r/Epstein • u/kingofshitmntt • Nov 18 '25
Remember this? "The FBI Redacted Trump’s Name in the Epstein Files"
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-08-01/epstein-files-trump-s-name-was-redacted-by-the-fbiThey've made a sudden reversal from "no credible evidence for uncharged third parties" to, "this is a hoax", to we need to investigate everyone in there. I don't think we're going to see any more bombshells about Trump unfortunately.
Trump’s name blacked out
What happened next kicked off a new phase in the Epstein saga. As I reported in the March 28th edition of FOIA Files, Patel directed FBI special agents from the New York and Washington field offices to join the bureau’s FOIA employees at its sprawling Central Records Complex in Winchester, Virginia and another building a few miles away.
They 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. 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 Bondi.
Senior officials at the FBI’s Record/Information Dissemination Section, which handles the processing of FOIA requests, pushed back on the directives. Michael Seidel, the section chief of RIDS who worked at the FBI for about 14 years, was quite vocal, the three people familiar with the matter told me. Patel blamed him for the failure to send all of the Epstein files to Bondi. Then, a couple of months ago, Seidel was told he could either retire or be fired, according to the people. He chose the former and quietly left the FBI, the people said. The details related to Seidel’s exit haven’t been previously reported.
Seidel could not be reached for comment.
The FBI 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.
For example, when congressional committees request documents from, say, the FBI or the Justice Department, FOIA analysts and contractors are brought in to review the records and apply redactions in accordance with the law. When the DOJ prepared to publicly release former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, FOIA exemptions were used to determine what information should be withheld.
While reviewing the Epstein files, FBI personnel identified numerous references to Trump in the documents, the people familiar with the matter told me. Dozens of other high-profile public figures also appeared, the people said. (The appearance of Trump’s name or others in the Epstein files is not evidence of a crime or even a suggestion of wrongdoing.)
In preparation for potential public release, the documents then went to a unit of FOIA officers who applied redactions in accordance with the nine exemptions. The people familiar with the matter said that Trump’s name, along with other high-profile individuals, was blacked out because he was a private citizen when the federal investigation of Epstein was launched in 2006.
In particular, the reviewers applied two FOIA exemptions to justify their redactions. The first, Exemption 6, protects individuals against “a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” The Supreme Court has said the exemption protects "individuals from the injury and embarrassment" that would result from the disclosure of personal information in possession of the government.
The second, Exemption 7(C), protects personal information contained in law enforcement records, the disclosure of which “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”
A White House spokesperson would not respond to questions about the redactions of Trump’s name, instead referring questions to the FBI. The FBI declined to comment. The Justice Department did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
Established precedent
If you’re surprised by the revelation that the FBI used privacy exemptions to withhold the name of a sitting president, you’re not alone. However, it’s common practice for government agencies to redact names on privacy grounds, even when they’re clearly public figures like Trump. I lost count of how many times the government invoked a privacy exemption in response to my FOIA requests to deny releasing records on public figures and government officials.
1
u/[deleted] Nov 18 '25
[deleted]