Hunter Biden posted something today about his father’s cancer that should make everyone stop for a second as there was a piece of somewhat good news in what he wrote.

According to Hunter, they caught the bone issue early, and with radiation and hormone therapy, it is under control.

That does not mean Biden is cured. Hunter was clear about that too. His father will live with cancer for the rest of his life. But it does mean the treatment appears to be doing what doctors hoped it would do. It is controlling the disease and giving him more time with his family.

And honestly, that should be the story.

Not the conspiracy theories. Not the cheap shots. Not people using cancer as some sick political weapon.

We can debate Joe Biden’s presidency. We can debate his age, his decisions, his policies, and whether Democrats handled things the right way. All of that is fair game.

But cancer should not be.

Hunter’s post was not some polished political statement. It read like a son defending his father from people who have forgotten basic decency. You can dislike Biden. You can hate his politics. But mocking or attacking a man over cancer says a lot more about you than it does about him.

The hopeful part here is that Biden’s treatment has the cancer under control. The heartbreaking part is that he still has to live with it for the rest of his life.

Both things can be true.

Joe Biden has already lost a son to cancer. His family knows exactly how cruel this disease can be. So maybe, just maybe, this is one place where people can put the politics down for five seconds and act like human beings.

Because if cancer is now fair game in our politics, then the disease eating away at this country is not just political.

It is moral.

Share

Subscribe now

Not because we threatened anyone.
Not because we called for violence.
Not because we encouraged harm.

Because Trump’s allies are trying to rewrite the meaning of “86” — a word that has meant remove, throw out, eject, cancel, or get rid of for nearly a century — and turn it into something criminal.

That is why we launched Project8647.info.

http://Project8647.info is simple: it documents what “86” actually means, exposes the bad-faith attempt to redefine lawful political speech as a threat, and makes clear that 8647 means removing the 47th president through lawful, democratic, constitutional means.

Voting him out.
Impeachment.
Resignation.
Peaceful protest.
Public pressure.
The Constitution.

Not violence.
Not threats.
Not harassment.

We condemn political violence completely. But we also refuse to let the government criminalize ordinary political dissent by pretending a dictionary definition suddenly means assassination.

This is bigger than one phrase. It is about whether Americans are still allowed to criticize a president without federal agents showing up at their doors.

Please visit Project8647.info, sign the pledge, and share the site.

Help us make one thing clear:

You can’t prosecute a dictionary.

Share

Subscribe now

BREAKING UPDATE: The Pentagon has just confirmed that there have been at least 140 US Service members wounded.

Is the Pentagon Hiding the True Cost of the War With Iran?

A troubling new report suggests the American public may not be getting the full picture of what is happening in the war with Iran.

According to two sources familiar with the matter who spoke to Reuters, as many as 150 U.S. troops may have been wounded so far in the conflict. The number is far higher than previously disclosed publicly by the Pentagon.

If accurate, this would represent a dramatic shift in what Americans understand about the human cost of the war.

Share

Until now, the public narrative has focused largely on fatalities and a small number of “seriously wounded” service members. Just days ago, U.S. Central Command had publicly acknowledged seven U.S. troops killed and eight seriously wounded, though officials also admitted that those numbers did not include troops suffering less severe injuries such as concussions or shrapnel wounds.

Now we are hearing that the real number of wounded could be nearly twenty times higher.

And the Pentagon isn’t commenting.

A War Escalating Quickly

The war with Iran has escalated rapidly over the past several days. U.S. and Israeli forces have carried out thousands of strikes on Iranian military targets, while Iran has responded with missile and drone attacks against U.S. facilities and allies across the region.

At least 8 American service members have already been killed in the fighting, including troops killed in a drone strike on a U.S. facility in Kuwait earlier in the conflict.

Meanwhile, global oil markets, shipping lanes, and regional stability have all been shaken as the war expands.

But while the strategic and geopolitical consequences dominate headlines, the human cost to American troops may be significantly higher than the public has been led to believe.

Subscribe now

Why the Wounded Number Matters

War casualties are typically reported in several categories:

• Killed in action

• Seriously wounded

• Other wounded or injured

Often the last category, concussions, blast injuries, burns, or shrapnel wounds—receives less attention, even though it can involve large numbers of troops and long-term health consequences.

We saw this phenomenon before.

In 2020, after Iran fired ballistic missiles at the Al Asad airbase in Iraq following the U.S. strike that killed Iranian general Qasem Soleimani, the initial reports suggested minimal injuries. Weeks later, it became clear that over 100 U.S. troops had suffered traumatic brain injuries from the blast waves.

The lesson was simple: the first casualty reports are often incomplete.

Subscribe now

Share

In the first major Cabinet shakeup of Donald Trump’s second presidency, Kristi Noem has been removed as Secretary of Homeland Security.

The move marks the first high-profile personnel change in Trump’s administration since he returned to the White House earlier this year. Noem, who previously served as governor of South Dakota, had been leading the Department of Homeland Security since January 2025.

According to multiple reports, the decision comes after mounting criticism of Noem’s leadership at DHS. Lawmakers from both parties had begun questioning a number of agency decisions and spending choices, including a controversial $220 million advertising campaign aimed at encouraging migrants already in the United States to voluntarily self-deport. The campaign drew sharp backlash in Congress and added to growing scrutiny over the department’s priorities.

Share

Trump has announced that Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma will be his choice to replace Noem as Secretary of Homeland Security, pending Senate confirmation.

Mullin is one of the more unconventional picks to run a federal department. Before entering politics, he built a reputation as a businessman and even competed as a professional mixed martial arts (MMA) fighter. In Washington, he’s become known for his aggressive political style—at one point even nearly getting into a physical confrontation during a Senate committee hearing in 2023.

If confirmed, Mullin would take over one of the most politically charged roles in the federal government, overseeing immigration enforcement, border security, disaster response, and domestic counterterrorism.

For Trump, the move appears aimed at resetting the narrative around DHS at a time when immigration and border policy remain central to his administration’s agenda. Whether Mullin’s combative background translates into effective leadership of the sprawling department remains to be seen.

But one thing is clear: the first Cabinet shakeup of Trump’s second term signals that the administration is willing to make high-level changes quickly as political pressures mount.

Share

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

In the last 12 hours, the Middle East has moved dangerously closer to a broader regional war.

Four American service members are now dead. Major oil and gas infrastructure has been struck. Fighter jets have been shot down. Commercial shipping in one of the world’s most critical waterways has come under attack.

This is no longer theoretical escalation.

Here are the 6 developments, and what we know so far.

1) Four U.S. Service Members Confirmed Dead

U.S. Central Command confirmed that a fourth American service member has died following Iranian-linked attacks in the region.

According to reporting from CBS News and other outlets, the fourth fatality came after a service member who was critically wounded in earlier strikes succumbed to injuries.

Why this matters:

• Once U.S. troop deaths mount, domestic political pressure intensifies
• Calls for retaliation increase rapidly
• Diplomatic space narrows

History shows that American casualties change the political calculus quickly

Share

2) Saudi Arabia’s Largest Oil Refinery Shut Down After Strike

Reuters reports that Saudi Aramco shut down the Ras Tanura refinery and export terminal following a strike and heightened threat conditions.

Ras Tanura processes roughly 550,000 barrels per day and is a major crude export node.

This is not just a refinery, it is a global supply artery.

When infrastructure of this scale pauses:

• Oil futures spike
• Traders price in prolonged disruption
• U.S. gasoline prices can rise within days

Energy markets respond instantly to instability in Saudi capacity.

3) Qatar Halts LNG Production After Facility Hit

Reuters and regional outlets report that Qatar halted liquefied natural gas production following strikes impacting its energy infrastructure, including areas near Ras Laffan.

Qatar is one of the world’s largest LNG exporters.

After Europe pivoted away from Russian gas, Qatar became a critical supplier.

If LNG exports pause:

• European and Asian energy markets tighten
• Electricity generation costs rise
• Industrial supply chains feel secondary shocks

This is not just a regional story. It’s a global energy story.

Subscribe now

4) Three U.S. Fighter Jets Shot Down in Friendly-Fire Incident

Reuters and AP report that three U.S. F-15E fighter jets were mistakenly shot down by Kuwaiti air defenses amid Iranian drone and missile activity.

All six crew members ejected and survived.

This incident underscores how chaotic and high-pressure the regional air-defense environment has become.

When airspace becomes saturated with drones and interceptors:

• Mistakes increase
• Tensions spike
• Escalation risks multiply

Even accidental incidents can carry strategic consequences.

5) Multiple Tankers Damaged Near Gulf Shipping Lanes

Reuters reports that multiple oil tankers were damaged as the conflict spilled into commercial shipping lanes near the Strait of Hormuz and Gulf of Oman.

At least one seafarer has been reported killed in a drone-boat attack in the region.

The Strait of Hormuz carries roughly 20% of the world’s petroleum supply.

If commercial shipping becomes unsafe:

• Insurance premiums surge
• Tanker traffic slows or reroutes
• Oil prices spike sharply

Targeting shipping transforms a regional conflict into an economic shockwave.

6) Saudi Frustration With U.S. Priorities Emerging

Reports circulating online attribute comments to a Saudi official suggesting the U.S. shifted air defense priorities toward Israel during the attacks.

While the exact quote remains unconfirmed in major wire reporting, what is clear is this:

Several Gulf states that were not directly initiating conflict have still been struck.

Alliance tensions rise quickly when infrastructure burns.

Saudi-U.S. cooperation is foundational to energy stability and regional balance. If trust erodes, geopolitical alignment shifts.

Subscribe now

Share

A Dangerous New Phase With Massive Oil Market Implications

In a major and deeply concerning escalation, an oil tanker, the Skylight, was reportedly struck just five nautical miles north of Khasab Port in Oman, near the Strait of Hormuz. Four sailors were injured. The attack allegedly came after the vessel ignored warnings not to enter the Strait.

This marks a shift from military targets to commercial energy infrastructure, and that changes everything.

Share

The Strait of Hormuz is not just another shipping lane. Roughly 20% of the world’s oil supply passes through this narrow chokepoint. If commercial vessels are now being targeted, or even credibly threatened, the oil market will not wait for confirmation. It will react instantly.

Even the perception that shipping through Hormuz is unsafe can:

• Send oil futures sharply higher

• Trigger panic buying and stockpiling

• Spike war-risk insurance premiums for tankers

• Disrupt LNG shipments to Europe and Asia

• Increase transportation and fuel costs globally

This is a textbook supply-shock scenario.

If insurers refuse to cover ships or major carriers reroute vessels, global supply tightens overnight. Oil doesn’t need to be physically removed from the market for prices to surge, the threat alone can push crude toward triple digits.

The broader danger?

Inflation.

Energy prices ripple through everything: food, shipping, manufacturing, airfare, trucking. If this escalates further and Hormuz becomes effectively restricted, we could see renewed global inflation pressures at a time when central banks are already on edge.

This is why attacks on commercial shipping are so dangerous. They expand conflict from battlefield strategy to global economic warfare.

The oil market is now watching one thing: whether this was an isolated incident, or the beginning of a broader campaign targeting energy flows.

If it’s the latter, the economic consequences could move faster than the military ones.

And markets will open Monday ready to react.

Subscribe now

Share

What happened

• In the early hours of Feb. 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched coordinated military strikes on Iran, marking the start of what U.S. officials are calling a sustained offensive against the Iranian regime’s military capabilities and nuclear program. The U.S. has named the operation “Operation Epic Fury.”

• The strikes reportedly hit multiple targets in Tehran and other Iranian cities as well as Iranian defense and missile infrastructure. Both Tehran’s air defenses and communications systems were disrupted by the attacks.

🎯 Goals stated by U.S. and Israel

• President Donald Trump said the aim was to eliminate what the U.S. views as an imminent threat from Iran’s missiles and nuclear ambitions and to create conditions for a political change in Iran.

• Israeli leaders described their part of the offensive as targeting what they call an existential threat from the Iranian regime and said strikes would continue “as long as needed.”

  Share

🇮🇷 Iran’s response

• Iran immediately retaliated, launching missiles and drones toward Israel and U.S. military bases across the region.

• Gulf Arab states including the UAE and Qatar closed their airspace and reported intercepting Iranian missiles. One person was reported killed in Abu Dhabi from missile debris.

Missile attack on U.S. military base in Bahrain

• Iran launched a large barrage of missiles across the Gulf in retaliation for a major U.S.-Israel military strike on Iranian territory earlier today.

• Bahrain confirmed that at least one Iranian missile hit part of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet facilities in Manama, the host nation for U.S. Central Command operations in the region. Videos show explosions and smoke near U.S. bases.

• Gulf neighbors, including the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait and Jordan, reported intercepting missiles or sounding alerts as sirens and defense operations were activated.

• British authorities warned their nationals in Bahrain and other Gulf states to shelter indoors amid the attacks.

• Reports indicate at least one civilian death in Abu Dhabi from falling shrapnel from Iranian missiles.

In context: these strikes are part of an escalating broader conflict after the U.S. and Israel launched coordinated strikes on Iranian sites earlier today, described by U.S. officials as an effort to curb Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities.

Subscribe now

Share

Lyrics:
You have the right to remain silent
or not…

God above a mother's love
A guiding hand to pick you up
To crush her like a coffee cup
Why?
Crossing guard or yellow bus
Our children teach us who to trust
The worst can’t kill what’s best in us
But they can try
America will rise
Against the people of the lie

I love you more
Than hate loves war
I love you more
Than hate loves war
(War, war)

We love you more than hate loves war

Renee Good born to die free
American mother of three
Seventh day January
A bullet for each child, you see
The color of her eye
930 Minneapolis
To desecrate domestic bliss
Three bullets blast, three babies kissed
Renee the domestic terrorist???
What you can’t kill can't die
America will rise
Against the people of the lie
I love you more
Than hate loves war
I love you more
Than hate loves war
(War, war)

We love you more than hate loves war

I am not mad at you, Lord
You’re the reason I was there
Could you stop a heart from breaking
By having it not care?
Could you stop a bullet in midair?

She says…
The power of the people is so much stronger than the people in power
The power of the people is so much stronger than the people in power
The power of the people is so much stronger than the people in power

In the streets with children playing
In the churches where they’re praying
School teachers are explaining
America, America
The power of the people!

We love you more (we say, we say) than hate loves war
I love you more (I say, I say) than hate loves war

Subscribe now

Share

Subscribe now

Prince Andrew Arrested Amid New Scrutiny Over Epstein Allegations

The long shadow of Jeffrey Epstein continues to stretch across some of the most powerful institutions in the world.

Now, it appears to have reached back into the British royal family once again.

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, more widely known as Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, has reportedly been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. At the same time, a U.K. police force confirmed it is “assessing” reports that Andrew may have sent trade-related reports or confidential material to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

If true, this would represent a significant escalation beyond the allegations that have surrounded Andrew for years.

But before jumping to conclusions, let’s break down what we know, and what we don’t.

What Is Being Investigated?

Authorities have stated that they are assessing reports suggesting Andrew may have shared trade-related information with Epstein during the period of their association.

The key phrase here is “assessing reports.”

That does not mean charges have been filed. It does not mean wrongdoing has been proven. It means law enforcement is reviewing the available evidence to determine whether further action is warranted.

Still, the fact that such an assessment is underway is significant given Andrew’s already controversial ties to Epstein.

The Epstein Relationship

Prince Andrew has long acknowledged his association with Jeffrey Epstein but has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

His 2019 BBC interview, intended to clear his name, instead deepened public skepticism. The interview led to significant backlash and ultimately to Andrew stepping back from public royal duties.

He later reached a civil settlement in a lawsuit brought by Virginia Giuffre, who accused him of sexual abuse. Andrew denied the allegations and did not admit liability as part of that settlement.

Since then, he has remained largely removed from public-facing royal responsibilities.

@krassensteinPrince Andrew Arrested after this Email was released! #princeandrew #epstein #epsteinfiles #england #women

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Subscribe now

Why “Misconduct in Public Office” Matters

In the United Kingdom, misconduct in public office is a serious criminal offense. It typically applies when:

• A public official willfully neglects their duties or abuses their position.

• The misconduct is serious enough to warrant criminal punishment.

• There is evidence of intentional wrongdoing.

If the allegation involves sharing sensitive trade information, the legal and national security implications could be substantial.

But again, an arrest or assessment is not a conviction. Investigations often conclude without charges.

The Royal Family’s Ongoing Vulnerability

The British monarchy has spent years attempting to stabilize its public image.

King Charles III has worked to modernize and streamline the institution. But Andrew’s association with Epstein has repeatedly reopened wounds, especially as more Epstein-related documents and disclosures emerge globally.

If these new allegations gain traction, they could reignite debates about transparency, accountability, and whether royal privilege has shielded powerful individuals from deeper scrutiny.

The Bigger Picture

The Epstein saga continues to reveal something deeply unsettling:

Power protects power, until it doesn’t.

Whether in politics, finance, media, or monarchy, the Epstein network has forced uncomfortable questions about who knew what, and when.

Prince Andrew has consistently denied any criminal conduct.

The U.K. police are assessing reports.

The public deserves clarity.

But clarity requires patience, evidence, and due process — not assumptions.

Final Thought

If the investigation moves forward, it will test not just Prince Andrew, but the British system itself.

Is the law applied equally to royalty and commoners alike?

Or does influence still carry weight behind closed doors?

As always, the facts will matter more than the headlines.

And we’ll be watching closely.

Share

According to this lawmaker, there were approximately 1.5 million redactions involving variations of Donald Trump’s name, including “Donald Trump,” “Trump,” “Don Trump,” “Donald,” and “Don.”

Now, to be clear: references to “Donald” or “Don” could include other individuals with those names. Those terms alone do not automatically mean Donald Trump. But the committee member’s claim is that the redactions overwhelmingly involved variations connected to Trump.

@krassensteinEXCLUSIVE: 1.5 million redactions related to Trump, Donald, Don, and Donald Trump in the Epstein files. #epstein #epsteinfiles #jeffreyepstein #trump #donaldtrump

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

I have not independently verified the number. This is what was relayed to me by a sitting member who reviewed the materials directly.

Still, if that estimate is even close to accurate, it raises major transparency questions.

Redactions are common in federal document releases. Victims are protected. Personal information is removed. Ongoing investigations are shielded.

But redacting references tied to a sitting president at this scale would not be routine, and definitely seems to be in violation of the Epstein transparency act.

Americans were promised transparency regarding the Epstein files.

If a lawmaker’s estimate is correct, what we got instead was an extraordinary amount of concealment.

And the American people deserve a clear explanation as to why.

Share

Subscribe now

Share

If you thought today’s congressional hearing with Attorney General Pam Bondi was about transparency and accountability, think again.

What unfolded was not testimony. It was deflection, hostility, and political theater at the expense of Epstein’s victims and the American people.

Let’s break down what actually happened.

Share

Jasmine Crockett Says What Others Won’t

Rep. Jasmine Crockett looked Bondi directly in the eye and said:

“I’m not saying the president is a pedophile, but there is a lot of evidence in these files that suggest that he is very close friends with a lot of men who are pedophiles.”

Bondi’s response?

Just silence.

From Epstein to… Border Patrol?

When Rep. Becca Balint pressed Bondi, instead of answering, Bondi attacked her for representing a “tiny state.”

Then, in the middle of questions about the Epstein files, Bondi pivoted to talking about Border Patrol agent Chris Maland, who was tragically killed a year ago during a traffic stop.

As Democrats asked about victims and accountability, Bondi started talking about the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

You read that correctly.

The Dow.

Jared Moskowitz Brings the Receipts

Then came Rep. Jared Moskowitz.

And it was brutal.

He said:

“Trump’s name appears more times in the Epstein Files than God’s name appears in the book about God. Trump’s name also appears more times in the Epstein Files than Harry Potter’s name appears in the 7 books about Harry Potter.”

It was biting, but the underlying point was serious: Donald Trump’s documented proximity to Jeffrey Epstein is not a conspiracy theory. It’s in the files.

Moskowitz then laid out connections between Howard Lutnick and Epstein, pressing Bondi for answers.

Bondi had none.

Deborah Ross Raises Ghislaine Maxwell

Rep. Deborah Ross asked about Ghislaine Maxwell being transferred to what critics have called the “country club of prisons” by the Bureau of Prisons, which operates under Bondi’s Department of Justice.

Instead of answering, Bondi tried to pivot to an unrelated line of questioning.

Again: deflection.

Jayapal Asks the Question That Matters

Rep. Pramila Jayapal cut to the heart of it:

“Will you turn to the survivors now and apologize for what your DOJ has put them through with the absolutely unacceptable release of the Epstein Files and their private information?”

Bondi’s response?

She refused to apologize.
She attacked Merrick Garland.
Then said:

“I’m not going to get in the gutter.”

Here’s the reality:

Asking for accountability for victims of sex trafficking is not “the gutter.”

Refusing to answer legitimate oversight questions is.

This Was an Embarrassment

If you watched this hearing and felt satisfied.

Her job is not to spar with lawmakers.
It’s not to pivot to stock market numbers.
It’s not to relitigate partisan grievances.

Her job is to answer.

Today, she didn’t.

And the American people deserve better.

Subscribe now

Share

Subscribe now

Congressman Ro Khanna just read aloud the names of six powerful men that had previously been redacted from the Epstein Files, names the public was never supposed to hear.

These weren’t random redactions. These weren’t minor clerical omissions. These were deliberate, intentional black bars placed over identities that someone, somewhere, decided Americans did not deserve to see.

Here are the names that were read into the Congressional Record, please share everywhere:

• Salvatore Nuara

• Zurab Mikeladze

• Leonic Leonov

• Nicola Caputo

• Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem

• Leslie Wexner

The obvious question is also the most important one:

Why were these men protected?

Share

Subscribe now

For years, Donald Trump has insisted that he cut ties with Jeffrey Epstein, claiming he kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago long before Epstein’s crimes became public in 2009. The implication has always been clear: whatever Epstein became, Trump wanted no part of it.

But newly surfaced material from the Epstein files complicates that narrative in a way that’s hard to ignore.

A Documented Claim, Not a Rumor

In Epstein File EFTA02666126 (seen above), Epstein told the executor of his estate, Boris Nikolic, that he planned to spend time with “all the Trump boys” for “fun” in Palm Beach on January 4, 2017.

Share

This wasn’t a casual comment to a journalist or a boast to an acquaintance. It was a private communication to the man Epstein trusted with his estate. That distinction matters.

The Timing Is the Problem

A photograph (seen above as well) places Trump at Mar-a-Lago on January 1, 2017, just days before Epstein referenced the planned meetup. Trump would be sworn in as President of the United States only 16 days later, on January 20.

So if Trump had truly severed ties with Epstein years earlier, why was Epstein describing social plans involving Trump, his family and/or inner circle during that exact window?

That’s not all Though!

In 2016 it appears as though Jeffrey Epstein and Deepak Chopra were going to dinner with Donald Trump, just 2 months before the 2016 election, but something came up that led to it being cancelled. (See email below).

Subscribe now

Why This Matters

If Trump’s version were airtight, Epstein would have had every reason to know he was unwelcome, especially that close to an inauguration. Instead, Epstein spoke as if access to Trump’s orbit was still very much alive.

That doesn’t automatically mean Trump himself met with Epstein. But it directly undermines the long-standing claim that Epstein was fully and permanently cut off from Trump’s world.

The dates align.
The location aligns.
And the statement comes from Epstein to his own executor, not from speculation or hearsay.

For a story that was supposedly settled years ago, the timeline is starting to look very unsettled.

Share

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

In the latest tranche of Epstein-related material, a newly surfaced video has sparked serious questions, not because of what’s been said about it, but because of what appears to be visible.

The footage shows a man who was not redacted, traveling aboard what appears to be Jeffrey Epstein’s private aircraft, in the company of several young women. Well, we have been able to identify the man as Nathi Mthethwa, who served as South Africa’s Ambassador to France in 2024-2025, shortly before his death.

That’s where the story takes a darker turn.

In September 2025, Mthethwa died in Paris after falling from a 22nd-floor window. Authorities ruled the death a suicide.

But that conclusion has never fully put the questions to rest.

According to people familiar with the aftermath, members of his own family have privately expressed doubts about whether he took his own life. Those doubts are sure to only intensified in light of newly uncovered Epstein-related material in which Mthethwa appears unredacted.

Share

Subscribe now

Subscribe now

For the second time in just three days, the U.S. Department of Justice has removed major Jeffrey Epstein-related files from its own website.

The files weren’t minor. And they weren’t obscure.

They were explosive, with claims that Trump measured the tighness of little girls’ private parts. We saved it all before they were deleted. See yellow except below.

Both documents contained graphic allegations involving Donald Trump, tied to so-called “Calendar Girls” parties at Mar-a-Lago, events that were not invented out of thin air, but partially corroborated years ago by a 2016 New York Times investigation.

Now, those files are gone.

What Was Deleted

The two missing DOJ-hosted files are:

• https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01660679.pdf

• https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA01660651.pdf

Both links now return missing-file errors, despite having been publicly accessible.

These documents included first-person allegations describing abuse involving underage girls, with Trump named directly in connection to Epstein-organized events.

The highlighted passages, now deleted, referenced “Calendar Girls” parties at Mar-a-Lago, alleging that young girls were brought in by Epstein and that Trump played a role in what occurred there.

Why the “Calendar Girls” Detail Matters

Here’s the part that makes the deletions impossible to brush off.

In 2016, The New York Times published a report detailing how Donald Trump hosted a “calendar girl” competition at Mar-a-Lago in 1992, organized by George Houraney at Trump’s request.

According to the Times, Houraney recalled that when the contestants arrived, the only guests present were Trump and Jeffrey Epstein.

That detail matters because the deleted DOJ files independently referenced “Calendar Girls” parties at Mar-a-Lago, creating a troubling overlap between documented historical reporting and allegations later preserved in federal records.

The DOJ didn’t just delete anonymous claims. It deleted material that intersected with previously reported facts.

Deletion Is Not Transparency

To be clear, the allegations in these files have not been adjudicated in court. But that’s precisely why their removal is so alarming.

Deleting records is not the same as disproving them.

When the government quietly removes files that name a former and possibly future president, especially files tied to one of the most notorious sex-trafficking cases in modern history, it raises a simple question:

What exactly is being protected here?

The DOJ has offered no public explanation for why these files were removed, why it happened twice in three days, or whether they will be restored.

Until then, the silence speaks loudly.

And once again, the Epstein case leaves us with fewer answers, and fewer records, than we had before.

Subscribe now

Share

Subscribe now

In one of the most controversial episodes of federal law-enforcement action in recent memory, two federal immigration agents have now been publicly identified as the officers who fatally shot Minneapolis protester Alex Pretti.

Government records show the agents were part of Operation Metro Surge — a federal immigration enforcement initiative deployed in Minneapolis, when the deadly encounter unfolded.

• Jesus Ochoa, a 43-year-old agent with the U.S. Border Patrol.

• Raymundo Gutierrez, a 35-year-old officer with Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

According to published reports, Ochoa is accused of shooting Pretti in the back, while Gutierrez fired multiple shots during the encounter.

Share

What Happened

The killing of Pretti, an ICU nurse who had been taking part in or observing protests, has ignited widespread demonstrations and national scrutiny.

Public outrage has been fueled not only by video of the incident and protests in Minneapolis and other cities, but by comparisons to another recent fatal shooting in the city of Renée Good, also killed by federal forces only days before.

Federal officials initially declined to release the agents’ names or many details, but investigative reporting and public records have since put their identities into the spotlight.

Calls for Transparency

Lawmakers from both major parties are calling for a transparent, independent investigation into Pretti’s death, including a review of federal use of force, body-camera footage, and enforcement practices in Minneapolis.

The case continues to develop as protests escalate and legal, civic, and political pressure mounts on federal authorities.

Subscribe now

Share

This is where things get really interesting though. Three brothers, Oren, Alon and Tal Alexander (two of which are twins) are literally on trial right now in Florida for sex trafficking, and one of the key witnesses in their case was 16 at the time she was allegedly sexually assaulted by them.

What's even more interesting, is that there is literally a photo of Oren Alexander in the Epstein files, standing with two women whose faces have been redacted.

So why would this victim tell such an elaborate story that now, years later seems true (given the trial) but make up the fact that Clinton and Trump were involved?

Share

The Trump DOJ just released the Don Lemon Indictment from under Seal. This sounds like a bunch of Horse shit to me.