"more than a million times"Wow, that's a lot more than I expected.
Bobby. wrote Yesterday 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.