Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Igel

(37,273 posts)
2. Since they look good on-screen, why would they?
Wed Dec 24, 2025, 11:10 AM
4 hrs ago

Maybe they should have had a phalanx of checkers to see if everything was properly masked, even if it looked okay on screen, but then we'd have access to far fewer of the (redacted) documents.

The process is showing all the hallmarks of being rushed--including claims that staff were taken off of various tasks that weren't exactly trivial in order to redact documents.

I've had bosses tell me that they've decided on a deadline for the team I was on and once out of the room--it wasn't like we could say 'no'--we just looked at each other and openly said it wasn't possible. And, when in fact, it wasn't possible, even with 10-hour days and work on Sunday, we were sometimes just told off and sometimes the boss would recognize that the deadline was imposed without any feedback from those the deadline was imposed on. (Those times when we procrastinated we had the spine to fess up and take the rebuke--making those times when it was mismanagement all the more clearly not our fault.)

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Botched Epstein redaction...»Reply #2