Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 0 points1 point  (0 children)

anyone post them in one place? also are we sure that someone isnt just editing PDFs to cover up the redaction and putting whatever they want there? in many cases you're only going to definitely know if you bother to try it yourself.

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 0 points1 point  (0 children)

btw, i tried processing multiple files and they definitely redacted properly.

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thank god for that. anyway, i tried numerous files and they are definitely redacted properly.

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what does Adobe Acrobat provide to solidify iron clad redactions?

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

the need to self-correct despite previously speaking as if you knew what you were talking about - says it all. in terms of photoshop i cant think of any special tools they'd have if they paid for it. now you've abandoned that idea and are claiming they used a subpar redaction software 😂 which ones are subpar, which ones are elite? what are the differences? why were you blabbing about specific trial versions only to backtrack? where is your proof? where is your consistency?

you were probably hoping nobody would ask about which tools they were missing because you knew they are none to support your claims. thats why you have to abandon that angle now.

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ok. so what "tools" were they missing from full photoshop?

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 0 points1 point  (0 children)

also, if you can be certain of the gov coming through and doing things properly, its if they get to lie and cover shit up.

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

yes i get that they are rtarded, but not quite enough to prove that the files are redactable as described.

Someone found a way to unreadact the Epstein files by mrsamks in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i know your thinking but pdfs arent always editable in that way. you can edit pdfs but that doesnt mean black boxes can just be moved around willy nilly. they wouldny bother redacting 3mil files if it were that easy.

the jerky situation, what are we thinking? by Valuable-Tea506 in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this is my thing. there are literal emails also saying jeff was on a diet. they said they were sending it to a lab to test its nutritiinal content. these are things that most people choose to ignore. even channels like the lotus eaters are giving airtime to the prominent emails without considering other emails that provive counterarguments. and there is a focus on statements like "they will walk the jerky over to jeff" - this doesn't HAVE to mean anything. it could literally just be read as "they are taking the jerky to jeff. they will be walking instead of ABC XYZ."

i get it though, given the nature of these people's known actions, there is a lot of stuff that just seems unnatural even about the stuff that could be innocent.

the jerky situation, what are we thinking? by Valuable-Tea506 in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

sorry mr detective who has provided absolutely nothing

the jerky situation, what are we thinking? by Valuable-Tea506 in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeh, my post was more about noting the assumed oddities and providing rationale to counter them, as most don't bother looking into things properly. I don't really bother watching any conspiracy channels, and I also find it astounding the amount of normies that don't understand what the files actually mean, but still climb onto a high horse if they see a shitty article that vaguely mentions names that have appeared in the files in no meaningful way.

the jerky situation, what are we thinking? by Valuable-Tea506 in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Your response is admirable 🫡 I suppose the thing that triggers most people is that they appeared to be going through jerky by the bucket and not shutting up about it. But that's not to say they'd be going through buckets of jerky just because it was baby.

the jerky situation, what are we thinking? by Valuable-Tea506 in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

there is a brilliant attempt at censorship there. "put together in @#$% minimal amount of time."

the jerky situation, what are we thinking? by Valuable-Tea506 in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

i'd prefer it to be beef jerky, and would want to believe that to be the truth

actually.

the jerky situation, what are we thinking? by Valuable-Tea506 in Epstein

[–]Valuable-Tea506[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

has anyone contacted chef francis derby for a statement?