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
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsan interesting hypothesis on why the word "don't" was redacted in the Epstein files. . .
They looked for âDon Tâ in the Epstein files and redacted all instances, which means they also redacted a lot of âdonâtâ
— God (@thegodpodcast.com) 2026-02-07T19:56:55.630Z
9 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
an interesting hypothesis on why the word "don't" was redacted in the Epstein files. . . (Original Post)
Stargleamer
8 hrs ago
OP
TheRickles
(3,231 posts)1. That's some Sherlock Holmes-level detective work. Impressive.
bamagal62
(4,400 posts)2. Yep.
lamp_shade
(15,406 posts)3. Sure makes sense to me.
canetoad
(20,408 posts)4. You'd think those idiots
Would learn to do word searches properly.
Mark.b2
(783 posts)5. There should be a law that whoever...
approves a redaction shall be disclosed in the document in which the redaction occurs for each redaction. EACH instance of redaction shall be given a unique identifier along with a justification. Further, the approver of such redactions shall be potentially subject to inquiry about each redaction identified in the event a court or Congress demands explanation.
Orrex
(66,810 posts)6. "Dwigt" has entered the chat
JoseBalow
(9,299 posts)7. Duh
What other possible reason could there be?
ms liberty
(11,073 posts)8. Darwin Award nominees, all of them.
Talitha
(7,783 posts)9. Seriously, is AI doing the redactions?
