The "Epstein Files"

Incorrect.
Not in a skiff

No, the unredacted Jeffrey Epstein files were not released to members of Congress inside a secure government SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, sometimes misheard or misspelled as a skiff).
Instead, the Department of Justice (DOJ) allowed members of Congress to review unredacted versions of millions of pages of Epstein-related documents on computers located in a DOJ satellite office in Washington, D.C.

Key Details of the Review Process:
    • Location: Lawmakers traveled to a DOJ office rather than viewing classified-style compartments or a congressional SCIF.
    • Access Rules: Only individual members of Congress were allowed to view the files on computer screens; they could not bring their staff, remove physical documents, or bring in any electronic devices (though taking handwritten notes was permitted).

    • Process: Lawmakers had to give the DOJ 24 hours' notice to schedule their in-person review.
    • Aftermath: Following reviews by bipartisan lawmakers—such as Rep. Thomas Massie, Rep. Ro Khanna, and Rep. Jamie Raskin—several members publicly criticized the DOJ over what they considered unnecessary or mysterious redactions in the files.
 
Not in a skiff

No, the unredacted Jeffrey Epstein files were not released to members of Congress inside a secure government SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, sometimes misheard or misspelled as a skiff).
Instead, the Department of Justice (DOJ) allowed members of Congress to review unredacted versions of millions of pages of Epstein-related documents on computers located in a DOJ satellite office in Washington, D.C.

Key Details of the Review Process:
    • Location: Lawmakers traveled to a DOJ office rather than viewing classified-style compartments or a congressional SCIF.
    • Access Rules: Only individual members of Congress were allowed to view the files on computer screens; they could not bring their staff, remove physical documents, or bring in any electronic devices (though taking handwritten notes was permitted).

    • Process: Lawmakers had to give the DOJ 24 hours' notice to schedule their in-person review.
    • Aftermath: Following reviews by bipartisan lawmakers—such as Rep. Thomas Massie, Rep. Ro Khanna, and Rep. Jamie Raskin—several members publicly criticized the DOJ over what they considered unnecessary or mysterious redactions in the files.
The full files have not been released as required by the law.
The files that have been released have redacted suspect names incorrectly and unredacted victim names incorrectly.
The law has not been enforced.
 
The full files have not been released as required by the law.
The files that have been released have redacted suspect names incorrectly and unredacted victim names incorrectly.
The law has not been enforced.
Where did you get that info?
 
I don't know. why are we letting foreigners sit around and tell us they're going to enter our homes whether we like it or not without pulverizing them into oblivion?

may as well wait around for reparations.

you are focused on Trump. many, many other politicians and celebrities are tied to the Epstein files. you just want him to be guilty.

I'd like to know the truth. I want guilty parties punished~but its not going to happen like this. this is just wasting time trolling.

May as well rename them to the "Ontario files".
This is hilarious coming from the weirdo 🤡 who just copies and pastes unfounded nonsense from Twitter.
 
Back
Top