Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, October 29, 2026

The contents of at least three documents in the massive tranche of files indicate classified information was included in files collected by the DOJ.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

"It's not a coincidence that classified documents are missing while he controls them." trib.al/kVMr9IR

[image or embed]

-- The New Republic (@newrepublic.com) 7:59 PM · Oct 28, 2026

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article ...

... "There's not some tranche of super-secret documents about Jeffrey Epstein that we're withholding, we're actually not withholding anything based upon [national defense information]," said Blanche, who was deputy attorney general at the time.

But the contents of at least three documents in the massive tranche of files indicate classified information was included in files collected by the DOJ.

One of the documents shows Blanche's Office of the Deputy Attorney General itself received classified material related to Epstein in March 2025. By law, material can only be classified for national security purposes.

What exactly was classified and why remains a mystery. ...

Clues about classified material

Included among the Epstein files is an eight-page timeline of the FBI's New York office's initial efforts last year to track down and deliver its voluminous files to the Justice Department's Washington headquarters.

On March 25, 2025, one document shows delivery of "16 Epstein items to ODAG," referring to the Office of the Deputy Attorney General. Among them, items No. 2 and No. 6 are described as "Epstein Transparency Project - Classified Material" and "CDs with classified materials (x2)."

The Epstein Transparency Project refers to the Justice Department's effort to review the files and redact, withhold or clear them for release. It is not clear what exactly was identified as classified. Each CD was likely capable of holding hundreds of megabytes of material. ...


#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-28 01:38 PM | Reply

Wait, what???

AG Blanche may have lied about the Epstein files again?

I am shocked!

#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-28 01:39 PM | Reply

Todd Blanche needs to be tied to a tree and sliced from stem to stern.

#3 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-10-28 02:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#2 ... AG Blanche may have lied about the Epstein files again? ...

Looks that way ...

#4 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-28 09:17 PM | Reply

Wait. You guys haven't heard Trump is tied to 11 sexual assaults in those files? Where the ---- do you guys get your news?

That's been out 2 days now.

Look, half the worlds billionaires are Chinese, and most of the other half are kiddy-diddling European aristocrat devil-worshipers.

It's a small club, and the Orange Lizard protects it.

#5 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2026-10-28 10:31 PM | Reply

Check Vlad's cache.

#6 | Posted by a_monson at 2026-10-28 11:14 PM | Reply

@#5 ... You guys haven't heard Trump is tied to 11 sexual assaults in those files? Where the ---- do you guys get your news? ...

The issue does not seem to be where ~we~ get our news, but Pres Trump's DoJ not releasing all the Epstein files as directed by Congress.


#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-10-28 11:21 PM | Reply

the Orange Lizard protects it.

The orange lizard is at the center of it.

#8 | Posted by Nixon at 2026-10-29 07:52 AM | Reply

Did anyone check the bathrooms at Mar a Lardo?

#9 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-10-29 11:43 AM | Reply

Of course it's missing.

Duh

The evidence was handed to the criminals.

#10 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-10-29 11:46 AM | Reply

>What exactly was classified and why remains a mystery. ...

>Clues about classified material
get one

#11 | Posted by john_savage2 at 2026-10-29 11:52 AM | Reply

---- off idiot.

#12 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-10-29 12:30 PM | Reply

Blanche knows exactly when he deleted the files.

#13 | Posted by Nixon at 2026-10-29 12:33 PM | Reply

Trump's lawyer(s) have had six long years to glean anything even remotely damaging in those files, and wish them into the cornfield. I've got $20 that says we'll NEVER see a complete and/or unredacted collection of those documents.

#14 | Posted by dutch46 at 2026-10-29 12:56 PM | Reply

Are the missing Epstein Files with the missing Russia binder?

#15 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2026-10-29 01:50 PM | Reply

LOL. There must be a special place in Hell for Donald Trump and the people who serve him. Such corrupt dishonest pieces of garbage.

#16 | Posted by moder8 at 2026-10-29 05:45 PM | Reply

The Justice Department posted a trio of FBI interviews with a woman who alleged President Donald Trump sexually assaulted her when she was a young teenager after she was introduced to him by Jeffrey Epstein.
The woman's central allegation, according to FBI summaries of her interviews with investigators, known as FBI 302s, is that Trump hit her after she bit his penis when he attempted to force her to perform oral sex.

Bugsy must've been too sloshed to redact this.

#17 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2026-10-29 06:04 PM | Reply

Epstein and Maxwell were the only ones prosecuted.

Why?

Not the -------- that the files were sealed. It wasnt sealed from other prosecutions.

It's a two party protection complicity

#18 | Posted by Petrous at 2026-10-29 06:25 PM | Reply

It's a two party protection complicity
#18 | Posted by Petrous

One of the parties is a little more equal than the other on that. Because they have more to protect.

Fundamentally, you're asking the same question as why was it only Lynndie England and other low-level soldiers who was prosecuted for torturing Iraqi civilians to death. Not the higher ups who ordered it.

Perhaps the only distinction here is which party publicly encourages the kind of behavior we saw at Abu Ghraib. And that's important. Because that kind of talk attracts that kind of person.

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-10-29 06:34 PM | Reply

Prosecute them all. Do we support this?

#20 | Posted by Petrous at 2026-10-29 06:39 PM | Reply

Prosecute them all. Do we support this?
#20 | Posted by Petrous

I don't think anyone has said we shouldn't, have they?

But first it's kinda good to know who and how much.

#21 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-10-29 07:09 PM | Reply

But if you need reassurance, yes, prosecute them all. Let the chips . . . and all that shyte.

That's what people were saying at the beginning. But now things are getting worse.

Like with COVID, anyone who was paying attention knew from the outset that masks were intended to protect healthcare workers from exhaustion.

Then it became political.

Anyone mentioned as doing stuff to underage girls or boys courtesy of Jeffrey Epstein needs every bit of their lives maligned (at the very least) as much as possible.

What else do you want to hear?

#22 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-10-29 07:14 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort