Judge orders unsealing of grand jury transcripts from Epstein investigation in Florida

WBALTV ^ | 12/5/25 | ap

[CFW]

Democrats may soon wish they'd never mentioned the Epstein "documents".

[brownsfan]

*** Democrats may soon wish they’d never mentioned the Epstein “documents”. ***

I doubt it. They’re all in on this, both sides. The Dems just wanted Trump and that fizzled. So now, any revelations, unless it’s a prominent Republican implicated, will be ignored.

It’s more likely that I will go to jail for what’s in the Epstein files as opposed to any of our elected criminals.

[Valpal1]

I actually expected a showdown between Congress and the Judiciary over this. Interesting.

[mewzilla]

How do we know the grand jury transcripts haven’t been doctored...?

[Sarah Barracuda]

Good Im glad, this is what the DOJ wanted release so good lets see it

[BobL]

“Good Im glad, this is what the DOJ wanted release so good lets see it”

Let’s see which Democrats sue to stop the release...

[Eli Kopter]

About damn time!

[Eli Kopter]

I thoughtI saw you on Epstein’s island.

[Jonty30]

Is that you, Bill Gates?

[AAABEST]

If not tampered with, this is where most of the bodies would be buried.

[digger48]

People are going to be disappointed when no prominent politicians name is in there having done anything wrong except know Epstein

[greenbrier]

We're finally going to find out what happened to Judge Crater!

[Tell It Right]

Are grand jury transcripts worth anything? If I understand it correctly, a prosecutor has to present just a minimal amount of evidence to get the grand jury to say, Yep, there's enough to hash this all out in court. It doesn't necessarily have to be substantial evidence.

Or as the saying goes, anyone get get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

[Col Frank Slade]

I’d like to see all the physical evidence that was seized in raids on the Island, NYC apartment and NM ranch.

[MortMan]

Worse than that - the prosecutor presents his or her narrative without any form of rebuttal by the defendant. That’s why the proceedings are secret - unsubstantiated allegations are allowed without rebuttal.

[Eli Kopter]

Lol...it was a joke.

[Jonty30]

So, you didn’t deny being Bill Gates. :)

[NavyShoe]

Not hearing much from dems on this anymore. Why?

[gloryblaze]

People are going to be disappointed when no prominent politicians name is in there having done anything wrong except know Epstein

But the conspiracy nutters will rumble and roll on even harder.

[tumblindice]

The Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R. 4405, signed into law in November 2025) mandates the release of unclassified Department of Justice records related to Jeffrey Epstein and associated individuals, entities, investigations, and events. Regarding redactions specifically, the law outlines the following key provisions:

Prohibited grounds for withholding or redacting information: No records can be withheld, delayed, or redacted based on potential embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.
Permitted withholdings and redactions: The Attorney General may only withhold or redact segregable portions of records that meet one of these narrow criteria:
Contain personally identifiable information of victims, or victims’ personal/medical files where disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Depict or contain child sexual abuse materials (CSAM) as defined under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2256 and prohibited under §§ 2252–2252A.
Would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution (must be narrowly tailored and temporary).
Grok

Yes, our political, economic & social betters will receive Get Out Of Jail Free cards through redaction exceptions.
I seem to recall that the redacted portions, nevertheless, must be published in the National Register? AI