I will withhold a magical disappearing sausage joke to point out that any innocent bystanders outed as a result of this, or a previous release were outed by the administration via the administration’s pathetic cover up and failure to release these files in an honest way.
I did hear a good joke. If someone would just take the Epstine files and post them to the walls of the Kennedy Center, then Trump will finally have his name all over it.
Innocent people—mostly the survivors and victims of Jeffrey Epstein—have been severely harmed by the release of the Epstein files due to major government redaction failures
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/jeffrey-epstein-files-congress-victims-trump-administration-d3b62e3b
unredacted files exposed the names, home addresses, phone numbers, birth dates, and private emails of nearly 100 abuse survivors, many of whom had never shared their identities publicly or were minors at the time of the abuse
When the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) released millions of pages of investigative records following a congressional mandate, technical and human errors led to botched redactions
Nearly two dozen accusers faced severe online abuse, threatening phone messages (including images of assault rifles), and real-life intimidation, such as strangers photographing their homes or suspicious cars lingering outside.
So, far, due mostly by incompetence on the part of the current administration, dozens if not hundreds of victims and survivors have had their lives ruined. Not on single US indictment has come out of them. My suggestion would be to publicly destroy all those files. Calling for more is just calling for more innocent prople to be hurt.
Sorry, I specifically tried to keep my question focused on those people “on the outskirts” of the files whose “lives and reputations” were ruined. I am aware of the incompetence and malice of the DOJ with regard to victim redactions, and it is indeed terrible.
So far in answer to that specific question what we have is David Copperfield losing a residency in Las Vegas. Anyone else?
But Is that not enough? How many more victims and survivors do we need to ruin their already terrible lives even more?
And for what? No good has come out of the “files”.
And there is Jack Horner, a top paleontologist that has been fired, shunned and banned. He did ask for funding in 2012 from E.
That is not a question I am qualified to answer or trying to answer - I would defer to Epstein’s victims to see what they want. I am trying to learn whether innocent people named in the previously released files had their lives ruined, as you predicted would happen with another release. That’s all.
So far the answer appears to be: two people. I haven’t yet had a chance to research what their actual ties to Epstein may have been and how much, if any, their lives have been ruined. But at least I have some names I can check out now, so I do appreciate the answers.
No, dozens if not hundreds of victims and survivors. yeah, maybe only a handful of peripheral people, but you can not ignore all the victims who have had their lives ruined- twice.
I do not know why you are focusing only on the peripheral people instead of the victims. So, it is
“only” two peripheral people and 100(?) victims. Are those 100 or so victims not enough?
Maybe? I really don’t know, because I’m not trying to answer that difficult ethical question at the moment. I understand your repeated position, and I am not saying it is without merit, but I am just trying to learn some facts about which I am currently ignorant.
For what it’s worth, with regard to your question of is it worth it, some Epstein victims very much want all files released.
ETA: Presumably they want them released with proper fucking redactions this time.
Both Jack Horner and David Copperfield had accusations of misconduct before the Epstein Files. That’s why their names stood out from many of the others. It’s not clear to me that they were collateral damage.
Seems like you’re safe as long as you don’t share a name with a boy from British literature.
Here’s the proposed new law that sounds likely to pass;
So if I understand, the victims can sue to have documents released about which they have no knowledge. How is that supposed to work?
Now, the victims also have rights to see unredacted versions of documents that refer to them. This sounds useful, which it is reasonably clear who was a victim.
My guess is that, considering all the duplication, and the inconsistent redactions in those duplicates released, they have already released the great majority of what they have. Given the low level of care done in the earlier release process, any effort to shield a particular perpetration was unlikely to succeed. So it is always going to be claimed that there are more documents being held back, regardless of whether the Attorney General is Republican or, perhaps in 2029, Democratic. Do I have that right?
.