There are new reports suggesting that the Trump Justice Department (DOJ) is trying to keep information about Jeffrey Epstein secret.
On Friday, the DOJ asked a federal judge to deny a media request for the names of two people who received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Epstein in 2018. The DOJ cited privacy concerns as its primary reason for objecting, according to court documents. And the day before that, James O’Keefe’s undercover journalism outfit, O’Keefe Media Group (OMG), published a video of a DOJ employee saying that any files the DOJ releases will likely be heavily redacted in favor of Republicans. Meanwhile, the leaders of an effort to push through a vote on a bipartisan bill that would force the government to release all Epstein documents say they will soon have the votes they need.
Individuals 1 and 2 received a total of $350,000 from Epstein in 2018 after the Miami Herald published a series of articles titled “Perversion of Justice: Jeffrey Epstein.” That investigative series included criticism by Epstein’s victims of the non-prosecution deal he received 10 years before that. Moreover, “as part of the plea agreement, Epstein secured a statement from federal prosecutors in Florida that the two individuals would not be prosecuted,” NBC News reported.
One of the individuals NBC is trying to have revealed was mentioned in the Herald reports. Both recipients have been labeled as potential co-conspirators, according to prosecutors.
The DOJ letter asking to keep those names sealed says that both individuals are “uncharged third parties who have not waived their privacy interests” and who have “expressly objected to the unsealing of their names and personal identifying information.” Moreover, they were not named in the case against Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.
As for O’Keefe’s video, the employee who spoke to the undercover journalist is analyst Joseph Schnitt, acting deputy chief of the DOJ’s Office of Enforcement Operations.
Schnitt said there’s internal turmoil at the DOJ. FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino want the files released. Bongino, according to Schnitt, “has been causing problems” because he wants the Epstein files made public. Attorney General Pam Bondi, however, just “wants whatever Trump wants,” according to Schnitt. “She’s just a yes-person.”
Schnitt told OMG’s undercover journalist that there are “thousands and thousands of pages of files” on Epstein. But even if the DOJ releases any of them, they would be incomplete:
They’ll redact every Republican or conservative person in those files, leave all the liberal, Democratic people in those files, and have a very slanted version of it come out.
Schnitt touched on Maxwell’s prison transfer to a minimum-security facility. He claimed the move suggested that “they’re offering her something to keep her mouth shut.” OMG verified Schnitt’s claim that convicted sex offenders are normally ineligible for minimum-security facilities.
O’Keefe started the video by revisiting promises of transparency DOJ heads have made in the past, only to reneg on them. At the end, he issued an invitation for people within the DOJ to come forward and provide inside information about what is truly going on within the agency, to spill the beans about what the Trump administration is hiding and why.
The idea that the DOJ wants to control the Epstein information that is released to the public makes sense given everything that is happening. It would explain why the Trump administration is calling efforts by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to have all the Epstein documents released a “hostile act.” Last week, the House Oversight Committee released more than 33,000 pages of documents related to the investigation. But, Massie pointed out, the information the agency releases will be heavily redacted or has already been made publicly available.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has justified the curated approach to releasing information as necessary to protect the victims. But the victims are supporting Massie and Khanna’s legislation; Johnson blames that on them being “misled.”
A few days ago, Johnson made the interesting comment that Trump was “an FBI informant to try to take this stuff down” and maintained that the president “has no culpability in this thing at all.” But on Monday, he walked that statement back — sort of. He said:
What I was referring to in that long conversation was what the (Epstein) victims’ attorney said. More than a decade ago, President Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago, and he was one of the only people, one of the only prominent people, as everyone has reported … willing to help law enforcement go after this guy who was a disgusting child abuser, sex trafficker, all the allegations. That’s what they heard. So the president was helpful in that.
Johnson’s “clarification” is bolstered by comments Massie made Sunday during an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. Massie told Stephanopoulos, “I don’t know if the Speaker misspoke when he said that Donald Trump was an informant. The lawyers for the victims said that Donald Trump had been helpful in 2009 in their case by giving them information.”
Stephanopoulos also asked about the effort to pick up the remaining necessary signatures needed for the discharge petition Massie and Khanna are working on. That would force a vote in the House of Representatives on a bill that would release all the information the government has on Epstein, minus redactions to protect the victims. The two held a press conference last week with several Epstein victims in an effort to squeeze out the last two votes needed to reach 218. Right now, 212 Democrats have signed on, and four Republicans. In addition to Massie, they are Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina, and Lauren Boebert of Colorado.
Stephanopoulos asked Khanna if they still believed they could get the last needed signatures. Khanna said they already have them:
We have the 218 votes. Two-hundred and sixteen already support it. There are two vacancies that haven’t been reported as much, but two Democrats are going to be joining and they are both committed to signing it. That’s going to happen by the end of September.… We have the votes. Let’s get a vote this month and get the files released.
Stephanopoulos brought up that, even if the bill passes in the House, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has “made it pretty clear” he’s going to block it. Can that be overcome? Massie’s response suggests they are hoping that the pressure that’s building for its release would compel Thune not to block it.
“Why do you think, Congressman Massie, the president is resisting the release?” Stephanopoulos asked. Massie replied:
I think it’s going to be embarrassing to some of the billionaires, some of the donors who are politically connected to his campaign. I also think Democrats are going to be implicated in this — Democrat donors. And when you get to the billionaire level, a lot of these folks give to both parties, anyway. There are probably intelligence ties to our CIA and maybe to other foreign intelligence, and the American people would be shocked, I think, to know that our intelligence agency was working with a pedophile who was running a sex trafficking ring.… We can’t avoid justice just to avoid embarrassment for some very powerful men.
Stephanopoulos asked Khanna if he’s concerned that, even if they succeed, the DOJ would “scrub” (as Schnitt suggested would happen) the files to include only Democrats. Khanna said he is indeed concerned. But he added that the victims’ lawyer, Bradley Edwards, has seen the files, as have “many people who are career officials.” So if they politicize the release, Khanna summarized, there are people who would call them out on it.
Khanna wrapped up the interview by pointing out that this issue is bridging the partisan divide:
The American people are dialed into this, They want to know that as a country we can stand with survivors.… They want to know that we can protect our children, and they want to know that there aren’t two Americas, that rich and powerful are going to be held to account for assaulting underage girls. I hope that this actually brings us together. I mean, the roll call had Marjorie Taylor Greene and me hugging after an emotional moment. Some people criticized me, but other people said the survivors are actually bringing this country together around fundamental values.