#redactions

[saywhat-politics]

[democracyunderground]

[hale-my-nathan]

Trump Weird News - Have Redactions Here Revealed The Truth?

[nekokotatsu]

Hey, MAGA!

Hi. Me again.

So, just curious. How are you feeling about the almost entirely redacted Epstein Files? We know for a fact that Trump's name is included in the redactions, because they forgot to redact part of the files before releasing them, then went back and struck them out. I'm not expecting much of a response from you guys, I know that there aren't any actual honest conservatives on Tumblr, but I'm just wondering how you're feeling right now. Any defense of this behavior whatsoever?

[grits-gal-raised-in-the-south]

This is why Invictus added First Responders to their platform AND the reason for the bogus Pat Tillman "award."

Prince Harry's visa file to be made public after bombshell ruling by judge amid claims he lied about drug use: MARCH 18th 2025

Prince Harry’s visa files must be made public by Tuesday at the latest, a judge has ruled.

Judge Carl Nichols set the deadline to release the files which will give the clearest indication yet as to whether the Duke of Sussex lied on his immigration paperwork.

The judge, who sits in Washington, approved the redactions suggested by the Department of Homeland Security and said they were ‘appropriate’.

While it is not clear what material will be released, it could include forms which indicate whether Harry said ‘no’ when asked if he was a drug user.

Lawyers for DHS have previously said that three items will be released with redactions but a fourth must remain private.

The right-wing Heritage Foundation sued the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) last year after the agency, which oversees immigration in America, refused a Freedom of Information request for Harry’s files.

Heritage claims that Harry may have lied on the forms under the section which asks if he had been a drug user.

In both his memoir, Spare, and his Netflix TV series Harry talked about using cannabis, cocaine and magic mushrooms.

In his order, Judge Nichols, who was appointed by Donald Trump, said: ‘The government has provided the court with its proposed redactions to the documents…those redactions appearing appropriate, the government is ORDERED to lodge on the docket the redacted versions of those documents no later than March 18, 2025’.

The case has caused embarrassment and consternation for Harry and raised questions about whether he could be deported if he was found to have lied.

But President Trump recently said he would not order him out of the country, while taking a swipe at Meghan, who he called 'terrible'.

Trump said he was only giving Harry a break because ‘he’s got enough problems with his wife’.

In September Judge Nichols had refused the request from Heritage to release all the documents because the Duke had a right to privacy.

But after a hearing he reconsidered and said he wanted to reveal as much as he could.

‘In my view that has to happen’, Judge Nichols said during a previous hearing adding that wanted to make the ‘maximum amount’ of material public that he could.

Judge Nichols did however say he did not want to reveal Harry’s immigration status, meaning that there could be heavy redactions on some files.

Speaking after that hearing, Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at Heritage, appealed to Trump to make the files public.

The president had put ‘border security and the application of the rule of law a top priority’.

In the past Harry has been frank about his drug use and once said that cannabis helped heal the trauma of the death of his mother, Princess Diana.

The Duke said that using ayahuasca, a psychedelic drug, he realized that his mother wanted him to be ‘happy’.

That means Harry’s US visa application in March 2020 could show he ticked the ‘no’ box on questions about his drug use, Heritage claims.

In previous legal filings, DHS said that the records at issue are ‘particularly sensitive’ because they would ‘reveal Harry’s (immigration) status in the United States’.

DHS wrote: ‘Even though he is a public figure, Prince Harry still maintains a privacy interest in these types of records and in his immigration or visa status generally.

‘Even if public figures may have a diminished expectation of privacy, they do not surrender their privacy interests entirely’,

The filing added that ‘were this not the case, a requester could go on a fishing expedition for (government) records for any celebrity at all’.

The original request sought to reveal whether Harry, who moved to the US after quitting being a working member of the British royal family, was getting ‘preferential treatment’.

Heritage has merely ‘recounted a litany of allegedly suspicious circumstances (that) lacked any substantiation’, DHS said.

DHS has also dismissed the Heritage Foundation’s claims as a ‘bare suspicion of government misconduct’ and making Harry’s paperwork public would not shed any ‘meaningful light’ on how it operates.

Harry’s representatives have declined to comment on the case.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67302535/heritage-foundation-v-us-department-of-homeland-security/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

Prince Harry's visa file to be made public after ruling by judge

Prince Harry's visa files must be made public by Tuesday at the latest, a judge has ruled.

[newstech24]

DOJ appears to bungle Epstein Files redactions

The Justice Department has blamed its delayed release of some so-called Epstein files on needing more time to redact sensitive information like details identifying the victims of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But at least some of the redactions so far released appear to mistakenly disclose information meant to be obscured from the public. A 2022 complaint filed by the US Virgin Islands…

DOJ appears to bungle Epstein Files redactions

[dragoni]

The Mueller report redactions, explained in 4 charts

Why parts of the Trump-Russia collusion section were redacted

There are four reasons Barr gave for why certain sections would be redacted, and good reasons for them:

Revealing it would harm an ongoing matter. Ward writes, “Some redactions in the report will exist mainly to allow other related cases to continue unimpeded.”

It reveals investigative techniques. Ward writes that “it’s highly likely the US government had to use sensitive spying methods — like, say, an undercover agent or top-secret surveillance technology — to investigate.”

It reveals private information of third-party individuals. Ward writes the “Justice Department has long had a policy of not divulging people’s names during an investigation unless they are indicted.”

It was obtained via grand jury testimony. This is secret by law.

There’s a decent amount of redactions, but we can read enough to know Trump and his associates were open to Russia’s help

But it turns out Barr left out some crucial information.

Vox’s Zack Beauchamp lays out some of the damning things the report reveals about Trump’s action during the election. 

This includes Trump directing an adviser to find the hacked Hillary Clinton emails, and approving another adviser’s efforts to set up a meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. And there may well be more under these black bars.

What the charts don’t show.

Mueller Made 14 Referrals of Potential Criminal Activity to Outside Offices, But Most Remain Redacted, Law & Crime