The redacted names were mostly witnesses interviewed.
hedged in the source
No event time was recorded for this claim — the text gave nothing to anchor it to, and a guessed date would be worse than none.
Standing
lens: Evidence-weighted Structural
No belief has been computed for this claim under Evidence-weighted yet.
What bears on it
Nothing supports or challenges this claim yet — untested, which is not the same as refuted.
Voices
- Thomas Massie independent hedged
Voices are counted, never weighed. How many people say a thing is structure worth seeing; it is not, by itself, a reason to believe it.
What the documents actually said
The verbatim text each extraction read before resolving it into this canonical claim. Quoted, never republished.
- The redacted names were mostly witnesses interviewed.
Presumably they were mostly witnesses interviewed.
Sources
Origin: extracted from Thomas Massie: “There are three dozen men's names redacted in this Epstein file. Presumably they were mostly witnesses interviewed. But Richard Kahn is one of the names. So is Leslie Groff. There's no reason their names should be redacted. Where are the interview notes?” · 2026-09-27 08:16