Epstein files: 2 million records in various stages of review, DOJ says, and the situation feels like it’s spiraling, doesn’t it? The Department of Justice has stated they’re knee-deep in reviewing over two million documents related to the Epstein case. It’s a staggering number, especially when you consider the initial deadline for releasing these files was back in December. What’s even more concerning is the slow pace of the releases thus far, with less than one percent of the documents having been made public.
This whole process has brought a lot of things into sharper focus. It makes you wonder about the priorities, the speed at which things are supposedly being done, and whether there’s a genuine commitment to transparency.… Continue reading
The Department of Justice has only released a small fraction of the Epstein files, as revealed in a recent court filing. Despite a federal law mandating release by December 19th, only about 12,285 documents have been published. While the department cites the protection of victims’ identities and the vast number of documents as reasons for delays, Democrats have intensified criticism, accusing the Trump administration of “lawlessness” and demanding the release of unredacted files. Several key figures are also mentioned in these files, including Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who is under investigation as well.
Read More
The Department of Justice’s handling of the Epstein files release has been marred by issues of willfulness and incompetence, particularly in light of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The DOJ has opted for a rolling release, defying the Act’s mandate for minimal redactions and a specific timeline, and has ignored requirements for written justifications for redactions. Furthermore, the released documents contain extensive, often improper redactions, with information easily recovered and inconsistently applied, raising questions about the DOJ’s adherence to the law and their handling of the process. To ensure transparency and public trust, a new House committee should be formed to oversee the release of the unredacted pages.
Read More
James Carville believes President Trump’s actions regarding Venezuela are a diversion tactic, meant to distract from the ongoing release of the Epstein Files and rising healthcare costs. Carville dismissed the pundit class’s attempts to find legitimate motives for the attack, asserting it was solely about avoiding further revelations from the Epstein case. According to Carville, Trump’s actions are a “reptilian survival” strategy. Trump has since targeted Latin American leaders, including Mexico’s Claudia Sheinbaum and Colombia’s Gustavo Petro, following the strike on Venezuela.
Read More
The Department of Justice missed its deadline to explain the redactions in the Epstein files, sparking criticism, particularly after the deletion of 16 files, including one featuring Donald Trump with Epstein. While the DOJ cited privacy concerns as justification, some argue this doesn’t explain the delayed release of millions of files. Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie are now pushing for a special master to ensure the files’ complete release and seeking to hold Attorney General Pam Bondi in contempt for non-compliance. The DOJ, using 400 lawyers, estimates the review and redaction process will continue until at least January 20th.
Read More
Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna and Republican Rep. Thomas Massie are bypassing Pam Bondi’s Justice Department to demand the full release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. They are intervening with the Southern District of New York, requesting a “special master” be appointed to oversee the document release. This action follows concerns that the DOJ’s delayed and heavily redacted releases are withholding critical information, including survivor statements and draft prosecution memos. Khanna and Massie are also considering holding Bondi in contempt of Congress, with the ultimate goal of exposing the rich and powerful men involved in Epstein’s crimes.
Read More
Following the release of the Epstein files, eight survivors are now calling for the impeachment of Donald Trump. They are also demanding investigations into Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI head Kash Patel due to their handling of the document’s release. Survivor Haley Robson, who previously supported Trump, has retracted her support, citing the withholding of documents and broken promises of transparency. The survivors are seeking accountability and justice for the mishandling of sensitive information and the overall lack of transparency.
Read More
Rep. Lauren Boebert alleges that former President Donald Trump’s veto of the “Finish the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act,” a bipartisan bill supporting a Colorado water pipeline, was an act of political retaliation. This bill, which aimed to provide water to nearly 50,000 residents, was vetoed due to concerns over high costs, despite nearly unanimous support in the House. Boebert, who pushed for the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files, believes Trump’s decision was a response to her actions, citing a betrayal of his “America First” agenda. This conflict mirrors the strained relationship between Trump and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who also supported the release of the Epstein files and has since fallen out of favor with Trump.
Read More
Justice Dept. Now Said to Be Reviewing 5.2 Million Pages of Epstein Files – this announcement immediately sets off alarm bells, doesn’t it? It’s a staggering amount of documentation, especially when considering the initial narrative that these files either didn’t exist or weren’t readily accessible. The shift in story, from absence to needing time for review, feels deeply problematic.
A huge scandal is unfolding right before our eyes, and the question that begs to be asked is, “Why are they just *now* reviewing these files?” If these documents truly existed, and a law mandated their release, the delays and explanations offered simply don’t add up.… Continue reading
Investigative reporter Julie K. Brown, whose work led to Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest, finds the revelations from the released Epstein files “worse” than anticipated, indicating a larger scope of involvement than previously known. The files, including photos of prominent figures, are prompting numerous new leads and tips, making prioritization challenging. Brown notes the suspicious nature of the government’s handling of the investigation, questioning why some information has been withheld and calling for further investigation, emphasizing that it should not be a partisan issue.
Read More
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker