Trump, other high-profile people had names redacted from Epstein files by FBI for privacy reasons
Article content
The redactions were made by a team of FBI employees tasked with reviewing the Epstein files for potential public release. The names were withheld under privacy protections because those individuals, including Trump, were private citizens when the federal investigation into Epstein began in 2006, the people said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
Article content
Article content
The appearance of a person's name in the documents does not indicate they were under investigation or even accused of wrongdoing.
Article content
Article content
The review was part of a broader effort sparked by Trump's campaign promise to 'declassify' files related to Epstein, which his MAGA base has long requested. In March, FBI Director Kash Patel directed his special agents from the New York and Washington field offices to join the bureau's FOIA employees at the agency's sprawling Central Records Complex in Winchester, Virginia, and another building a few miles away.
Article content
Responding to public pressure, FBI personnel were instructed to search for and review every single Epstein-related document and determine what could be released. That included a mountain of material accumulated by the FBI over nearly two decades, including grand jury testimony, prosecutors' case files, as well as tens of thousands of pages of the bureau's own investigative files on Epstein.
Article content
Article content
It was a herculean task that involved as many as 1,000 FBI agents and other personnel pulling all-nighters while poring through more than 100,000 documents, according to a July letter from Senator Dick Durbin to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.
Article content
The employees reviewed the records using the Freedom of Information Act as their guide for deciding what information should be withheld. That alone isn't uncommon. In the FOIA, Congress established nine exemptions as a way to balance the public's right to know against the government's need to protect sensitive interests, such as national security, official deliberations, ongoing law enforcement proceedings or privacy. When such competing interests arise in non-FOIA matters, those exemptions are often applied even if the exact language set forth in the FOIA statute doesn't appear in the final record.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Forward
an hour ago
- Japan Forward
Do Not Open Japan-US Trade Deal to Distorted Interpretation
このページを 日本語 で読む A trade deal was concluded by the Shigeru Ishiba administration and the Donald Trump administration. But, were the provisions of the agreement actually finalized? It is difficult to dispel doubts on that score. There are stark differences in how the Japanese and US sides explain provisions on new investment in the United States. This is a cause for concern in the actual implementation of the agreement. One of the main pillars of the Japan-US agreement sets reciprocal tariffs and auto tariffs the US imposes on Japanese imports at 15%. However, no written agreement has been drawn up. Isn't that the cause of the differences in perception between the two sides? Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba should have spoken directly with President Trump immediately after the agreement was reached to share his views. His failure to do so has created a major problem. If things continue as they are, it is possible that the US side will try to force its own interpretation on Japan. If that were to happen, Japan's national interest might well suffer damage. The Prime Minister and Minister for Economic Revitalization Ryosei Akazawa should clarify the reasons for these differing perceptions during the extraordinary Diet session that convened on August 1. They have a duty to explain to the satisfaction of the Japanese people that the agreement will be appropriately implemented. US President Donald Trump speaks at the White House on July 31 (©Reuters via Kyodo) Regarding Japanese investment in the United States, Trump posted on social media that Japan will invest $550 billion USD (approximately ¥80 trillion JPY) in the United States. Furthermore, he said, the US will receive 90% of the profits. In response, the Japan side has explained that the $550 billion in question is actually the upper limit for investments, loans, and loan guarantees. Of this, the "90%" of the profits the US would stand to make from the deal are from investment projects. That amounts to just 1% to 2% of the $550 billion, according to Akazawa. As for the issue of rice, the US side claims that Japan's imports of American rice will increase by 75%. However, Japan has not provided any specific details. Won't this really amount to sacrificing Japan's agricultural sector? US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has also declared that he intends to review Japan's compliance with the agreement quarterly. He has further threatened that tariffs will be raised to 25% if Trump is not satisfied. That would provide leeway for Trump to unilaterally scrap the agreement. The lack of a joint document sharing a mutual understanding of what the agreement entails has left a legacy of problems. The Japanese side prioritized an early conclusion to the talks. That allowed the delay of the time-consuming task of hammering out a written agreement. Their excuse was to avoid a situation where an agreement could not be reached by the Trump-imposed deadline of August 1. On that date, Trump's reciprocal tariffs on Japan were scheduled to rise to 25%. Even if that is true, it will end up counterproductive if the agreement comes to be distorted by the US interpretation. Above all, the Ishiba government should urge the Trump administration to quickly align their respective views. We should realize that, unless both sides share a mutual understanding, economic uncertainty from Trump's tariffs will not dissipate. Author: Editorial Board, The Sankei Shimbun このページを 日本語 で読む
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
China pushes back at US demands to stop buying Russian and Iranian oil
WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. and Chinese officials may be able to settle many of their differences to reach a trade deal and avert punishing tariffs, but they remain far apart on one issue: the U.S. demand that China stop purchasing oil from Iran and Russia. 'China will always ensure its energy supply in ways that serve our national interests,' China's Foreign Ministry posted on X on Wednesday following two days of trade negotiations in Stockholm, responding to the U.S. threat of a 100% tariff. 'Coercion and pressuring will not achieve anything. China will firmly defend its sovereignty, security and development interests,' the ministry said. The response is notable at a time when both Beijing and Washington are signaling optimism and goodwill about reaching a deal to keep commercial ties between the world's two largest economies stable — after climbing down from sky-high tariffs and harsh trade restrictions. It underscores China's confidence in playing hardball when dealing with the Trump administration, especially when trade is linked to its energy and foreign policies. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, emerging from the talks, told reporters that when it comes to Russian oil purchases, the 'Chinese take their sovereignty very seriously.' 'We don't want to impede on their sovereignty, so they would like to pay a 100% tariff,' Bessent said. On Thursday, he called the Chinese 'tough' negotiators, but said China's pushback hasn't stalled the negotiations. 'I believe that we have the makings of a deal,' Bessent told CNBC. Gabriel Wildau, managing director of the consultancy Teneo, said he doubts President Donald Trump would actually deploy the 100% tariff. 'Realizing those threats would derail all the recent progress and probably kill any chance' for Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to announce a trade deal if they should meet this fall, Wildau said. In seeking to restrict oil sales by Russia and Iran, a major source of revenue for both countries, the U.S. wants to reduce the funding available for their militaries, as Moscow pursues its war against Ukraine and Tehran funds militant groups across the Middle East. China plays hardball When Trump unveiled a sweeping plan for tariffs on dozens of countries in April, China was the only country that retaliated. It refused to give in to U.S. pressure. 'If the U.S. is bent on imposing tariffs, China will fight to the end, and this is China's consistent official stance,' said Tu Xinquan, director of the China Institute for WTO Studies at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing. WTO is the acronym for the World Trade Organization. Negotiating tactics aside, China may also suspect that the U.S. won't follow through on its threat, questioning the importance Trump places on countering Russia, Tu said. Scott Kennedy, senior adviser and trustee chair in Chinese Business and Economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Beijing is unlikely to change its posture when it sees inconsistencies in U.S. foreign policy goals toward Russia and Iran, whereas Beijing's policy support for Moscow is consistent and clear. It's also possible that Beijing may want to use it as another negotiating tool to extract more concessions from Trump, Kennedy said. Danny Russel, a distinguished fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said Beijing now sees itself as 'the one holding the cards in its struggle with Washington.' He said Trump has made it clear he wants a 'headline-grabbing deal' with Xi, 'so rejecting a U.S. demand to stop buying oil from Iran or Russia is probably not seen as a deal‑breaker, even if it generates friction and a delay.' Continuing to buy oil from Russia preserves Xi's 'strategic solidarity' with Russian President Vladimir Putin and significantly reduces the economic costs for China, Russel said. 'Beijing simply can't afford to walk away from the oil from Russia and Iran,' he said. 'It's too important a strategic energy supply, and Beijing is buying it at fire‑sale prices.' China depends on oil from Russia and Iran A 2024 report by the U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that roughly 80% to 90% of the oil exported by Iran went to China. The Chinese economy benefits from the more than 1 million barrels of Iranian oil it imports per day. After the Iranian parliament floated a plan to shut down the Strait of Hormuz in June following U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, China spoke out against closing the critical oil transit route. China also is an important customer for Russia, but is second to India in buying Russian seaborne crude oil exports. In April, Chinese imports of Russian oil rose 20% over the previous month to more than 1.3 million barrels per day, according to the KSE Institute, an analytical center at the Kyiv School of Economics. This past week, Trump said the U.S. will impose a 25% tariff on goods from India, plus an additional import tax because of India's purchasing of Russian oil. India's Foreign Ministry said Friday its relationship with Russia was 'steady and time-tested.' Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff and a top policy adviser, said Trump has been clear that it is 'not acceptable' for India to continue financing the Ukraine war by purchasing oil from Russia. 'People will be shocked to learn that India is basically tied with China in purchasing Russian oil,' Miller said on Fox News Channel's 'Sunday Morning Futures.' He said the U.S. needs 'to get real about dealing with the financing of this war.' Congress demands action Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, is pushing for sanctions and tariffs on Russia and its financial backers. In April, he introduced a bill that would authorize the president to impose tariffs as high as 500% not only on Russia but on any country that 'knowingly' buys oil, uranium, natural gas, petroleum products or petrochemical products from Russia. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. 'The purpose of this legislation is to break the cycle of China — a communist dictatorship — buying oil below market price from Putin's Russia, which empowers his war machine to kill innocent Ukrainian civilians,' Graham said in a June statement. The bill has 84 co-sponsors in the 100-seat Senate. A corresponding House version has been introduced, also with bipartisan support. Republicans say they stand ready to move on the sanctions legislation if Trump asks them to do so, but the bill is on hold for now. ___ Associated Press writers David McHugh in Frankfurt and Rajesh Roy in New Delhi and researcher Yu Bing in Beijing contributed to the report.
Winnipeg Free Press
5 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Texas Democrats leave the state to block vote on redrawn House map backed by Trump
Texas Democrats are leaving the state in an attempt to prevent the state House from holding a vote Monday on new congressional maps that Republicans hope will net them several additional U.S. House seats in the 2026 midterm elections. The dramatic move Sunday could expose Democrats to fines and other penalties — with the state's attorney general having previously threatened to arrest them if they took such an action. Refusing to attend legislative session is a civil violation, however, so Democrats legally could not be jailed and it's unclear who has the power to carry out the warrants. Democrats have cast the decision to leave the state as a last-ditch effort to stop Republicans who hold full control of the Texas government from pushing through a rare mid-decade redrawing of the congressional map at the direction of President Donald Trump. 'This is not a decision we make lightly, but it is one we make with absolute moral clarity,' said Gene Wu, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, in a statement. To conduct official business, at least 100 members of the 150-member Texas House must be present. Democrats hold 62 of the seats in the majority-Republican chamber. At least 51 Democratic members are leaving the state, said Josh Rush Nisenson, spokesperson for the House Democratic Caucus. 'Apathy is complicity, and we will not be complicit in the silencing of hard-working communities who have spent decades fighting for the power that Trump wants to steal,' he said. The move marks the second time in four years that Texas Democrats have fled the state to block a vote. In 2021, a 38-day standoff took place when Democrats left for Washington in opposition to new voting restrictions. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott called a special session of the Legislature that started last month to take up the redistricting effort, as well as to respond to flooding in Texas Hill Country that killed at least 135 people in July. Trump has urged Texas Republicans to redraw the map to help the party net a handful of seats in the midterms next year. Texas Republicans last week unveiled their planned new U.S. House map that would create five new Republican-leaning seats. Republicans currently hold 25 of the state's 38 seats. By leaving the state, Democrats are looking to block Republicans from the needed quorum to hold votes on the map set for Monday. The Texas House has rules to fine lawmakers $500 each day they break a quorum. GOP Attorney General Ken Paxton has said previously that if Democrats break quorum, 'they should be found and arrested no matter where they go.' 'My office stands ready to assist local, state, and federal authorities in hunting down and compelling the attendance of anyone who abandons their office and their constituents for cheap political theater,' Paxton said on the social media platform X on July 15. A large chunk of the Texas Democrats are heading to Illinois, where Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker had been in quiet talks with them for weeks about offering support if they chose to leave the state to break quorum. Pritzker, a potential 2028 presidential contender, has been one of Trump's most outspoken critics during his second term. Last week, Pritzker hosted several Texas Democrats in Illinois to publicly oppose the redistricting effort. California Gov. Gavin Newsom held a similar event in his own state. Pritzker also met privately with Texas Democratic Chair Kendall Scudder in June to begin planning for the possibility that lawmakers would depart for Illinois if they did decide to break quorum to block the map, according to a source with direct knowledge who requested anonymity to discuss private conversations. Now, with Texas Democrats holed up in Illinois and blocking the Trump-backed congressional map, the stage may be set for a high-profile showdown between Pritzker and the president. Trump is looking to avoid a repeat of his first term, when Democrats flipped the House just two years into his presidency, and hopes the new Texas map will aid that effort. Trump officials have also looked at redrawing lines in other states, such as Missouri, according to a person familiar with conversations but unauthorized to speak publicly about them.
