7 children)

    Both are luckily still alive so no

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Both Nanas. Unless I am misunderstanding something here

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (4 children)

    Oh good. I don't think we need to add a 137 year old Hitler to the current political situation. It's bad enough as it is. I assume your Nans haven't Holocausted anyone. ...right?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (3 children)

    137 year old skeleton hitler???????

    Nope. Both my nans were born during the end of the holocaust and even if they had been born before it, they would have been the ones to get holocausted. We were on the hitler genocide list just after the jews and gypsies anyhow.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago

    I said the best thing, didn't say comfort. If you're looking for comfort, you need to wish harder. All we got left here for justice is philosophy and bureaucracy and bureaucracy ain't helping us right now.

    The ultimate justice isn't any worldly punishment it's the knowledge that without something to establish true permanence, the impact of any action anyone could take is eventually negligible and everyone is punished the same. The punishment for your crimes is always being eventually forgotten and having the remnants of your life lost to time. For some that might take longer, but regardless of how it might make us feel, they'll all get there.

    Sometimes that can feel like a good thing and sometimes that can feel like a bad thing. Feel like it varies depending on your outlook on life at the moment.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 8 months ago* (3 children)

    So the FBI had an interview about the then president sexually assaulting/raping a child and them punching her in the face when it didn't go his way. The interview evidence gets mishandled and instead of taking 5 business days required to file it took 12 business days. The next day the person who connected the President to these charges is found dead. With his brother requesting a secondary otopsy because he believed his brother was murdered, and the review showed they did not believe the death to be suicide. And the footage mysteriously having issues as well. And the people who moved the body had no recollection of removing a noose.

    This is nothing but a conspiracy, lol

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Where's the defamation lawsuit, Mr. I Sue Everybody?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago

    I want this entire DOJ arrested and the CIA and FBI dismantled and replaced with a transparent agency that is beholden to America and the constitution. Anyone who worked with Mossad should be tried for treason

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 child)

    So Jeffrey Epstein is pretty much just another partner or employee Trump threw under the bus. And I'm beginning to think it's more the *latter.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago*

    100%

    Epstein got an unheard of sweetheart deal the first time he was charged, by then Florida AG Alex Acosta.

    Alex Acosta would then go on to be rewarded with a major cabinet position in Trump's first term. Labor Secretary. Something he had no real experience with.

    Epstein got off very easy so he wouldn't be compelled to talk, and Acosta was rewarded for facilitating it.

    Years later, during Trump's first term, his Attorney General Bill Barr would go on to facilitate the murder of Epstein while in prison.

    It's all just a massive criminal enterprise. They aren't even bothering to hide it anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    god help me my dad will huff and puff about biden this and biden that and some made up 'good' shit trump did whenever more trump shit comes out.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    "Well at least Biden wasn't a pedophile or a rapist."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago*

    Lol, they absolutely will turn around and say he was while simultaneously saying there is no proof that Trump is a pedophile rapist. Remember when they were saying Biden was a pedo because he sniffed a baby? Pepperidge Farms remembers.

    These people's perception of reality is fundamentally twisted. They will never admit they are wrong unless they are forced into a room to watch Trump actually fuck a child in front of them and even then more than half will try with every ounce of mental power they have to try and come up with some fallacy justification for why it's not the same.

    These people are sick.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 8 months ago

    More evidence tampering

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Hope he burns painfully in hell for all eternity together with his corrupt pedo-ring protecting administration. Dream come true if someone ever speed up his arrival. Only boss Putin would miss him. 

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Once it's on the internet it's permanent no matter what they do

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Why are they allowed to take stuff down? We need the remaining files still and they’re allowed to take shit down?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    They're allowed because who's going to stop them?

    They're not allowed by law - they're allowed simply by being in control of who enforces the law. This kind of government corruption would normally be investigated by the DOJ... Except it's the DOJ doing it, and the only people who might be able to anything about that (the legislature and judiciary) are complicit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    6 comments in c/Epsteinfiles@lemmy.world view that post
    1 comment in c/TrueAnon@lemmy.today view that post