[Dusseldorf]

Colleagues whose full time job is doing this sort of thing for various bits of the government have told me this is exactly the case here. People from all over the government have been deputized to redact these documents with little or no prior training.

[culi]

If there's that many people who have access to these files, I'm shocked there hasn't been leaks until this point.

[maeln]

Why risk leaking it and potentially getting caught, when you can do a bad job redacting instead :)

[Jcampuzano2]

When other people close to the case end up dead you have a pretty decent reason to not leak.

[lukan]

If loyalty is the metric and not competence they were selected for ..

[dboreham]

CUaaS. Cover Up as a Service.

[femto]

With a sister website BAEaas (Backup and Extort as a service).

[mindslight]

I wonder if this activity is being used as a kind of loyalty test. Keep track of who is assigned to redact what, and then if certain files leak or are insufficiently redacted, they indicate who isn't all in on Dear Leader.

It's not like a few more stories of Trump raping $whomever are going to move the needle at all, especially with how the media is on board with burying negative coverage of the regime.

Also if you're wondering how this activity isn't some kind of abuse of government resources, keep in mind that thanks to the Supreme Council's embrace of the Unitary Executive Theory (ie Sparkling Autocracy), covering up evidence about Donald Trump raping under-aged sex trafficking victims is now an official priority of the United States Government.

[andrewflnr]

I guess they might try, but given all the other nonsense I certainly don't think the admin is organized enough to execute that plan.