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

halobeam

(5,081 posts)
20. I understand they have to list legal reasons why each and every redaction was made.
Fri Dec 19, 2025, 11:59 PM
Friday

If I understand correctly, they have 15 days from today, to turn in the full list of every single redaction and the SPECIFIC reason for it, and correctly classified -as stated in the bill

Additionally, (per the bill) these redactions are only temporary, as they must turn in every redaction, in its unredacted state, to congress (committies?) I'm almost certain the unredacted pages are also due in 15 days.

Furthermore. this bill that past both houses states they can only make minimal redactions, not full pages.

There's so much they already didn't comply with, these are just a few things (not to mention the full file was due today)

Recommendations

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

The coverup continues Blues Heron Friday #1
Well. If this is a transcript of a videotaped deposition, Volaris Friday #2
Good point. Wiz Imp Friday #7
Let the motions and lawsuits to compel compliance begin pat_k Friday #3
It's explicitly stated in the law what can and can't be redacted. Wiz Imp Friday #6
Protecting the criminals. Color me surprised! NOT! BComplex Friday #13
Huh? These restrictions in the law are expicitly to NOT protect the criminals. Wiz Imp Friday #16
Got it! BComplex Yesterday #23
I understand they have to list legal reasons why each and every redaction was made. halobeam Friday #20
Yep. I believe everything you said is correct. Wiz Imp Yesterday #22
They probably will claim that [redacted] os an ongoing investigation Bluetus 22 hrs ago #30
Besides the general hideousness of this (and all the girls, young women violated)... electric_blue68 Friday #4
All redactions by law, were supposed to come with Emile Friday #5
I think that is what is due 15 days from today? halobeam Yesterday #21
And the Trump Administration moved Maxwell to a much cushier prison too. Botany Friday #8
Agreed. And given the specific question about Victoria's Secret lingerie Wiz Imp Friday #9
Les Wexner is the person behind Victoria's Secrets and the brand but he would have no interest in a woman Botany Friday #12
Sorry, but info released in January 2024 confirms it WAS Wexner she was talking about. Wiz Imp Friday #15
That is surprising Botany Friday #18
Wow. Who is questioning her? Demanding, borderline mean. Horrible. Joinfortmill Friday #10
This was in relation to lawsuit against Alan Dershowitz brought by Giuffre's lawyer. Wiz Imp Friday #11
Ah, that explains it. Joinfortmill Friday #14
Working link: Celerity Friday #17
The only way Bondi will release this is when she sees the handcuffs coming for her. mn9driver Friday #19
Guiffre's 2015 testimony against Maxwell in her civil case mentioned in the OP has long been publicly available AZJonnie Yesterday #24
I won't dispute any of the points you make, however you are wrong about one thing. Wiz Imp Yesterday #25
Okay, my bad. I thought your post was in two parts, top and bottom (2015 and 2016 testimonies) AZJonnie Yesterday #26
Like I said. I agree. Especially about Bondi. Wiz Imp Yesterday #28
I don't think she understood that president and prime minister are essentially the same thing. everyonematters Yesterday #27
I think the questioner was trying to trip her up. Wiz Imp Yesterday #29
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»*****Updated***** I pulle...»Reply #20