The ----- ----- ------ -----: ------- ----- Edition

[mod-man]

Lol they just deleted 16 of the files, including one that shows Epstein's desk with a framed picture of Annoying Orange on it.

do you know the numbers on the files deleted? i probably have them

[Ad Bot]

[Masterlegodude]

-double quote snip-

So i guess he's clean then? (At least of the Epstein case) And maybe Bill Clinton just being there was the only reason that picture was included at all, seeing as he's like the mascot of the releasing of the files for some odd reason

The nanny released this…

[Dr.Block]

Yar it was a scam by the Annoying Orange administration to redirect blame away from him and onto someone who's already dead and already was accused of love crimes in the past, I fell for the bait ngl. Its the same reason they put so much emphasis on Bill

[mod-man]

so i double checked the cut files i could find:
VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0165:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored completely

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0167:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0229:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0384:
cut for unknown reasons. it's literally just a hallway



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0468
cut most likely because of photos of Annoying Orange and other uncensored faces



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0470:
cut because of uncensored names on a mailbox(?)



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0476:
cut most likely because of existing information on the document that wasn't redacted properly



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0503:
cut because of uncensored names(?)



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0656:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0657:
cut because a previously censored nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1124:
cut most likely because of a photo of a person on a horse on a desk that wasn't censored (nude painting in photo)

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1423:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1424:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1931:
cut possibly because of uncensored address and name




i also found these:
EFTA00001051
EFTA00001052
EFTA00001053
EFTA00001055
EFTA00001056

again, nude paintings that weren't censored. thats really all i could find before the files stop being numbered concurrently and just start becoming random (massive cuts that were never released to begin with to my knowledge)

[Master Matthew²]

[Ladios]

Annoying Orange sends Louisiana Governor, Jeff Landry, to Greenland as special envoy with the intention to claim the semi-autonomous Danish territory as a new part of the US

[ultimamax]

so i double checked the cut files i could find:
VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0165:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored completely

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0167:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0229:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0384:
cut for unknown reasons. it's literally just a hallway



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0468
cut most likely because of photos of Annoying Orange and other uncensored faces



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0470:
cut because of uncensored names on a mailbox(?)



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0476:
cut most likely because of existing information on the document that wasn't redacted properly



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0503:
cut because of uncensored names(?)



VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0656:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0001_EFTA0000 0657:
cut because a previously censored nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1124:
cut most likely because of a photo of a person on a horse on a desk that wasn't censored (nude painting in photo)

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1423:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1424:
cut because a nude painting wasn't censored at all

VOL00001_IMAGES_0002_EFTA0000 1931:
cut possibly because of uncensored address and name




i also found these:
EFTA00001051
EFTA00001052
EFTA00001053
EFTA00001055
EFTA00001056

again, nude paintings that weren't censored. thats really all i could find before the files stop being numbered concurrently and just start becoming random (massive cuts that were never released to begin with to my knowledge)

why do nude paintings need to be censored? and are they gonna censor them and put them back in?

[Dr.Block]

Annoying Orange sends Louisiana Governor, Jeff Landry, to Greenland as special envoy with the intention to claim the semi-autonomous Danish territory as a new part of the US

The excuse the world needs to finally start bombing us? Hopefully! Please Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, my people crave liberation. I beg you.

why do nude paintings need to be censored? and are they gonna censor them and put them back in?

My assumption was that these were nudes paintings of kids

[mod-man]

why do nude paintings need to be censored? and are they gonna censor them and put them back in?

to be put back in? yet to be determined. why should they be censored? what do you expect the DOJ to treat you as an adult and not a handicap that can't handle nudity? they have to maintain their upright and just status and nudity of any kind is simply out of the question. (despite their failure that continues to exist in current releases)

we're dealing with an extremely touchy subject here. a mass child love abuser agent of the state that has incriminated multiple people in the US govt. my assumption from what ive seen is that the DOJ or FBI or whoever is redacting this crap has no idea who is who. they're just covering up anyone, or anything they deem to be potential or possible victims/abusers.

thats why the michael jackson photo that i posted was redacted. they didnt know who those kids were. they didnt know whether they were victims or not they just saw kids and said "oh its on jeffreys hard dive we need to redact it" or they inserted it on purpose. it makes no sense. maybe they think the paintings are of victims, but judging from how their redaction behavior is going, they didnt do what you would expect an intelligence agency to do. you would expect an intelligence agency to know who is and who isnt victims and what possible other content based on their character should (or shouldn't) be redacted.

the govt is having to tread this fine line of "do we just release borderline research/nudity to the US population?". how would a govt institution be viewed if they did such a thing? my belief (in terms of jeffrey epstein) would be favorable because its the transparency we all want. but its like they're trying to sell the image of being this transparent and honest institution while treating us all like children. i think its just unprecedented and no one really knows how to deal with something like this.

My assumption was that these were nudes paintings of kids

they are paintings of adult women. only one painting involved a nude child and as far as i know that one is still on the DOJs site.

EDIT: just double checked.

EFTA00000234.pdf
EFTA00000235.pdf