Jeffrey Epstein

Subterms

    Latest story

    138 Shares24 Views

    US justice department renews request to unseal Epstein grand jury materials

    by

    The justice department has renewed its request to unseal grand jury materials from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation that led to the disgraced financier’s federal indictment on sex-trafficking charges in 2019.The submission, signed by US attorney Jay Clayton for the southern district in New York, says that Congress made clear in approving the release of investigative materials last week that the court records should be released.Clayton asked in the filing to Manhattan federal court that the release of the materials should be done promptly because lawmakers gave a 30 day window after Donald Trump signed the measure into law last week. The justice department said the congressional action overrode existing law in a way that permits the unsealing of the grand jury records.But Judge Richard Berman denied a prior Trump administration request to make the grand jury transcripts public, citing a “significant and compelling reason” to deny the request.Berman said in August that 70 pages of grand jury transcripts and exhibits including a PowerPoint presentation, four pages of call logs and letters from victims and their attorneys, pale in comparison to what documents the government already has on Epstein.In that ruling, Berman wrote that “the government’s 100,000 pages of Epstein files and materials dwarf the 70 odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials” and that the request appeared a “diversion” from releasing documents in its possession.The grand jury materials largely consist of the testimony of an FBI agent, the sole witness in the grand jury proceedings, “who had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay”.But Berman said the compelling reason to keep the documents under seal was the “possible threats to victims’ safety and privacy”.A similar request to unseal grand jury testimony relating to the prosecution of Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell was also rejected. Manhattan federal court judge Paul Engelmayer wrote that the government’s request to unseal “implies that the grand jury materials are an untapped mine lode of undisclosed information about Epstein or Maxwell or confederates, they definitively are not that”.Still, Clayton’s request comes soon after he was assigned to investigate Epstein’s relationship to prominent Democrats and four months after Maurene Comey, one of the lead prosecutors on the cases against Epstein and Maxwell, was fired soon before deputy attorney general Todd Blanche travelled to Florida to interview Maxwell.Asked last week how that the New York Epstein-Democrat investigation could affect the release of Epstein files in the government’s possession, Attorney General Pam Bondi said: “We’re not going to say anything else on that because now it is a pending investigation in the southern district of New York.” More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares36 Views

      in US Politics

      Epstein survivors fighting for document release find themselves caught in party war

      by

      As the Jeffrey Epstein scandal has once again become a millstone around the neck of the Trump administration and forced a rare split between the US president and his Maga base, one group has gained little attention for its steadfast commitment to keeping the story alive beyond politics: Epstein’s victims.Despite the frequent efforts of lawmakers to harness the scandal for political purposes, the victims of Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation have been a strong voice in keeping the focus on the impact of sexual abuse and on Epstein’s wide circle of allies across all sides of the US political and cultural landscape.Their effort was clearly on display last week when more than a dozen women visited the US Capitol to advocate for a vote to release the federal government’s files on the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender. Trump had opposed the vote but reversed position in the face of a rebellion in his own party.In a video from World Without Exploitation, they held up photos of themselves as young women. Some recited their ages when they first met Epstein. “It’s time to bring the secrets out of the shadows. It’s time to shine a light into the darkness,” they said, adding in a text message: “Five administrations and we’re still in the dark.”In the event, the measure passed both houses of Congress and was quickly signed into law by Trump, giving the justice department 30 days to make all of its unclassified records, documents, and communications related to Epstein and co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell publicly available.But, despite the efforts of the victims, politics is still being played with the issue.Some Epstein survivors who spoke at the Capitol were unconvinced that Trump’s turnaround to support the Epstein Files Transparency Act was genuine. “I can’t help but to be skeptical of what the agenda is,” Haley Robson said. “So with that being said, I want to relay this message to you: I am traumatized. I am not stupid.”Faced with a rebellion on the release issue by congressional Republican representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert and Nancy Mace, the president soon returned to the theme that Epstein is an issue that should scare Democrats. “The Democrats were Epstein’s friends, all of them,” Trump said prior to the vote. “And it’s a hoax, the whole thing is a hoax.”In a video announcing her surprise decision to leave Congress, Greene explicitly referred to the Epstein drama as an example of entrenched political forces that shaped her decision. “ Standing up for American women who were raped at 14 years old, trafficked and used by rich, powerful men should not result in me being called a traitor and threatened by the president of the United States,” she said, referring to Trump.There have emerged dissenting voices on whether either political party can be trusted on the Epstein issue and if either truly serves the purpose of exposing and preventing the exploitation of women, including the politically active Epstein victims. When one Democrat in Congress was revealed to have been texting with Epstein during a hearing, she escaped censure as her party strongly opposed any measure to punish her.“All you have to do is close your eyes, wake up, the wind blows in the other direction, and suddenly it’s the other party that claims to the party of women that cares about abuse,” said Wendy Murphy, a former sex crimes prosecutor who serves as a professor of sexual violence law at New England Law Boston.“There is zero consistency because we know it’s across party lines where the abuse comes from. This is really a male problem and not party or political problem. Neither party actually cares about women and neither party actually cares about victims.”Epstein victim Rina Oh, who attended the Capitol gathering last week, said: “I feel stuck in the middle. Everyone is pulling me from each side and I refuse to side with anyone.“I just want criminals who prey on children brought to justice, and that’s apolitical, because I don’t think predators pick out victims based on what political party they belong to,” she added.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn a post on X last week, Murphy stated it plainly: “Anyone who thinks this is a left-right issue is a fool.”After all, one of the main consequences of a recent release of an Epstein document trove was that former Bill Clinton treasury secretary Larry Summers was forced to step back from board positions and teaching at Harvard after damaging correspondence with the sex abuser was released.And, of course, misogyny crosses party lines very easily.Murphy points to incidences including the Anita Hill hearings when Democrats, under committee chair Joe Biden, worked to smear her during confirmation hearings for then supreme court nominee Clarence Thomas in 1991.In the ongoing partisan political morass of the Epstein case, there is a political benefit to keeping the pot boiling because both sides are in trouble, Murphy says.When the government-held documents are released sometime over the next month, she predicted, “the odds of the public getting what it thinks it’s getting are effectively zero. Continuing to boil the pot should make all of us wonder what’s actually going on behind the scenes.”She added: “We’ll probably never know. Anyone who thinks they know is just naive.” More

    • 138 Shares48 Views

      in US Politics

      Chomsky had deeper ties with Epstein than previously known, documents reveal

      by

      The prominent linguist and philosopher Noam Chomsky called it a “most valuable experience” to have maintained “regular contact” with Jeffrey Epstein, who by then had long been convicted of soliciting prostitution from a minor, according to emails released earlier in November by US lawmakers.Such comments from Chomsky, or attributed to him, suggest his association with Epstein – who officials concluded killed himself in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges – went deeper than the occasional political and academic discussions the former had previously claimed to have with the latter.Chomsky, 96, had also reportedly acknowledged receiving about $270,000 from an account linked to Epstein while sorting the disbursement of common funds relating to the first of his two marriages, though the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) professor has insisted not “one penny” came directly from the infamous financier.The emails disclosed on 12 November by the Republican members of the US House oversight committee generally detailed the correspondence Epstein had with political, academic and business luminaries, including the Bill Clinton White House’s treasury secretary Larry Summers and Steve Bannon, the longtime ally of Donald Trump. Further, they reveal Epstein and Chomsky were close enough to discuss musical interests and even potential vacations.Perhaps the most telling of the Chomsky-related documents in question was a letter of support for Epstein attributed to Chomsky with the salutation “to whom it may concern”. It is not dated, but it contains a typed signature with Chomsky’s name and citing his position as a University of Arizona laureate professor, a role he began in 2017, as first reported by the Massachusetts news outlet WBUR.Epstein pleaded guilty in 2008 in Florida to state charges of solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of prostitution with a minor. He served 13 months of an 18-month sentence and was released in July 2009.“I met Jeffrey Epstein half a dozen years ago,” read the letter of support from Chomsky that was reviewed by the Guardian after its Republican House oversight committee release. “We have been in regular contact since, with many long and often in-depth discussions about a very wide range of topics, including our own specialties and professional work, but a host of others where we have shared interests. It has been a most valuable experience for me.”It is unclear whether Chomsky sent the letter to anyone. Nonetheless, it exalts Epstein for teaching Chomsky “about the intricacies of the global financial system” in a way “the business press and professional journals” had not been able to do. It boasted about how well connected Epstein was.“Once, when we were discussing the Oslo agreements, Jeffrey picked up the phone and called the Norwegian diplomat who supervised them, leading to a lively interchange,” the letter read. The letter recounted how Epstein had arranged for Chomsky – a political activist, too – to meet with someone he had “studied carefully and written about”: the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak.Epstein had – “with limited success” – aided efforts from Chomsky’s second wife, Valeria, to introduce him “to the world of jazz and its wonders”, the letter continued.It concluded, “The impact of Jeffrey’s limitless curiosity, extensive knowledge, penetrating insights and thoughtful appraisals is only heightened by his easy informality, without a trace of pretentiousness. He quickly became a highly valued friend and regular source of intellectual exchange and stimulation.”Another notable communication involving Chomsky and Epstein is a 2015 email in which the latter offers the former use of his residences in New York and New Mexico.The emails don’t indicate whether Chomsky took advantage of the offer, whose particulars surfaced as certain officials are striving to investigate allegations of crimes by Epstein at a ranch compound he owned outside Santa Fe, New Mexico.Interest in the Epstein case has surged in recent months after Trump – a former friend of his – pledged to release a full list of the late financier’s clients while successfully running for a second presidency in 2024. However, after he took office in January, Trump’s justice department declared no such list existed and said that it would not be releasing any additional files related to Epstein’s prosecution, igniting a bipartisan furor that the president sought to dismiss as a Democratic “hoax”.Yet the pressure was enough that Trump on Wednesday signed a legislative bill directing his justice department to release more of what has come to be collectively known as the Epstein files.Chomsky is not the only renowned Massachusetts academic to be ensnared in the Epstein scandal. On Wednesday, Larry Summers relinquished a teaching role at Harvard University – where he was once president – after his email correspondence with Epstein revived questions about their relationship.A statement that MIT provided to WBUR and the Guardian declined to comment on Chomsky but said the university in 2020 had reviewed its contacts with Epstein. “Following that review, MIT took a number of steps, including enhancements to our gift acceptance processes and donating to four nonprofits supporting survivors of sexual abuse,” the statement said.The University of Arizona did not immediately reply to a request for comment on Chomsky. Neither did Chomsky. Nor did Valeria Wasserman Chomsky, who is a spokesperson for her husband – and in January 2017 sent an email to Epstein apologizing for not wishing him a happy birthday a couple of days earlier.“Hope you had a good celebration!” she wrote to Epstein, according to the emails released by House oversight committee Republicans. “Noam and I hope to see you again soon and have a toast for your birthday.”Chomsky hasn’t spoken publicly since he was reported in 2024 to be convalescing in Brazil after a stroke.Anna Betts contributed reporting More

    • 113 Shares36 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats investigating Epstein decry Andrew ‘silence’ over interview request

      by

      Two Democratic lawmakers involved in the US congressional investigation into the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein on Friday condemned Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s “silence” in response to their request that he sit for a deposition.Robert Garcia, the ranking member of the House oversight committee, and Suhas Subramanyam, a member of the panel, were among the Democrats who earlier this month sent the former British prince a letter seeking his cooperation in their inquiry into Epstein, who died in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges.“Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s silence in the face of the Oversight Democrats’ demand for testimony speaks volumes,” Garcia and Subramanyam said Friday, a day after the deadline they had set to receive Mountbatten-Windsor’s response.Documents the committee has obtained – many of which came from Epstein’s estate – along with testimony from abuse survivor Virginia Giuffre, “raise serious questions” the ex-prince “must answer, yet he continues to hide”, the lawmakers continued.“Our work will move forward with or without him, and we will hold anyone who was involved in these crimes accountable, no matter their wealth, status, or political party. We will get justice for the survivors.”Democrats on the investigative committee appear to have few options to compel Mountbatten-Windsor to talk. As the minority party, they lack the power to issue subpoenas, and the Republican chair James Comer has not commented on if he would take such a step against the former prince.Even if one was issued, Mountbatten-Windsor – who has strongly denied wrongdoing – could avoid the legal penalties for non-compliance by not coming to the United States.The lawmakers issued their statement days after Donald Trump had signed into law the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which will compel attorney general Pam Bondi to release documents related to the government’s handling of his case within 30 days.Trump, a one-time friend of Epstein, tried to stop the bill from moving through Congress, but backed down when it appeared clear it had the votes to pass the House of Representatives. However, the law includes exemptions for the release of documents that could undermine national security and jeopardize investigations.Critics have accused Bondi of being a Trump loyalist who has used the law enforcement agency’s powers to protect the president and retaliate against his allies. Last week, she announced that she would investigate ties between Epstein and Democrats, shortly after Trump demanded she do so.In a letter to Bondi on Friday, Garcia wrote that “politically motivated investigations are not a legitimate justification for withholding or redacting records” under the newly passed law.“There is already a concern president Trump will attempt, on dubious legal grounds, to exploit a provision which allows [the] DoJ to withhold information relevant to ongoing investigations,” Garcia said, echoing a concern expressed by Republican senators this week.He also noted that the committee is awaiting the justice department’s response to a subpoena they issued in August for documents related to Epstein, which Garcia said can be shared in their entirety with lawmakers, even if they are involved in an investigation.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Any additional federal investigations launched by the DoJ or the president do not impact our subpoena,” Garcia wrote, while adding that “the identity of survivors and potential victims” can be protected.In September, the justice department turned over more than 33,000 documents to the committee in response to its subpoena, but most of them were already publicly available.A source familiar said that the justice department is “sitting on a mountain of information” that may total up to 300 gigabytes of files. These include interview transcripts, court documents and emails, as well as records from the investigation that led to Epstein’s 2008 guilty plea to sexual abuse charges in Florida, and the sex trafficking investigation that led to his 2019 arrest in New York, sources said.As he campaigned to return to the White House last year, Trump, alongside his allies, made statements indicating that there was more to be revealed about Epstein and his ties to global elites.But in July, the justice department and FBI released a memo saying that they had no further information to share about his activities or relationships, while concluding that his death was a suicide, despite conspiracy theories to the contrary.The announcement sparked an uproar among Trump’s supporters, leading to a drawn out congressional campaign to force release of government files related to the case that culminated in this week’s passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. More

    • 163 Shares52 Views

      in US Politics

      World awaits fresh Epstein cache – but could Trump officials block full release?

      by

      They are the files that America – and the world – has long waited to see: a huge cache of documents at the Department of Justice related to the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, whom a judge once dubbed the “most infamous pedophile in American history”.After a law passed by Congress and signed by Trump on Wednesday, those documents must now must be released to the American public and a waiting army of journalists. Just like previous Epstein caches they are certain to include damning communications between Epstein and many rich and powerful people in his social circle.Experts interviewed by the Guardian said that the documents are certain to contain fresh revelations about Epstein and his activities and could easily embarrass or damn prominent figures in the worlds of politics, academia, finance and entertainment, including Donald Trump and many others.But at the same time, despite the legal mandate, experts warn that justice department officials could use loopholes to try to stymie a full release, using redactions or withholding crucial documents for a variety of reasons. They warned that even this release of documents could still leave many Epstein questions unanswered and would not provide a full accounting of his crimes or who he socialized and worked with.Under the law signed on Wednesday, Trump’s justice department had 30 days to disclose all files related to Epstein, among them investigative documents into the disgraced financier’s death in jail pending his sex-trafficking trial. The much-awaited disclosure would come in the wake of congressional release of tens of thousands of pages provided by Epstein’s estate.The law allows for redaction of information that could identify victims but bars authorities from redacting information – including names – solely out of concerns that it could embarrass them or harm their reputations, or listen to concerns about political sensitivity. Trump’s attorney general, Pam Bondi, said her department would “follow the law and encourage maximum transparency”.But members of Congress who heralded the law’s passage, plus Epstein victims and transparency advocates, have expressed concerns that these files will not be delivered entirely as required.A provision allowing the justice department to withhold files that could jeopardize current investigations has raised eyebrows as Bondi – at Trump’s direction – has appointed a prosecutor in New York to investigate Bill Clinton, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, and other political opponents’ with past associations with Epstein. Neither Clinton nor Hoffman have been accused of misconduct and both have publicly expressed regret for their association with Epstein.Litigation by the news website Radar Online might be the most telling with regard to the investigation exception. In April 2017, Radar Online made a public records request for Epstein investigative files – about a decade after he pleaded guilty to state-level prostitution counts.The FBI did not respond, and Radar sued in May 2017. While the agency said it would process files at a rate of 500 pages monthly, authorities have withheld about 10,000 of more than 11,000 pertinent pages – invoking the law-enforcement proceeding exemption.“The bill allows material to be withheld if it’s connected to a law enforcement investigation, which is the same issue Radar is challenging in court,” a spokesperson for Radar Online told the Guardian. “Given the newly announced investigation the whole thing could be a dud. Our lawsuit is still the best chance of transparency.”Roy Gutterman, director of the Newhouse School’s Tully Center for Free Speech at Syracuse University in New York, said it was difficult to predict what might be in these files.“No matter what is released, even the thousands upon thousands of pages of records, data and information, there will always be questions of what else is out there or what may have been sanitized for political purposes,” Gutterman said. “Lots of people are talking about transparency, but unless someone finds the smoking gun they are looking for, human nature and pure skepticism will continue to raise questions about ‘what else has not been released’.”And releasing the files is not a silver bullet for finding truth.“There are ways you can release a lot of material and still not be transparent,” Gutterman said.Spencer Kuvin, chief legal officer of GoldLaw and a lawyer for several Epstein victims, said the justice department’s documents had more potential to reveal truth than Congress’s cache. He explained: “These documents will likely be photographs, surveillance videos, investigative memoranda and any other documents and interviews conducted in the underlying litigation.”He expressed frustration and pointed to the investigation provision.“The fact that the president made Congress go through this lengthy process is offensive, because he had the power to release these materials with the stroke of a pen,” Kuvin said. “Hopefully he does not further complicate matters by having his DoJ prevent access to all the records because of his threats of continuing investigations.”Victims of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, the British socialite who was convicted of sex trafficking for luring teenage girls into his orbit, worry as well.“That is a real fear that the victims have. These victims have repeatedly been frustrated by the failures of the state and federal government in this case over the last 20 years and it is all because the people involved were either rich or politically connected,” Kuvin said. “Unfortunately, rich and powerful people protect their own even if it means they may be guilty of sex trafficking and pedophilia.”Jennifer Plotkin of Merson Law, which has represented 33 Epstein victims, also expressed wariness.“While the release of documents may potentially increase transparency, it does little to address the government’s accountability to the many victims that have come forward in the lawsuit against the FBI. The government continues to fight against the sexual abuse survivors of Jeffrey Epstein,” Plotkin said. “The FBI failed to prosecute Epstein for decades and the victims still don’t understand why.”Those who have expressed skepticism that Bondi will follow through have pointed to Trump and his administration’s waffling on Epstein matters, despite his campaign trail promise to release the files.The justice department said in July that their investigation of Epstein files “did not expose any additional third-parties to allegations of illegal wrongdoing” and that “this systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list’”.“We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties,” their statement also said.The departmental memo conflicted with Epstein accusers’ accounts that others took part in his abuse. Trump’s supporters, many of whom are convinced that Epstein plotted with high-profile individuals to traffic minors, were outraged, as the president vowed to disclose documents.Furor over the Epstein document stalemate proved an extensive political liability for Trump, as news reports and released documents showed that the president had a relationship with Epstein. Trump has denied wrongdoing and said their relationship soured.“It’s not news that Epstein was a member of the Mar-a-Lago club, because it’s the same club Donald Trump kicked Epstein out of for being a creep,” the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said at one point. “These stories are tired and pathetic attempts to distract from all the success of President Trump’s administration.”In reversing course to support the bill, Trump said “we have nothing to hide” and that “it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown’”.Asked for comment about transparency concerns related to the ongoing investigation exception, a White House spokesperson, Abigail Jackson, said: “Democrats and the media knew about Epstein’s victims for years, did nothing to help them, and Democrats even solicited donations from him AFTER he was a convicted sex offender. President Trump was calling for transparency and accountability, and is now delivering on it with thousands of pages of documents.”Democrats have pointed out that Bondi and Trump are close in expressing concern about the documents release.“This is Pam Bondi. She works for Trump. This is all a set-up. Trump fought to the end to resist release. He lost. Do I believe he’s had a real conversion? No,” Senator Peter Welch, a Vermont Democrat on the Senate judiciary committee, said, per the Hill.“He anticipated the outcome and then ordered Bondi to begin other investigations, so we’ll be seeing the justice department withholding information because it might interfere with ongoing investigations.“The concealment will continue.” More

    • 188 Shares49 Views

      in US Politics

      Congressman Ro Khanna warns officials not to impede Epstein files release: ‘They will be prosecuted’

      by

      Democratic congressman Ro Khanna was a major force behind the legislative campaign that led Donald Trump to back down from his opposition and sign into law a bill compelling the release of files related to the deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.With the justice department now required to release the documents within 30 days, Khanna has a warning for those in the Trump administration who may find themselves pressed to withhold information: comply or face the consequences.“Now, it’s federal law for those documents to be released, and if the justice officials don’t release it, they will be prosecuted, and they … could be prosecuted in a future administration,” Khanna told the Guardian on Wednesday evening, shortly before Trump put his signature on a bill intended to reveal the truth about what he spent weeks calling a “Democrat hoax”.“The career officials [that] are making these decisions have to think that they’re going to be subject to future contempt of Congress or criminal prosecution, and they’re taking a huge risk … if they violate that, given that administrations change,” the California lawmaker added.As Democrats eye regaining control of the House of Representatives in next year’s midterm elections, Khanna also expressed his support for issuing a subpoena to Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former British royal who was stripped of his titles over his affiliation with Epstein.A top UK minister has since said Mountbatten-Windsor should answer questions about the relationship from US lawmakers, and Khanna and other Democrats asked Mountbatten-Windsor to sit for a deposition voluntarily, though the former prince has not responded.“We could subpoena him, because then, if he ever visited the United States, he’d be in contempt of Congress, and … face prosecution,” Khanna said. “Maybe he never wants to visit the United States, but if he does, he would have to comply with the subpoena.”It would be up to the House of Representatives’s Republican majority to issue a subpoena, and Khanna said he had suggested doing so to James Comer, the Republican chair of the oversight committee, which is also investigating the Epstein case. He has not heard back, and spokespeople for Comer did not respond to a request for comment.A financier and one-time friend of the president, Epstein died in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges, after pleading guilty in 2008 to a sexual abuse charge in Florida after a deal with prosecutors. During last year’s campaign, Trump and his allies insinuated that there was more to be revealed about Epstein and his interactions with global elites, but in July, the justice department and FBI announced that they would release no further information.That sparked an outcry among Trump’s supporters as well as many of his opponents, which continued even after the president dismissed the concern as a politically motivated attack. Khanna then collaborated with Republican congressman Thomas Massie on the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires the release of the government’s files about Epstein. To overcome the objections of the House speaker, Mike Johnson, Massie circulated a discharge petition among lawmakers to force a vote on the bill.The petition took weeks to receive the 218 signatures necessary to succeed, due in part due to the 43-day government shutdown and Johnson’s refusal to swear in a newly elected Democratic representative. Earlier this week, Trump dropped his opposition to the bill, and the House approved it overwhelmingly. The Senate later agreed to pass it unanimously.“We cracked the Maga base. It’s the first time anyone has ever cracked the Maga base,” Khanna said, adding that the “courage of the survivors” of Epstein, who twice traveled to the US Capitol to publicly press for the release of the files, was similarly pivotal.The US attorney general, Pam Bondi, has been accused of undoing the justice department’s independence from the White House, and recently opened an investigation into ties between Democrats and Epstein at Trump’s request.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionUnder the law, she is now tasked with releasing a wide range of files related to Epstein, his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell and others who interacted with them, though there are exemptions for materials related to open investigations or that could jeopardize national security.Khanna would not speculate on what may be revealed by the files, but signaled that Democrats would not let the issue drop, and would pursue officials who do not follow the law, though that will likely have to wait until they reclaim the majority in one chamber of Congress.“If we have the House, the people will be held in contempt and in front of Congress if they’re not complying. And if there’s a new administration, they’re very likely to enforce the law if people have violated it,” he said.The Epstein files have already generated uncomfortable headlines for powerful Democrats, including Larry Summers, a former treasury secretary under Bill Clinton who this week announced he would stop teaching at Harvard University after emails released by the House oversight committee reignited questions about his ties with Epstein.Khanna said he was not concerned by the possibility that the documents could cost others in his party their reputation.“I believe that we need a clearing, frankly, of the elite governing class … whether they were Democrats or Republicans,” he said.“We need a generational change, and if there are people who are caught up in protecting sex offenders or people caught up in participating in sex trafficking or abuse of underage girls, they should not be part of the future of politics.” More

    • 138 Shares32 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans warn Bondi not to bury Epstein files after law’s passage

      by

      Within hours of Donald Trump signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law, Republican senators were on the ground to issue a pointed message to the US attorney general, Pam Bondi: don’t bury these documents.The bill’s passage marked a rare moment of bipartisan support in an otherwise ideologically fractured Congress as it now sets a 30-day deadline for the release of Department of Justice files related to the actions of convicted sex offender of minors and financier Jeffrey Epstein, dubbed by a judge “the most infamous pedophile in American history”.It also marked a rare defeat for Trump, whose own contacts with Epstein have been the subject of intense speculation, along with many other powerful figures who associated with the sex trafficker who killed himself in 2019. Trump had originally been against the passage of the bill, before switching in the face of a rebellion in his own party.The bill passed the House of Representatives with 427 votes and sailed through the Senate by unanimous consent, a level of cross party support rarely seen. Rather than celebrating, many Republican lawmakers spent the week bracing for what they fear may come: a slow drip of information, justified one way or another by Bondi’s justice department.“People who feel very strongly about this will feel like they’ve been duped” if the justice department claims “we can’t release anything because of an active investigation,” said Republican senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. “I don’t think that that will help calm the suspicions many have harbored for a long while on this.”The anxiety stems from the Trump administration’s earlier resistance to transparency, which included months of dismissing public demands – and even insults for those calling for release – before reversing course this week when its passage became inevitable.Now, with Bondi opening investigations into exclusively Democrats mentioned in Epstein’s correspondence, Republicans are watching closely for signs the department might use those probes as a reason to redact or withhold materials as they are now part of an ongoing investigation.“If you do a blanket hold, I think that they’re going to have a lot of people angry,” said Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a judiciary committee member. “It would just add fuel to the fire if they don’t produce something meaningful” he added later.The legislation mandates release of unclassified materials within 30 days in a searchable format. Yet it contains exemptions for information that could jeopardize active investigations and for material depicting minors – potential escape hatches the Justice Department could exploit.The bill requires disclosure of materials related not only to Epstein but also to his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, a British socialite who was convicted in 2021 and sentenced to 20 years in prison for recruiting and grooming underage girls for Epstein to abuse.Bondi acknowledged the congressional mandate on Wednesday, saying the department would “follow the law” while “protecting victims but also providing maximum transparency.”Still, her carefully measured words offered little comfort to some skeptics on Capitol Hill. Tillis pressed for clarity on any redactions. “I think they would do well to figure how to release as much as possible and then have a very well-articulated reason for that which they can’t,” he said.Republican senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, however, was more optimistic. “Congress has spoken. I fully expect the Justice Department to release all the documents. It will take a while, but I believe they’ve started,” he said, adding, “I’m hoping we’ll see the first tranche…after Thanksgiving.”The urgency reflects deep skepticism about how the justice department has handled the case historically.In 2008, then-US attorney Alexander Acosta approved a non-prosecution agreement that allowed Epstein to plead guilty to state prostitution charges, avoiding federal sex-trafficking prosecutions. Epstein served 13 months of an 18-month sentence in a minimum-security facility with work-release privileges. That deal, later ruled to have violated victims’ rights, shielded Epstein from far more serious federal charges for over a decade until his 2019 arrest on federal sex-trafficking charges.Epstein died in federal custody in August of that year, one month after his arrest on sex-trafficking charges. His death was officially ruled a suicide.The Epstein files, so far roughly tens of thousands of pages of emails and correspondence released by the House Oversight Committee, detail the convicted sex offender’s connections across political, academic, and financial elites. Names from both parties appear, though Trump’s comes up over a thousand times, mostly linked to Epstein’s apparent obsession with the presidency.Senate majority leader John Thune, a Republican, weighed in on the side of his colleagues. “I trust the judgment of the justice department to ensure that whatever files they release protect the victims,” he said. Congress had “clear intent” to “get the information out there”, he addedThe near-unanimous support – marred by just one dissenting vote in the House – reflects both public interest and political stakes. The justice department now has 30 days to make the materials available in searchable format. The FBI has indicated its records include more than 300 gigabytes of data and evidence. Content depicting child abuse will remain sealed, and information that could compromise ongoing investigations may be withheld or redacted.The real test is now with Bondi’s department. Republican senators have made it clear they will scrutinize any major delays or broad redactions, so how swiftly and transparently the justice department acts could shape perceptions of the Trump administration’s commitment to accountability on a highly sensitive matter.Republican senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri summed it up: “All the credible information that can be released should be released.” More

    • 125 Shares67 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump signs bill to compel release of more Epstein documents

      by

      Donald Trump signed a bill Wednesday directing the justice department to release files from the investigation into the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, surrendering in the face of joint pressure from Democratic opponents and the president’s conservative base.The signature marked a sharp reversal for Trump, who had the authority as president to release the documents himself, but chose not to.Democrats have gloried in the controversy over the files and the possibility they may contain compromising information about Trump, who had a personal friendship with Epstein, who died in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges.Trump sought to flip that script after signing the bill in a posting to Truth Social that pointed out Epstein’s ties to the Democratic party.“Perhaps the truth about these Democrats, and their associations with Jeffrey Epstein, will soon be revealed, because I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!,” Trump wrote on Wednesday night.The justice department has 30 days to release all files related to Epstein, including the investigation into his death by suicide in a federal prison cell. The legislation permits redacting identifying information of victims, but specifically bars officials from declining to disclose information over concerns about “embarrassment, reputational harm or political sensitivity”.Trump waffled on the issue for years before finally succumbing to political pressure. On the campaign trail, he pledged to release the Epstein files. Once in office, he changed his position, calling the issue a “hoax” and railing against those who wanted to make the documents public.But he reversed course in recent days after it was clear the House of Representatives would pass legislation, saying “we have nothing to hide” and that “it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown’”.After Trump indicated his approval of the bill, Republican holdouts swiftly moved it through the House and then the Senate. Mike Johnson, the US House speaker, had stalled the bill for months, and after the House passed it, Johnson said he hoped the Senate would amend it, which it did not.The justice department said earlier this year that it had released all the documents it could about Epstein without hindering investigations or revealing information about his victims.“Much of the material is subject to court-ordered sealing,” a justice department memo from July said. “Only a fraction of this material would have been aired publicly had Epstein gone to trial, as the seal served only to protect victims and did not expose any additional third parties to allegations of illegal wrongdoing.”It’s not clear what the department will release in response to the bill – the bill details a host of potential items that must be released, but provides exceptions for some materials.The bill calls for the attorney general to make unclassified Epstein-related documents publicly available “in a searchable and downloadable format”, including all investigations into Epstein, his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, flight logs and travel records, individuals referenced or named in connection with his crimes, entities that were tied to his trafficking or financial networks, immunity deals and other plea agreements, internal communications about charging decisions, documentation of his detention and death, and details about any file deletions.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe department will have 30 days to turn over the documents. The bill provides for some exceptions, including redactions of victims’ identifying information or personal files, any depictions of child sexual abuse, releases that would jeopardize active investigations or prosecutions and depictions of death or abuse.Members of Congress released tens of thousands of documents that resurfaced and added depth to relationships Epstein had with prominent figures, including Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary, and Michael Wolff, the writer and Trump biographer.Trump and Epstein were once friends, and Trump’s name is in some of the documents released by members of Congress so far, though the mentions do not mean he was a party to any of Epstein’s criminal activity.Documents released by Democratic members of the House oversight committee included an email from Epstein to Wolff in which Epstein said of Trump: “Of course, he knew about the girls as he asked Ghislaine to stop.” In another, he called Trump the “dog that hasn’t barked”.Epstein emailed people about Trump regularly, usually derogatorily. “I have met some very bad people,” he wrote in one email. “None as bad as Trump. Not one decent cell in his body.” More