Missing Epstein Records Spark New Transparency Questions

Missing Epstein records raise questions about Trump. Newly released FBI emails show investigators scrambling to understand what their Jeffrey Epstein files contained about Donald Trump and other prominent figures. In one internal message, an FBI agent listed 14 men connected to Epstein and instructed colleagues to gather any negative or derogatory information about them. Trump's name appeared— where do you think it appeared? In the middle? At the bottom? No, Trump's name appeared at the top of the list. Agents compiled summaries of tips and allegations they had received, including a claim from a woman who said she was assaulted by Trump as a teenager, and another account describing Epstein introducing a woman to him. Most of the tips were unverified, and investigators noted that many came from anonymous callers or secondhand sources. But the controversy intensified when some underlying interview documents tied to one allegation were initially missing from the Justice Department's public document release. Officials later said the files were mistakenly withheld as duplicates and were subsequently published. Critics say the missing records raise questions about transparency in the Epstein document release, while the White House has dismissed the allegation as completely baseless and unsupported by evidence. Now, this is from reporting in the New York Times today. The New York Times has been very slow on this story. National Public Radio has been much better, and not surprisingly, a number of media outlets from Great Britain and Europe have been much better about this. Apparently, many American media outlets are still living in such fear of the Trump administration and the Trump Department of Justice that they are holding back, and even the Times still isn't reporting news that most Americans would want to know, want to hear. They're sanitizing it. They're cleaning it up. Again, the allegations are a woman claimed in 2019 that President Trump and Epstein sexually molested her when she was between the ages of 13 and 15. That specifically, and I'm not saying this for prurient titillation, but these are facts. Regarding perhaps one of the biggest criminals of our era. And the allegation is that this 13-year-old girl, after being introduced by Epstein to Donald Trump, was forced to give oral sex to Donald Trump. These are the allegations in documents released by our Department of Justice. And that apparently she hated doing that, bit the president down there, and he then hit her upside the head. I have no idea this is true. I do know it's true that those allegations were made in 2019 and that the FBI interviewed this woman. Now, typically, if someone is interviewed and it seems obvious they're crazy or lunatic or just making up stuff, the, the investigator would put notes to that effect. And you could say, well, this person is claiming it, that it happened in Antarctica. There's no evidence of the president ever having been in Antarctica in their life. And so a fair-minded person could conclude this is just deranged nonsense, dismiss it. No more credible than saying I was abducted by space aliens and that's how I got pregnant. But that's not what happened. There's no, there's no record stating that. So here's what is intriguing to many people. The records state that this woman was interviewed not once, not twice, not three times, but four times. Now, you may ask yourself, how often do FBI investigators go back to interview the same person 4 times using valuable government resources, valuable government time to interview someone regarding criminal allegations 4 times if they think there's a good chance the person is crazy and just made it up? I honestly don't know the answer to that. I've not worked for the FBI. I would think that they would have better things to do. I would think that once any investigator concludes, well, this person is just clearly making this up because the facts don't bear it out, it's easy to determine this person is delusional, I would think that they wouldn't interview a person like that more than once. And I would think there would be notes reflecting that. But these are the very notes from these documents that we're not seeing. So that's what inquiring minds would like to know. What's— what were in the notes from these 4 different meetings? Now the woman apparently decided, I don't want to be a part of this, and she ceased all communication. She refused. Doesn't mean her allegations weren't true, doesn't mean they were true either. But once again, we are seeing a lot of funny business. The concern was always that Trump would simply order his henchmen and henchwomen at the Department of Justice, just delete anything that makes me look bad. And when we see the spreadsheets and see, okay, here's the record, here's this allegation, here were the 4 interviews by the investigators, and now normally the corresponding notes would be here and they're gone. I don't know how, unless you are a complete apologist, unless you're Carolyn Levitt and a complete 100% propaganda-spewing apologist for Trump, I don't know how that doesn't arouse curiosity and make you think, sure seems like they're hiding something here. Something seems corrupt.