By Matt Underwood US Justice Department releases new tranche of Epstein files, and the immediate reaction is a mix of frustration, anger, and a pervasive sense of disbelief. These new documents, the latest installment in the saga of Jeffrey Epstein, have been met with skepticism regarding their release, specifically how they were released. This isn’t just about the contents of the files, but how the Department of Justice is choosing to handle them.
The initial impression from many seems to be that the DOJ is more interested in protecting certain individuals than in providing true transparency. The claim that the documents contain “untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump” and the assertion that if they were credible, they’d have been “weaponized” already, seems to be a clear attempt to manage the narrative. This is not the role the DOJ is supposed to play, as it’s supposed to be impartial. Furthermore, the quick release of this particular statement by the DOJ, defending Trump, raises questions about whose interests they are truly serving.
The redactions are another major point of contention. The concern is that they are not being done in accordance with the law, but rather to shield specific individuals. Many believe that the redactions are excessive and are being used to protect the people involved. The feeling is that the DOJ is working harder to cover for alleged perpetrators than to reveal the truth. There’s a strong sentiment that the government, in this case, is not on the side of justice, but rather on the side of the powerful.
There is a discussion of the practical problems with documents being released. One example is the observation that a document can have its layers unflattened and its text, including text within areas that were supposed to be redacted, copied and pasted. This reveals the underlying information. This means that, in a sense, the redactions aren’t always effective. It seems some of the documents have been partially redacted with black boxes that, with some technical know-how, can be circumvented.
The timing of the releases, being spread out over time, also seems to be a source of frustration, with many feeling that this strategy is akin to a “Netflix series.” This is seen as a way to control the flow of information and potentially allow for damage control, rather than a genuine effort at transparency. The legal requirement to release the full files last week suggests a disregard for the law, which only adds fuel to the fire of those already suspicious.
The content of the released files themselves is, unsurprisingly, deeply disturbing. Allegations of rape, sexual assault, and the presence of prominent figures in Epstein’s orbit paint a grim picture. There are alleged accounts of Trump’s involvement, which have led to anger and calls for accountability. The sense of outrage is palpable and it seems to be growing.
The reactions within the documents that have been released range from the mundane to the bizarre. The documents have already been altered in a way that suggests the DOJ has something to hide. References to “the big guy” and how some documents are used as the basis of claims is a contrast between the current state of affair. The contrast between how the public looks at claims of wrongdoing against one person, compared to another, is a concern.
There is a feeling of powerlessness, that the elites are protected, while the rest of society is left to deal with the consequences. The closing sentiments are despairing, noting that “nothing happens,” and that the rich will always get richer without consequence. It is an indictment of the system.