‘Stop this cover-up!!!’: The DOJ tried to redact Trump’s name from a document detailing his bizarre ‘pert nipples’ obsession
They're too dumb and Trump is beyond saving.
The Department of Justice keeps insisting it’s releasing what the law requires. But the documents keep insisting otherwise. In the latest Epstein-file dump, the DoJ republished records from the Giuffre v. Maxwell case. And they dropped two versions of the same document, one mentions Trump and one censored.
The Giuffre v. Maxwell court records have been public, litigated, and dissected for a year already after they were released in Jan. 2024. Among the released files were materials that ignited the now-infamous “pert nipples” controversy involving Donald Trump. But, when the DoJ re-released the same files in Dec. 2025, Trump’s name disappeared from the paper as if he were a victim.
What was already public?
Back in Jan. 2024, unsealed court records included emails sent in 2016 by Sarah Ransome to journalist Maureen Callahan. Those emails made lurid claims about Trump, writing (via NY Post):
“She confided in me about her casual ‘friendship’ with Donald. Mr. Trump definitely seemed to have a thing for her, and she told me how he kept going on about how he liked her “pert nipples”. Donald Trump liked flicking and sucking her nipples until they were raw.”
The disgusting detail of that encounter continued in her email. She also added knowing about a girl having “sexual relations with Trump at Jeffrey’s NY mansion on regular occasions.” Ransome later retracted those claims in Oct. 2016 and told The New Yorker in 2019 that she had fabricated “tapes” to draw attention to Epstein’s conduct.
That history has been reported, fact-checked, and contextualized extensively (via Snopes). All of that is old news. And crucially, it is public record.
The DoJ’s latest switch to cover up for Trump
Fast forward to Dec. 2025, the DoJ re-released the same email records under the Giuffre v. Maxwell docket. And they did it twice. Document numbered 1332-16 is the familiar record, unredacted, as it appeared when unsealed in 2024. In the same docket, document numbered 1296-17 shows the same record but with Trump’s name repeatedly blacked out.
Both are the same material, presented once as-is and once with Trump’s name scrubbed off. Under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the DoJ is permitted to redact identifying information of victims and potential victims. But it is not authorized to shield the names or images of powerful figures already named in public court filings. And Trump is not a victim in these documents.
The material was already released under the Biden administration without any black boxes. So, why did the DoJ even try to sanitize a document everyone can already read? Redacting Trump’s name now is only a senseless attempt to rewrite the record after everyone already knows his history. The DoJ also compounded the problem by quietly repackaging this year-old material as part of a “new” Epstein release.
The DoJ has not explained the Trump redactions
After dropping the documents, the DoJ hurriedly labeled all allegations involving Trump as “sensationalist” before the public could review them. Disputing documents on social media and now selectively redacting his name in filings are only making all this look worse. The logic is simple. If the document was safe to publish yesterday, it doesn’t need to be redacted today.
Just days ago, a picture of Trump-Maxwell was also found redacted in a Steve Bannon email released by the DoJ. We can only guess where else Trump’s name is hiding under those heavy redactions. So far, the DoJ has not offered a legal justification for redacting Trump’s name and images. It has not explained why the same document appears twice with different treatments. And it has not clarified how this squares with a transparency law that explicitly bars shielding powerful individuals.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
