Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times."

Trump in Epstein Files "a Million Times"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Y9NnzkxamQ

So, we should start calling them the Trump Files?

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 1:37pm:

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times."

Paywalled and not covered on the MSM.    ::)

ProudKangaroo wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 1:52pm:

So, we should start calling them the Trump Files?

Absolutely.

His name appears more than Epstein's.

https://i.etsystatic.com/51374402/r/il/1c2292/7113092549/il_340x270.7113092549_hvhn.jpg

Trump never went to Epstein's pedo Island.

It's all salacious gossip from people like Greggy.   ::)

Bobby. wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 2:19pm:

Trump never went to Epstein's pedo Island. It's all salacious gossip from people like Greggy.   ::)

Epstein had more than one residence, Bobby.

7. Plaintiff was subject to acts of rape, sexual misconduct, criminal sexual acts,
sexual abuse, forcible touching, assault, battery, intentional and reckless infliction of emotional
distress, duress, false imprisonment, and threats of death and/or serious bodily injury by the
Defendants that took place at several parties during the summer months of 1994.

The parties were held by Defendant Epstein at a New York City residence that was being used by Defendant Epstein at 9 E. 71st St. in Manhattan. During this period, Plaintiff was a minor of age 13 and
was legally incapable under New York law of consenting to sexual intercourse and the other
sexual contacts detailed herein.

10. Defendant Trump initiated sexual contact with Plaintiff at four different parties.
On the fourth and final sexual encounter with Defendant Trump, Defendant Trump tied Plaintiff
to a bed, exposed himself to Plaintiff, and then proceeded to forcibly rape Plaintiff. During the
course of this savage sexual attack, Plaintiff loudly pleaded with Defendant Trump to stop but
with no effect. Defendant Trump responded to Plaintiff’s pleas by violently striking Plaintiff in
the face with his open hand and screaming that he would do whatever he wanted. Exhs. A and B.

Now now, Greggery, you need to pay attention. Listen to the "noble Scoot".

The big fella was working for the CIA. Agent Trump, you see, was just doing his job in a top secret opperation to catch Jeff in the act with his young fillies.

To do so, Donnie needed to spend ten years with the guy, run a joint "modelling agency" together, move next door to him in Palm Beach, and head down to the island every now and then to participate in his orgies.

It makes perfect sense he'd be all through the files, dear. The Don was about to crack the big one when he accidentally became prez and had to pull out. He had to secure the files at the end of his term, taking his boxes with him. He made sure to keep them in highly classified locations around Mar a Lago, as you do.

The Deep State blew that one, as you'd expect. To this day, Donnie's role in this operation was one of the biggest secrets in CIA history. Until Aquascoot blew the whistle, nobody was any the wiser.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 1:37pm:

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times."

So why didn't Sleepy Joe (aka Bazza O'Bama Mark III) release the docs?

Frank wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 5:44pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 1:37pm: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times." So why didn't Sleepy Joe (aka Bazza O'Bama Mark III) release the docs?

He's right, Greggery.

Also, why didn't Bazza release the 2002 Muslim gang rape files?

He could have had them sent over from Scotland Yard, shurely.

Frank wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 5:44pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 1:37pm: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times." So why didn't Sleepy Joe (aka Bazza O'Bama Mark III) release the docs?

How many times do you need to be told the answer to that diversionary question?

There was an ongoing court case involving Ghislaine Maxwell until 2022, and then ongoing appeals until 2025.

Releasing investigative files, such as witness statements or grand jury testimony, could have jeopardised her conviction and violated court seals intended to protect the trial's integrity.

And, during an appeal, it is standard practice for investigative files to remain sealed to prevent claims that the proceedings were tainted by external information.

A federal judge in New York kept the documents under seal, unsealing them in batches (notably, a large set in January 2024) only as legal challenges allowed.

While some documents were released in early 2024, the broader, more sensitive investigative files remained sealed until the legal proceedings concluded, with the Supreme Court ultimately declining to hear her appeal in October 2025.

To dumb it down for you: there was ongoing legal action involving Epstein's accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell while Biden was President.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 5:56pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:44pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 1:37pm: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times." So why didn't Sleepy Joe (aka Bazza O'Bama Mark III) release the docs? How many times do you need to be told the answer to that diversionary question? There was an ongoing court case involving Ghislaine Maxwell until 2022, and then ongoing appeals until 2025. Releasing investigative files, such as witness statements or grand jury testimony, could have jeopardised her conviction and violated court seals intended to protect the trial's integrity. And, during an appeal, it is standard practice for investigative files to remain sealed to prevent claims that the proceedings were tainted by external information. A federal judge in New York kept the documents under seal, unsealing them in batches (notably, a large set in January 2024) only as legal challenges allowed. While some documents were released in early 2024, the broader, more sensitive investigative files remained sealed until the legal proceedings concluded, with the Supreme Court ultimately declining to hear her appeal in October 2025.

:D :D :D


And you fapped to that a million times.

Frank wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 5:58pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:56pm: Frank wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:44pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 1:37pm: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times." So why didn't Sleepy Joe (aka Bazza O'Bama Mark III) release the docs? How many times do you need to be told the answer to that diversionary question? There was an ongoing court case involving Ghislaine Maxwell until 2022, and then ongoing appeals until 2025. Releasing investigative files, such as witness statements or grand jury testimony, could have jeopardised her conviction and violated court seals intended to protect the trial's integrity. And, during an appeal, it is standard practice for investigative files to remain sealed to prevent claims that the proceedings were tainted by external information. A federal judge in New York kept the documents under seal, unsealing them in batches (notably, a large set in January 2024) only as legal challenges allowed. While some documents were released in early 2024, the broader, more sensitive investigative files remained sealed until the legal proceedings concluded, with the Supreme Court ultimately declining to hear her appeal in October 2025. :D :D :D

I know legal proceedings and the surrounding processes are difficult for you to understand.

Maybe have an adult explain it to you.

A million times!

How many more times is that than we first thought, Mr President?

"1,200, 1,300 and 1,400, 1,500%".

"I don’t mean 50%. I mean 14 - 1,500%".

https://lavocedinewyork.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/trump.jpg

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 6:00pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:58pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:56pm: Frank wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:44pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 1:37pm: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times." So why didn't Sleepy Joe (aka Bazza O'Bama Mark III) release the docs? How many times do you need to be told the answer to that diversionary question? There was an ongoing court case involving Ghislaine Maxwell until 2022, and then ongoing appeals until 2025. Releasing investigative files, such as witness statements or grand jury testimony, could have jeopardised her conviction and violated court seals intended to protect the trial's integrity. And, during an appeal, it is standard practice for investigative files to remain sealed to prevent claims that the proceedings were tainted by external information. A federal judge in New York kept the documents under seal, unsealing them in batches (notably, a large set in January 2024) only as legal challenges allowed. While some documents were released in early 2024, the broader, more sensitive investigative files remained sealed until the legal proceedings concluded, with the Supreme Court ultimately declining to hear her appeal in October 2025. :D :D :D I know legal proceedings and the surrounding processes are difficult for you to understand. Maybe have an adult explain it to you.

Rule of law, innit.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 6:00pm:

Frank wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:58pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:56pm: Frank wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 5:44pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11th, 2026 at 1:37pm: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times." So why didn't Sleepy Joe (aka Bazza O'Bama Mark III) release the docs? How many times do you need to be told the answer to that diversionary question? There was an ongoing court case involving Ghislaine Maxwell until 2022, and then ongoing appeals until 2025. Releasing investigative files, such as witness statements or grand jury testimony, could have jeopardised her conviction and violated court seals intended to protect the trial's integrity. And, during an appeal, it is standard practice for investigative files to remain sealed to prevent claims that the proceedings were tainted by external information. A federal judge in New York kept the documents under seal, unsealing them in batches (notably, a large set in January 2024) only as legal challenges allowed. While some documents were released in early 2024, the broader, more sensitive investigative files remained sealed until the legal proceedings concluded, with the Supreme Court ultimately declining to hear her appeal in October 2025. :D :D :D I know legal proceedings and the surrounding processes are difficult for you to understand. Maybe have an adult explain it to you.

Your million wanks speak for themselves.

Repulsive.

"more than a million times"

Wow, that's a lot more than I expected.


Bobby. wrote on Feb 11^th, 2026 at 1:57pm:

Paywalled and not covered on the MSM.    ::)

Bobby, why is everything always paywalled for you? Every time you've said something is paywalled I (and I suspect nearly everyone else) can see it without a paywall?

Do you think someone is trying to tell you something?

Are you being watched by the government and the media?  :-/

Anyway - here you go:


Quote:

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) told Axios in an interview Tuesday that when he searched President Trump's name in the unredacted Epstein files the previous day, it came up "more than a million times." Why it matters: At least one of the files Raskin found appears to contradict what Trump has publicly claimed about his association with Jeffrey Epstein, according to the House Judiciary Committee ranking member.     That document is a 2009 email exchange between Epstein and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, in which Epstein recounted his lawyers' account of a phone call with Trump, as Raskin previously told reporters.     "Trump is paraphrased and quoted as saying, 'No, Jeffrey Epstein was not a member of Mar-a-Lago, but he was a guest at Mar-a-Lago, and no, we never asked him to leave,'" Raskin said in an interview at the Capitol. The other side: Trump has denied all wrongdoing in the Epstein matter, and he's maintained that he kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago for poaching spa workers.     The former Palm Beach chief of police testified to the FBI in 2019 that following Epstein's arrest in the early 2000s, Trump claimed he threw Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago, the Epstein files show.     Trump reportedly also told the then-police chief that "everyone has known he's been doing this" and that Maxwell is "evil and to focus on her." Zoom in: Asked for comment, the White House pointed to three posts on X from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche pushing back on Rep. Thomas Massie's (R-Ky.) claims about the unredacted files.     Blanche accused Massie of sensationalizing his findings, saying for example that while the name of Les Wexner was redacted in a portion of the files naming him an Epstein co-conspirator, he "already appears in the files thousands of times."     "DOJ is hiding nothing," he said in his posts. "Be honest, and stop grandstanding." Driving the news: Following allegations of improper redactions in the more than 3 million files it released on Epstein, the Justice Department has begun giving members of Congress access to the unredacted files.     Starting with Judiciary Committee members, lawmakers have access to the files on terminals at DOJ headquarters from 9am to 6pm ET, Monday through Friday.     Several lawmakers, including Raskin, Massie, and Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Becca Balint (D-Vt.), viewed the files on Monday. What they're saying: But it's about more than one email, Raskin stressed, exclaiming that the Mar-a-Lago exchange is "just one memo out of 3 million!"     "The idea that we could get through a meaningful fraction of them is just ridiculous," he said.     "I mean, there's tons of redacted stuff. ... And [Trump's] name, I think I put his name, and it appears more than a million times. So it's all over the place." Following publication of this story, Raskin clarified in a statement to Axios, "In the database, I typed in the words 'Trump,' 'Donald or Don' and it came up with more than a million results."     "I obviously didn't have the time to review each one, and I obviously cannot guarantee that every mention of a Donald is Donald Trump as opposed to some other Donald."     Raskin said the Mar-a-Lago exchange was "one of the first documents I came across."     He added that "the DOJ database review tool given to Members is confusing, unreliable, and clunky." The bottom line: "To me, this whole rollout of saying that members can come from nine to five to sit at those four computers, is just part of the coverup," Raskin asserted.     The 3 million documents that the administration has not publicly released "are the ones I'd like to see," he said.     "The administration says that these are duplicative. Well go ahead and release them then! If they're duplicative, what's the problem? We'll be the judge of that." Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional comments from Raskin for clarification.

You're welcome.  :)