Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AZJonnie

(2,250 posts)
26. Not suggesting anyone tried to warp the facts, but mistakes can be made on a task like that
Wed Nov 12, 2025, 10:18 PM
9 hrs ago

Suppose there is one and only one place in the documents where "Donna Smith" appears (my theoretical cop). Maybe offhand the redactor don't know who that is, and in the context of the sentence, "Victim" makes sense, and they figure they can't really go wrong saying "Victim".

I hope someone from the Estate comes out and clarifies that " (Victim) " is definitely accurate (or if, for some reason, they actually aren't certain), and at least whether or not it is Guiffre, since the WH has let that out of the bag. I'm skeptical because VG is the *best* possible victim for it to be. She both called Trump a perfect gentleman, and she can't speak for herself anymore. I maintain that a cop/investigator's name makes slightly more sense in the sentence, and I'd be really surprised if it's VG. Victim = VG means the email is a nothingburger. Literally.

I also REALLY want to see the surrounding context. This appears to be the middle of discussion. What are they actually talking about, surrounding this blurb?

This other email? I'd be surprised if that's not some inside joke. In Dec. 2017 IQ47 was POTUS. I don't think he was regularly hanging around Epstein's place at that point. But if he was, then YEAH, he has a LOT to answer about

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

you seem very vested in all of this Skittles 12 hrs ago #1
to be honest every day I see dozens here incredibly vested in this. WarGamer 12 hrs ago #3
I have two answers for you AZJonnie 12 hrs ago #4
Is that email in question from the estate? OneGrassRoot 12 hrs ago #6
I cannot possibly imagine that the DoJ does/did not have everything the Estate has in this regard, long ago AZJonnie 12 hrs ago #8
Well, not just Biden's DOJ. Sorry to burst the bubble you'd prefer to exist in, but it is true. RockRaven 12 hrs ago #10
I see you as rather a brilliant person so this reply surprises me. AZJonnie 11 hrs ago #11
I believe my last post failed to communicate to you what I intended. RockRaven 11 hrs ago #18
Thanks for clarification. This is exactly the sort of cogent argument I always see from RockRaven AZJonnie 3 hrs ago #33
I don't think BeerBarrelPolka 3 hrs ago #34
yeah OK Skittles 11 hrs ago #12
Because Biden wanted to protect others. Sadly. Bluesaph 4 hrs ago #32
I am one KentuckyWoman 11 hrs ago #19
The White House released the name Abnredleg 12 hrs ago #2
Well, that's very convenient since Giuffre REPEATEDLY exonerated Trump of any wrongdoing including in her book AZJonnie 12 hrs ago #7
do you admit that Trump is one vile, disgusting POS??? Skittles 11 hrs ago #13
Do you not see what I post, all day and every day? I mean obviously not everything, but generally? AZJonnie 11 hrs ago #15
The premise of this post is wrong, from what I've read. The ID is known, from multiple RockRaven 12 hrs ago #5
See my post #7 above this one. AZJonnie 12 hrs ago #9
and how do you know she wasn't under duress? Skittles 11 hrs ago #14
Because it was in her 2025 memoir that she just wrote, and her estate released posthumously AZJonnie 11 hrs ago #17
speak for yourself Skittles 11 hrs ago #21
We are making the same point. Yes, she is gone, having exonerated him (to her knowledge) on her way out. AZJonnie 10 hrs ago #23
It doesn't matter Boo1 11 hrs ago #16
I want to address this part of your post Quiet Em 11 hrs ago #20
I get what you mean, but I was asked why *I* am so interested in the case near the top of the thread. AZJonnie 10 hrs ago #24
You are not annoying me and no apology is required. Disaffected 10 hrs ago #22
From what I've read, the "VICTIM" redaction was in the version of the files supplied by the estate, Emrys 10 hrs ago #25
Not suggesting anyone tried to warp the facts, but mistakes can be made on a task like that AZJonnie 9 hrs ago #26
It MIGHT be an inside joke, but to borrow the words of a past US president, "I want to hear him deny it." Emrys 8 hrs ago #28
I've said this like 20 times in various posts over months but not everyone see everything, so again lol AZJonnie 7 hrs ago #29
"the 'complete release of DoJ files' for any case is not a normal occurrence" Emrys 6 hrs ago #30
Setting aside the details of our particular definitions of "great lengths", the point is we agree AZJonnie 5 hrs ago #31
AZJohnny I agree with you that it wasn't Virginia Roberts Giuffre that Chump met at Epstein's house FakeNoose 8 hrs ago #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Sorry to annoy everyone y...»Reply #26