Dems Release Redacted Photo of Trump from Epstein Files; Unredacted Version Clears Him
“Vile, disturbing new photos of Donald Trump that raise even more question[s] about knowledge of abuses at Epstein’s estate.”
As Yogi Berra would say, it’s déjà vu all over again.
Last month, after reviewing more than 23,000 pages of files from the estate of late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released three documents. Two were emails in which they inexplicably chose to redact the name of Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre — even though her name had not been redacted in the original estate records.
Why did they do it? In a sworn deposition, Giuffre stated she had never seen Donald Trump engage in any wrongful or illegal behavior. Leaving her name unredacted would have undercut their narrative and exonerated Trump.
3/ So what did Democrats do?
They leaked 3 cherry-picked emails out of 23,000 pages—then made their own redactions to hide exonerating facts.
One name they blacked out? Virginia Giuffre.
Why? Because she publicly said she NEVER saw Trump do anything wrong. pic.twitter.com/8L0X9iwPDw
— Oversight Committee (@GOPoversight) November 17, 2025
The Democrats wound up with egg on their face when their ruse was exposed. But undeterred, they tried the same tactic again on Friday. This time, however, they redacted faces.
In the social media post below, Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) attached one of the photos released by House Oversight Democrats on Friday — a 1998 image of Trump posing with five young women at his Mar-a-Lago residence. The women’s faces were blacked out, creating the impression that they were underage.
Ansari disingenuously wrote, “Vile, disturbing new photos of Donald Trump that raise even more questions about knowledge of abuses at Epstein’s estate. @OversightDems are demanding the DOJ comply with our subpoena and release the full Epstein files. Stop protecting pedophiles. Survivors deserve justice now.”
But the Democrats were foiled again when The New York Post published the original version of the photo, which clearly indicates that none of the women were minors.
You should sincerely be ashamed of yourself pic.twitter.com/Nyyka5tYFR
— The Facts Dude 🤙🏽 (@Thefactsdude) December 13, 2025
The Telegraph provided some important context to the story. The women were models for the suntan lotion company Hawaiian Tropic, who were participating in an event held at Mar-a-Lago.
One of the women who appeared in the photo told the British media outlet, “I don’t remember much of that. I was 22 years old and remember him being very nice. He was very gentlemanly, that’s the word to describe him.”
Gentlemanly. Now, where have we heard that before?
The Post published another set of photos, one redacted and the other not. Trump is shown aboard a private jet, his tie loosened. He is “sitting next to a blonde woman who does not resemble his wife, first lady Melania Trump, or his previous wife, Marla Maples.”
The unredacted photo confirms this woman was not a minor.
Questioned about the latest photo dump by a reporter at the White House on Friday, Trump replied, “Well, I haven’t seen it, but I mean, everybody knew this man.
“He was all over Palm Beach. He has photos with everybody. I mean, almost there are hundreds and hundreds of people that have photos with him,” Trump said. “So that’s no big deal. I know nothing about it.”
From the Post:
The legal team for Epstein’s estate told The Post that faces were redacted based on their request.
…
Early Friday, the committee received 95,000 images from Epstein’s estate, but only released 19, showing celebrities, royalty, political heavyweights and dark glimpses of Epstein’s twisted kinks.
…
About 70 more images were released Friday night, showing a disturbing photo of a naked Epstein lounging in a bubble bath.
[This photo can be viewed on the Post’s website.]
People Magazine published all of the photos released by the House Democrats. None of them are compromising. Nor does Epstein appear in all of the images.
In one photograph, Bill Gates and then-Prince Andrew are seen chatting at a social gathering during the Malaria Summit at the 2018 Commonwealth Business Forum in London, England.
According to People, “in the original photo, which appears in the Getty Images archive, Gates is shown speaking with then-Princes Andrew and Charles.”
In the photo released by the Democrats, however, Charles has been cropped out. Asked why Charles was removed from the image, a spokesperson for Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, “told People that the photo arrived with Charles cropped out when Congress received the files from the Epstein estate.”
Other photos show Epstein in business settings with Steve Bannon, Woody Allen, Richard Branson, Alan Dershowitz, and businessman Dean Kamen. Larry Summers is pictured seated on a private jet, presumably Epstein’s, speaking with Allen and an unidentified woman.
During an appearance on the CNN program The Arena with Kasie Hunt on Friday, Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA) confirmed that some of the photos show “people engaged in sexual acts.”
“The last time when there was a big production [of photos], what we tried to do was release all the files eventually,” he said. “We’re trying to be selective about what we release now. And so in this case, we’re not really quite sure yet who is who. Certainly, there is a lot of people involved in some of these acts.”
No doubt committee staffers are furiously sifting through the 95,000 images obtained on Friday. So far, however, much to the Democrats’ chagrin, it looks like Trump has nothing to worry about.
But they remain ever hopeful.
Elizabeth writes commentary for Legal Insurrection and The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
How low can they go?
Dems have no respect for their constituents, what so ever.
Theyre going to have to really dig to outdo this ruse, but I have faith in them to at least try.
Hey Shiff! Still waiting for the pee tapes you KNEW existed.
Liars. All of them.
reply to RITaxpayer”
“How low can they go?”
I believe (it’s been several years since I read it in its entirety) that Dante discusses a particular ring where the souls of such individuals find themselves for eternity.
Well, Duh. The D’s know their constituents can’t read charts, for instance. Most D voters are purely emotional thinkers.
The tally, two more poos for Democrats, two more gold stars for Trump
Leftists: Let’s concoct a Russia collusion scandal to destroy Trump.
Leftists: Let’s wage constant lawfare against his businesses to destroy Trump.
Leftists: Let’s attempt to assass/inate Trump to destroy Trump – twice.
Also leftists: We can’t use all this evidence of Trump doing island prevert pedo trafficking parties in the Epstien files which we’ve been sitting on all these years to destroy Trump!
Good grief.
Beauty pageant owner is photographed with beautiful women…
Only progressives would get the vapors about such a thing.
The rest of us are green with envy.
Every red blooded American boy wants to be around beautiful women. It’s as though it’s natural and genetic.
Weird, huh?
D’s & their willing media accomplices: Crop out the facts until they get the narrative they want. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.
Cropping out inconvenient personages from photos? These pukes truly are disciples of Uncle Joe Stalin.
Removing context and exculpatory evidence is how the filthy Dems operate. And they do it repeatedly.
They have nothing else. I can’t think of a single positive thing the Dems have done since PRESIDENT Trump was inaugurated, elected, the four years of the Biden autopen regime, and the prior Trump administration.
But I can sure come up with multiple things they have done against America and PRESIDENT Trump….
Yeah, I bet they are. (Wink, wink)
Wonder just how many of these 95,000 images are ending up on committee member’s personal USB drives as they “sift through the images” that have been released.
“No doubt committee staffers are furiously sifting through the 95,000 images obtained on Friday.”
I am sure that “furiously sifting” involves Rosie Palmer and her four sisters.
Remember staffers, “furiously sifting” causes you to grow hair on your palms. Ask Schiff-for-brains.
I heard Jeffrey Toobin is hard at work.
You mean “Lubin’ Toobin?”
The neo-communist/Islamofascist Dhimmi-crats are vile, mendacious and despicable — pure evil. Servants/disciples of Satan.
This should be obvious, by now, to any person possessing a scintilla of moral probity, rationality and common sense.
These reprobates represent the greatest present threat to American prosperity, freedom and civil order.
Congress remains a wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Mothers don’t let your children grow up to be congress critters.
May property tax went up $600 this year and my electric bill went up another 2400. Being on a fixed income, this is a pure lose of funds to incompetency by both Democrats and RINO republicans (hat tip to Indiana).
Millions are being stolen by illegals from our tax base locally including schools, services and goods. They say snap increases our grocery bill by 10%. That is easily a $50 hidden tax. Lets me laser focused on this and not let them distract. When they say Epstein, I say stop screwing with my money and purposely distracting that you are screwing me.
This is why I didn’t even bother to react when they started the photo thing. I already knew he was surrounded by ADULT women and it was normal.
What does an event held at Mar a Lago have to do with Epstein? If “nothing,” why was that photo in the files? Is it actually in the files, or did someone get it elsewhere and decided it could be used to incriminate Trump?
Just spitballing here but I wonder of a lot of these are pictures and other documents seized from Epstein’s offices and residences during the investigation. Epstein appears to have been obsessed with Trump.
Good point. Was Epstein collecting photos of Trump that he thought he could possibly use against him (because if Epstein had actually incriminating photos of Trump we would have seen them a long time ago). Your theory that Epstein may have obsessed about Trump would explain how such a photo ended up in his possession (and subsequently ended up in the “files”). (Did Epstein begin to focus on Trump before or after he was unceremoniously thrown out of MAL by DJT? That episode gave him a reason to have a hair up his butt about Trump.)
I have the same question. What does Trump hosting young ladies from a beauty pageant have to do with Epstein? Why is that in the Epstein archives? It just shows how desperate the deep state was to try and besmirch Trump with anything they could
This kind of crap is why I’ve been pushing for release of the files without redaction other than disguising face in images of minors. Put it all out there. Do it and there’s no room for drip, drip, drip successively timed releases of concocted/implied crap because the void has been filled. So long as there’s info not made public there’s gonna be an attempt by d/prog, leftist ideologues to deflect from the heavy participation in hanging out with/around Epstein/Maxwell, asking them for financing, getting them to broker meetings or worse trips to Pedo Island by folks on their side and project it onto Trump.
House Oversight Democrats: sue every one of them….
Rep. Robert Garcia (CA), Ranking Member
Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC)
Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA)
Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (IL)
Rep. Ro Khanna (CA)
Rep. Kweisi Mfume (MD)
Rep. Shontel Brown (OH)
Rep. Melanie Stansbury (NM)
Rep. Maxwell Frost (FL)
Rep. Summer Lee (PA)
Rep. Greg Casar (TX)
Rep. Jasmine Crockett (TX)
Rep. Emily Randall (WA)
Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (VA)
Rep. Yassamin Ansari (AZ)
Rep. Wesley Bell (MO)
Rep. Lateefah Simon (CA)
Rep. Dave Min (CA)
Rep. James Walkinshaw (VA)
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (MA)
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (MI)
They can’t be sued for anything they say in the course of their legislative or oversight role. “For any speech or debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other place.”
Note that the Constitutional immunity is limited to speech or debate “in either house”. So comments made outside Congress are not privileged.
This is not true at all. They have the same immunity for any speech that is related to their congressional roles — and so do their staff members.
What you write is the case in the UK and other Commonwealth countries, but not in the USA.
It is a squirrel to distract from the real problems of Health care cost, utility and taxes.
Stunned. Dems release a picture blocking out faces that are in the public realm to try and make is seem salacious and then throw out innuendo. The WH immediately destroys them by pointing out all the of the women are known, the picture is in Florida and one of the women said Trump was a gentleman. They have nothing and it’s getting to the point of embarrassment but they have not shame so it is what it is.
Ah, but the caption deliberately implying the females are under-age should suffice to support a suit for libel. Maybe Trump will settle with them for enough to add another wing to his Presidential Library. At least, sue them for enough to bankrupt them.
If they didn’t have congressional immunity, Trump might have been able to sue them for false light, rather than for defamation. But their immunity is absolute.
The Democrats are just muddying the waters so the escapades of Bill Clinton are lost in the haze.