The inquiry comes less than a week after a coalition of Trump-aligned investors took control of the platform’s U.S. operations
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is launching an investigation into TikTok’s censorship practices after users reported being unable to post content critical of the Trump administration.
The inquiry comes less than a week after TikTok struck a deal with a group of non-Chinese investors to create a U.S. TikTok, ending a six-year legal saga that saw Congress ban the popular social media app over national security concerns.
U.S. TikTok’s new owners feature several Trump-aligned companies, including Oracle, run by longtime Trump ally Larry Ellison, and MGX, an Emirati investment firm, heightening concerns about censorship.
It’s time to investigate.
I am launching a review into whether TikTok is violating state law by censoring Trump-critical content. https://t.co/AZ2mWW68xa
Some TikTok users reported being unable to mention Jeffrey Epstein in direct messages, while others, including Hacks star Megan Stalter and singer-songwriter Billie Eilish, said content criticizing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was barred on the platform.
“TikTok is under new ownership and we are being completely censored and monitored,” Stalter wrote. “I’m unable to upload anything about 🧊 even after I tried to trick the page by making it look like a comedy video.”
Stalter has since deleted her TikTok account and encouraged her followers to delete the app in protest.
Journalist David Leavitt wrote on X that “TikTok had begun censoring anti-Trump and anti-ICE content,” sharing a screenshot of videos on his profile that had been flagged as “Ineligible for Recommendation.”
Scroll to continue reading
Another user saw his comments on videos removed for expressing anti-Nazi rhetoric and pro-Palestine viewpoints.
None of the users’ claims could be independently verified by Los Angeles Magazine.
I know this is out of character for me, but I’m speaking up.
I made this post (left) on my TikTok story.
Less than an hour later, it was replaced with a black screen (right).
Conversations surrounding social media censorship have risen in prominence since Elon Musk bought Twitter in 2022 and rebranded the platform as X.
Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” fired the platform’s content moderation team soon after taking control of the company, accusing the department of silencing conservative voices.
Despite the tech billionaire’s claims of transforming X into a “free speech app,” Musk has been accused of “silencing his critics” on the site by banning journalists and political commentators while tweaking the platform’s algorithm to promote conservative viewpoints.
Many Democrats fear Oracle and MGX could reshape TikTok in ways similar to Elon Musk’s changes at X.
“I know it’s hard to track all the threats to democracy out there right now, but this is at the top of the list,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) wrote on X.
Jeffrey Epstein‘s inner circle, Les Wexner, Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, were formally issued subpoenas Friday to testify before the House Oversight Committee, as key associates of the convicted sex offender.
“Oversight Democrats fought hard to get these subpoenas and forced the vote on Republicans. Now, the Committee will hear directly from the individuals most closely involved in Epstein’s inner circle. We will not stop until we get answers,” Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said in a statement.
Indyke, Epstein’s lawyer; Khan, his accountant, and Wexner, his billionaire financial client and longtime benefactor, were identified as critical to the investigation by Epstein survivors. Documents released in earlier lawsuits and among the recent U.S. Department of Justice trove show a complex and tangled relationship between Epstein and the three men.
Daniel H. Weiner, an attorney for Indyke and Kahn, said in a statement to CBS News that the two accepted the subpoenas and intend to cooperate with the committee, but added that the allegations in the subpoena are “false.”
“It is worth emphasizing that not a single woman has ever accused either Mr. Indyke or Mr. Kahn of committing sexual abuse or witnessing sexual abuse, nor claimed at any time that she reported to them any allegation of Mr. Epstein’s abuse,” Weiner said in the statement. “Indyke and Kahn did not socialize with Mr. Epstein, and they have always rejected as categorically false any suggestion that they knowingly facilitated or assisted Mr. Epstein in his sexual abuse or trafficking of women, or that they were aware of Mr. Epstein’s actions while they provided legal and accounting services to Mr. Epstein.”
Indyke first began working with Epstein in 1986 at a small boutique law firm in New York City that handled Epstein’s real estate deals. He later claimed Epstein as a mentor and was exclusively employed by Epstein by the 1990s. Indyke helped establish Epstein’s corporate and personal base of operations in the U.S. Virgin Islands. He was involved in almost every aspect of Epstein’s business and personal affairs and was paid millions of dollars for his services, according to court documents.
Kahn also worked closely with Epstein, managing his finances and investments. He managed other minutiae for Epstein, such as renovations on his private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Indyke and Kahn recently settled a lawsuit alleging they facilitated Epstein’s trafficking network. Court documents show they were accused of facilitating sham marriages between women Epstein was abusing for immigration purposes.
Epstein worked with Wexner, a billionaire who founded The Limited clothing company, from the mid-1980s as his financial manager and had broad control over Wexner’s fortune. They parted ways after Epstein’s 2006 arrest but stayed in touch, documents show.
Attorney Brad Edwards, who has represented many of Epstein’s victims, told CBS News: “Epstein is dead. If anyone has questions they would ask of Epstein on any topic, those questions should either be directed to Darren, Rich or Leslie [Wexner].”
Epstein appointed Indyke and Kahn as executors of his will. They now control the estate.
CBS News has reached out to Wexner for comment but did not immediately receive a response.
The House Oversight Committee has subpoenaed several figures in the convicted sex offender’s network since last August, when former U.S. Attorney General William Barr testified about his pledge to personally lead the investigation into Epstein’s death in a Manhattan detention center.
In the months since then, various people have testified — while the panel has accepted written statements from others — with scant new information on Epstein released. On Wednesday, the committee recommended holding former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt after the pair refused to appear in person before the Republican-led panel. The Clintons submitted sworn declarations to the committee last week.
Ghislane Maxwell, Epstein’s former girlfriend who is serving 20 years in federal prison for a sex trafficking conviction, is scheduled to appear before the committee on Feb. 9. Her lawyers told members that she plans to invoke the Fifth Amendment.
Wexner is set to testify Feb. 18, Kahn on Feb. 25, and Indyke is scheduled for March 5, 2026.
Republicans have thirsted for a criminal prosecution of a Clinton — Bill, Hillary, any Clinton will do — since the 1990s. Thirty years and several near-misses later, they may finally get their wish.
The Clintons almost certainly aren’t going to prison, or even getting convicted. But with characteristic hubris, Bill and Hillary have walked themselves to the brink of federal charges by defying bipartisan congressional subpoenas on the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. And it’s a good bet that our current Justice Department — which apparently makes critical decisions by a sophisticated litmus test that asks, “Do we like you, or not?” — will pursue criminal contempt charges.
The Clintons have, of course, had previous brushes with the law. We all remember the impeachment (and acquittal) of Bill Clinton over his false testimony about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. But nearly lost to history is that Clinton barely avoided a federal indictment. On his final day in office in January 2001, Clinton agreed to a deal with prosecutors that spared him criminal charges for perjury and obstruction in exchange for a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license, a $25,000 fine, and a public statement acknowledging that he had testified falsely. For my latest book, I asked Robert Ray, who replaced Ken Starr as Independent Prosecutor in late 1999, whether he would have indicted Clinton had he not agreed to the deal. Ray responded, “We were more than prepared to pull the trigger, if necessary.”
A decade and a half later, Hillary Clinton narrowly dodged an indictment for her use of a private email server while secretary of state. Shortly before the 2016 election, FBI Director James Comey unilaterally announced that Clinton had been “extremely careless” but that the Justice Department would not pursue criminal charges; he then announced the case’s re-opening, eleven days before the election. Clinton was spared an indictment, but Comey’s public comments probably cost her the presidency.
Yet for all the political drama and close prosecutorial calls, the Clintons could soon find themselves sitting at the defense table over a pair of comparatively mundane subpoenas.
In August 2025, the House Oversight Committee — led by Republican James Comer, a serial over-promiser who habitually teases shocking revelations about prominent Democrats but never delivers — subpoenaed both Clintons for in-person testimony over their connections to Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Both subpoenas were approved unanimously by all Republicans and Democrats on the Committee.
Through their lawyers, the Clintons engaged in a monthslong pushback campaign. They argued to the Committee that the subpoenas were unrelated to any legitimate legislative purpose; were intended to harass and embarrass; and were overbroad and unduly burdensome. Indeed, it’s not clear Hillary would know anything of substance about the details of Epstein’s criminal enterprise. And while Bill Clinton would have a hellacious time explaining newly-revealed photographs of his nighttime frolic in a pool with Maxwell and an unidentified female, it’s difficult to articulate how testimony about his dealings with Epstein thirty years ago might somehow inform the drafting of anti-human-trafficking legislation now, as the Committee disingenuously claims.
But the Committee holds broad subpoena power, and Comer was unswayed by these legal arguments. Comer declined the Clintons’ offer to provide written statements in lieu of live testimony and, ultimately, the parties reached no resolution.
Listen to The Counsel podcast
Join a team of experts — from former prosecutors to legal scholars — as they break down the complex legal issues shaping our country today. Twice a week, Elie Honig and other CAFE Contributors examine the intersecting worlds of law, politics, and current events.
Subscribe on:
Last week, the Clintons launched a self-important, last-ditch public relations campaign. In a letter signed personally by both Bill and Hillary (not their lawyers), the Clintons wrapped themselves in all manner of high-minded irrelevancy. They cited “[p]eople [who] have been seized from their homes by masked federal agents,” the mass pardons of January 6 rioters, Donald Trump’s targeting of universities and law firms, and the recent fatal shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis. “Every person has to decide when they have seen or heard enough, and are ready to fight for this country, its principles, and its people, no matter the consequences,” the Clintons wrote with a self-important flourish. “For us, now is that time.” Yet the Clintons conspicuously failed to explain how their cited examples had anything to do with whether Bill Clinton should tell Congress what he knows about Jeffrey Epstein’s child sex trafficking network.
Now the Clintons have worked themselves into a jam. They made a curious tactical decision not to file a lawsuit in advance to “quash” (invalidate, essentially) the subpoenas; while they still might formally challenge the subpoenas in court, it’s likely too late. When the designated days arrived last week for the Clintons to testify, they both failed to appear. At that point, the Committee had all it needed to pursue contempt: presumptively valid subpoenas (and no court order invalidating them); two dates for testimony; and no-shows by both Bill and Hillary.
On Wednesday, the Oversight Committee voted to hold both Clintons in contempt of Congress. Notably, nine Democrats joined their Republican colleagues to vote for contempt for Bill Clinton, while three Democrats voted for contempt against Hillary. The matter will next move to the full House for a vote. If it passes — Republicans hold a slim majority, and several Democrats on the Committee voted for the subpoenas and contempt — then the matter will be formally referred to the Justice Department for potential prosecution.
That’ll leave the final call to DOJ leadership. Both attorney general Pam Bondi and deputy attorney general Todd Blanche have made clear that political retribution is their highest aspiration. Witness, for example, the spectacularly failed payback prosecutions of James Comey and Letitia James, and the recent full-bore investigations of seemingly every prominent Democrat in Minnesota — but not the ICE officer who fatally shot Good.
And consider that, during the Biden administration, lightning-rod Trump confidantes Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon were prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned for four months each for contempt after they, too, defied Congressional subpoenas. Navarro and Bannon made less of an effort than the Clintons have to engage with the Committee, and were more defiant in general, but those are thin distinctions. At bottom, the Clintons did the same thing as the two Trump loyalists.
If the Justice Department does indict the Clintons for contempt, don’t count on the cases getting anywhere. The cases would have to be charged in Washington D.C., which is overwhelmingly pro-Democratic and anti-Trump. Trump received less than 7 percent of the vote in D.C. in all three of his presidential runs; Bill Clinton topped 84 percent in both of his campaigns, and Hillary topped 90 percent in hers. A grand jury might well refuse to indict, even under the low “probable cause” standard, and it’s almost impossible to conceive of a D.C. trial jury unanimously voting to convict Bill or Hillary.
But it’s not clear the Justice Department, or Comer, or Trump would care about the ultimate outcome. After more than three decades of futile yearning for a Clinton indictment, Republicans have never seen an opportunity quite like the one the Clintons have handed them now. The prospect of a Clinton criminal charge — even if unlikely to succeed — might just be too much to resist.
A House committee advanced resolutions Wednesday to hold former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt of Congress over the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, opening the prospect of the House using one of its most powerful punishments against a former president for the first time.
In bipartisan votes, the Republican-controlled House Oversight Committee approved the contempt of Congress charges, setting up potential votes in the House early next month. In a rare departure from party lines, some Democrats supported the contempt measures against the Clintons, with several progressive lawmakers emphasizing the need for full transparency in the Epstein investigation.
The votes were the latest turn in the Epstein saga as Congress investigates how the late financier was able to sexually abuse dozens of teenage girls for years.
“No witness, not a former president or a private citizen, may willfully defy a congressional subpoena without consequence. But that is what the Clintons did and that is why we are here,” Rep. James Comer, the chairman, said at the session on Wednesday.
The repercussions of contempt charges loomed large, given the possibility of a substantial fine and even incarceration. Still, there were signs of a potential thaw as the Clintons appeared to be searching for an off-ramp to testify. In addition, passage of contempt charges through the full House was far from guaranteed, requiring a majority vote — something Republicans increasingly struggle to achieve.
The Clintons have said they had nothing to do with Epstein for decades and are seeking a resolution to the dispute. This week, they offered to have the committee leadership and staff interview Bill Clinton in New York.
Comer rejected that offer Tuesday, insisting that any interview also have an official transcript.
What do lawmakers want to know from the Clintons?
The push in Washington for a reckoning over Epstein has shown details of the connections between the wealthy financier and both Bill Clinton and Trump, among many other high-powered men. Epstein killed himself in 2019 in a New York jail cell while awaiting trial.
Bill Clinton, President Donald Trump and many others connected to Epstein have not been accused of wrongdoing. Yet lawmakers are wrestling over who receives the most scrutiny.
A spokesman for the Clintons, Angel Ureña, said on social media that the Clintons are trying to help the Epstein investigation but that “both Clintons have been out of office for over a decade. Neither had anything to do with him for more than 20 years.”
Behind the scenes, longtime Clinton lawyer David Kendall has tried to negotiate an agreement with Comer for months. Kendall raised the prospect of having the Clintons testify on Christmas and Christmas Eve, according to the committee’s account of the negotiations.
The Clintons, who contend the subpoenas are invalid because they do not serve any legislative purpose, have also offered the committee written declarations about their interactions with Epstein.
How Democrats are approaching the issue
Democrats have largely been focused on advancing the investigation into Epstein rather than mounting a defense of the Clintons, who led their party for decades. They agreed that Bill Clinton should inform the committee if he has any pertinent information about Epstein’s abuses.
A wealthy financier, Epstein donated to Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign and Hillary Clinton’s joint fundraising committee ahead of her 2000 Senate campaign in New York.
“No president or former president is above the law,” the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Robert Garcia, said at the hearing.
On Wednesday, Democrats tried to advance several changes to the contempt of Congress charges. Several argued that Hillary Clinton should be exempted because she has said she had very little personal interaction with Epstein. Democratic lawmakers also tried to downgrade the contempt of Congress resolution to a civil rather than criminal offense.
Democrats spent the hearing criticizing Comer for focusing on the Clintons when the Justice Department is running a month late on a congressionally-mandated deadline to publicly release its case files on Epstein. Comer has also allowed several former attorneys general to provide the committee with written statements attesting to their limited knowledge of the case.
The committee had also subpoenaed Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime confidant, who is serving a lengthy prison sentence for a conviction on sex trafficking charges. But Comer declined to press for the interview after Maxwell’s attorney indicated she would invoke Fifth Amendment rights in any deposition.
“It’s interesting that it’s this subpoena only that Republicans and the chairman have been obsessed about putting all their energy behind,” Garcia said.
Comer said the committee will interview Maxwell next month. Attorney General Pam Bondi will also appear before the House Judiciary Committee in February.
In the end, nine Democrats voted with all Republicans on the committee to advance contempt against Bill Clinton, and three Democrats — Reps. Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan — joined in the vote to advance the contempt resolution for Hillary Clinton.
Democrats embraced the call for full transparency on Epstein after Trump’s return to the White House, particularly after Bondi stumbled on her promise to release the entirety of the unredacted Epstein files to the public. The backlash scrambled traditional ideological lines, leading Republicans to side with Democrats demanding further investigation.
The pressure eventually resulted in a bipartisan subpoena from the committee that ordered the Justice Department and Epstein’s estate to release files related to Epstein. Republicans quickly moved to include the Clintons in the subpoena.
Comer has indicated that he will insist that the subpoena be fulfilled by nothing less than a transcribed deposition of Bill Clinton.
“They’re going to have two weeks until this bill is on the floor,” he said Wednesday
How contempt proceedings have been used
Contempt of Congress proceedings are rare, used historically as a last resort when lawmakers are trying to force testimony for high-profile investigations, such as the infamous inquiry during the 1940s into alleged Communist sympathizers in Hollywood or the impeachment proceedings of President Richard Nixon.
Most recently, Trump’s advisers Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon were convicted of contempt charges for defying subpoenas from a House panel investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, riot by a mob of the Republican president’s supporters at the Capitol. Both Navarro and Bannon spent months in prison.
The Jan. 6 committee also subpoenaed Trump in its inquiry. Trump’s lawyers resisted the subpoena, citing decades of legal precedent they said shielded ex-presidents from being ordered to appear before Congress. The committee ultimately withdrew its subpoena.
No former president has ever been successfully forced to appear before Congress, although some have voluntarily appeared.
But some Republicans said they should face the same consequences for refusing to testify as Bannon and Navarro.
Rep. Andy Biggs, an Arizona Republican, said on social media that if the Clintons “aren’t perp walked, we will have failed the American people.”
Monday marks one month since the deadline for the Justice Department to release all of its files related to Jeffrey Epstein, but only a fraction of the records have been made public.
The delays have frustrated Epstein’s victims and brought warnings of repercussions from the co-authors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif.
Massie claimed in a statement to NBC News on Friday that “Attorney General Bondi is making illegal redactions and withholding key documents that would implicate associates of Epstein.”
In a separate statement Friday, Khanna said “DOJ’s refusal to follow the law” is “an obstruction of justice.”
“They also need to release the FBI witness interviews which name other men, so the public can know who was involved. That is why Massie and I are bringing inherent contempt against Bondi and requested a special master to oversee this process,” he said.
“The survivors and the public demand transparency and justice,” Khanna said.
The Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment on the releases and the lawmakers’ claims. It said in a court filing last week that it had “made substantial progress and remains focused on releasing materials under the Act promptly while protecting victim privacy.”
“Compliance with the Act is a substantial undertaking, principally because, for a substantial number of documents, careful, manual review is necessary to ensure that victim-identifying information is redacted before materials are released,” the filing said.
Victims have complained that the Justice Department is protecting the wrong people. In a letter to the Justice Department’s inspector general last week, a group of Epstein survivors and relatives of victims complained that the redactions to date had been “selective.”
“These failures have caused renewed harm to survivors and undermined trust in the institutions responsible for safeguarding sensitive information,” the group said in its letter.
“In multiple instances, names of individuals alleged to have participated in or facilitated abuse appear to have been redacted, while identifying details of survivors were left visible. In some cases, survivors’ names, contextual identifiers, or other information sufficient to identify them publicly were not adequately protected,” they added.
They also complained, as have Khanna and Massie, that the Justice Department has not complied with another part of the law, which requires it to explain its redactions.
“Without it, there is no authoritative accounting of what records exist, what has been withheld, or why, making effective oversight and judicial review far more difficult,” an attorney for the congressmen argued in a filing.
The Justice Department has not commented on the request for the inspector general to step in. On Friday, lawyers for the Justice Department challenged Massie and Khanna’s request for a special master to oversee the release of the materials in a court filing, arguing the pair do not have legal standing to make the request.
President Donald Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law on Nov. 19. The law gave the attorney general 30 days to “make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the possession of the Department of Justice” involving Epstein, “including all investigations, prosecutions, or custodial matters.”
On Dec. 19, the day the files were due to be made public, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in an interview with Fox News that the Justice Department was releasing hundreds of thousands of documents that day and that it could take a “couple of weeks” for the rest to come to light.
He said the delay was needed to comply with the law’s directive that information about all of Epstein’s victims — of which the Justice Department has said there are over 1,000 — is redacted from the releases.
The Justice Department said in a court filing this month that it had posted “approximately 12,285 documents (comprising approximately 125,575 pages) in response to the Act.”
In a court filing Thursday, the Justice Department acknowledged that “millions” of pages of materials were outstanding.
“To date, the Department has employed over five hundred reviewers to review and redact millions of pages of materials from the investigations into Epstein and his convicted co-conspirator,” Ghislaine Maxwell, the filing said.
The filing did not give a total number of files that are outstanding or say when they would be made public.
The Justice Department released a transcript of an interview between a senior administration official and Ghislaine Maxwell, the imprisoned former associate of Jeffrey Epstein.
Among the documents that have yet to be released are any internal discussions about a controversial joint memo the FBI and the Justice Department released in July, in which they said they had conducted an “exhaustive” review of the files and determined that there was not evidence to charge anyone else in the case and that no further information would be released.
Epstein at various points had ties to Trump, former President Bill Clinton and the former Prince Andrew of Britain, among others. All have denied wrongdoing.
Epstein died by suicide in his jail cell while he was awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges in 2019.
Epstein had been investigated on similar charges a decade earlier but wound up pleading guilty to state charges involving a single underage victim after he reached a secret nonprosecution agreement with federal prosecutors in Florida. The deal resulted in Epstein’s serving just 13 months in a Palm Beach County jail, which he was allowed to leave almost daily via a work-release program and have his own private security detail.
Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison term for conspiring to sex traffic minors.
Ryan J. Reilly, Hallie Jackson and Joe Murphy contributed.
Prince Andrew will no longer be called the Duke of York after giving up his title in the wake of continued scrutiny surrounding his connection to Jeffrey Epstein.
Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor said Friday that a judge lacks the authority to appoint a neutral expert to oversee the public release of documents in the sex trafficking probe of financier Jeffrey Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer was told in a letter signed by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton that he must reject a request this week by the congressional cosponsors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act to appoint a neutral expert.
U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, and Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, say they have “urgent and grave concerns” about the slow release of only a small number of millions of documents that began last month.
In a filing to the judge they said they believed “criminal violations have taken place” in the release process.
Clayton, though, said Khanna and Massie do not have standing with the court that would allow them to seek the “extraordinary” relief of the appointment of a special master and independent monitor.
Engelmayer “lacks the authority” to grant such a request, he said, particularly because the congressional representatives who made the request are not parties to the criminal case that led to Maxwell’s December 2021 sex trafficking conviction and subsequent 20-year prison sentence for recruiting girls and women for Epstein to abuse and aiding the abuse.
Khanna said Clayton’s response “misconstrued” the intent of their request.
“We are informing the Court of serious misconduct by the Department of Justice that requires a remedy, one we believe this Court has the authority to provide, and which victims themselves have requested,” Khanna said in a statement.
“Our purpose is to ensure that DOJ complies with its representations to the Court and with its legal obligations under our law,” he added.
Epstein died in a federal jail in New York City in August 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. The death was ruled a suicide.
The Justice Department expects to update the court “again shortly” regarding its progress in turning over documents from the Epstein and Maxwell investigative files, Clayton said in the letter.
The Justice Department has said the files’ release was slowed by redactions required to protect the identities of abuse victims.
In their letter, Khanna and Massie wrote that the Department of Justice’s release of only 12,000 documents out of more than 2 million documents being reviewed was a “flagrant violation” of the law’s release requirements and had caused “ serious trauma to survivors.”
“Put simply, the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act,” the congressmen said as they asked for the appointment of an independent monitor to ensure all documents and electronically stored information are immediately made public.
They also recommended that a court-appointed monitor be given authority to prepare reports about the true nature and extent of the document production and whether improper redactions or conduct have taken place.
[ad_2]
Michael R. Sisak, Larry Neumeister, The Associated Press
Many of the documents and photos from the Epstein files, such as this one depicting Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Ghislaine Maxwell, feature significant redactions.
Department of Justice
“This is a time-intensive process due to the voluminous materials, the idiosyncratic nature of many of the materials, and the need to protect victim-identifying information,” Bondi writes. “The Department will continue to apprise the Court of its progress in this regard,” she continues, but does not provide a timeline.
Frustrating, yes, but a situation Americans might have to accept. Though Democrat Rep. Ro Khanna of California and Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massieasked to Engelmayer to appoint an independent monitor to oversee the file release, as they suspect “serious misconduct by the Department of Justice,” the judge’s hands appear to be tied at the moment. According to a letter sent to Engelmayer Friday by US Attorney Jay Clayton, the judge “lacks the authority” to appoint that neutral party, the Associated Press reports, as Khanna and Massie lack standing with the court that would allow them to make that demand.
Via statement, Khanna says that Clayton misunderstood their request, which was denied as neither Khanna nor Massie were involved in the criminal case against Maxwell, which resulted in the Epstein investigation’s sole conviction. “We are informing the Court of serious misconduct by the Department of Justice that requires a remedy, one we believe this Court has the authority to provide, and which victims themselves have requested,” Khanna says. “Our purpose is to ensure that DOJ complies with its representations to the Court and with its legal obligations under our law.”
A protester holds a sign related to the release of the Jeffrey Epstein case files outside the US Capitol in Washington, DC, November 12, 2025.
SAUL LOEB
AFP via Getty Images
The U.S. Department of Justice is reviewing more than 2 million additional documents related to investigations into Jeffrey Epstein, and dozens of South Florida lawyers have been called in to help, Attorney General Pam Bondi revealed in a letter to a New York judge Monday.
The Justice Department has posted about 12,000 documents in response to a December deadline to release its files under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. There are more than 2 million additional documents “that are in various phases of review,” Bondi wrote.
The new transparency law required the Justice Department release files from all investigations into the convicted sex trafficker — who is believed to have abused about 1,000 victims — by Dec. 19. The department blew past that deadline, releasing less than 1% of the potentially relevant files in its possession so far, according to Bondi’s letter.
The Justice Department announced two weeks ago, after the December deadline passed, that it had “uncovered” over a million additional documents to review. The department now believes many of those files are copies or “largely duplicative” of documents it already had in its possession, but still require examination, according to Bondi’s letter.
Initially, Justice Department attorneys in D.C. and the U.S. Attorney’s office in New York were reviewing the files, Bondi told a judge in mid-December. Since then, “dozens of lawyers” from the Miami-based U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida, where Epstein was investigated in the mid-2000s, have started reviewing files as well.
Bondi said these attorneys are being pulled from the Florida office’s criminal and national security divisions. Former prosecutors with the office believe it has become increasingly politicized under U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones, who is pushing to prosecute Donald Trump’s enemies, the Herald has reported.
In total, there are more than 400 lawyers across the Justice Department dedicated to reviewing Epstein files, Bondi said.
Also in the letter, which Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche wrote to a judge in the U.S. case against Ghislaine Maxwell this week, the Justice Department described plans to “modify” its review process.
The department is changing its process for reviewing the documents, adding additional “electronic” reviews that were not included when Bondi detailed her plans for complying with the transparency law to the judge in December.
The latest updates come in addition to Blanche’s letter to Congress in December, obtained by the Herald, detailing the Justice Department’s plans to redact files above and beyond the requirements of the transparency act to protect victim information.
The Justice Department has also been blacking out information “otherwise covered by various privileges, including deliberative-process privilege, work-product privilege, and attorney-client privilege.”
Bondi said the new “electronic quality control searches” are to protect victim information that was inadvertently released in previous document dumps. But critics say the department has been withholding information from the released files without clear legal justification.
One document released last month, for example, redacted the names of the Epstein associates that were subpoenaed in 2019.
Records released by the DOJ Tuesday December 23, 2025 redacted the names of those Epstein associates were were subpoenaed in 2019. Department of Justice
The roughly 12,000 documents that have been released thus far under the new transparency law have revealed dozens of new photos of Epstein and powerful figures, including former President Bill Clinton. They also included multiple references to Donald Trump, with one 2020 memo revealing Trump was on many more flights with Epstein in the mid 1990s than the DOJ was initially aware of.
The documents also shed new light on the FBI’s investigations into others who may have participated in Epstein’s crimes, with one document naming 10 possible co-conspirators. The Justice Department redacted seven of these alleged co-conspirators’ names in the documents, drawing sharp criticism from the lawmakers that sponsored the bill forcing the release of the files.
The Securities and Exchange Commission was investigating Epstein’s financial transactions before his death in 2019, the newly released documents revealed. The files also revealed Epstein’s lawyers continued working to influence Florida prosecutors after they negotiated a cushy 2007 plea deal avoiding lengthy prison time for Epstein.
As the Miami Herald documented in its 2018 ”Perversion of Justice” investigation, under that deal, Epstein was allowed to leave jail regularly to work from a nearby office space where, according to lawsuits, he allegedly continued to abuse girls.
Miami Herald reporters Julie K. Brown and Ben Wieder contributed to this report.
This story was originally published January 6, 2026 at 3:38 PM.
Claire Heddles is the Miami Herald’s senior political correspondent. She previously covered national politics and Congress from Washington, D.C at NOTUS. She’s also worked as a public radio reporter covering local government and education in East Tennessee and Jacksonville, Florida.
A recently released cache of surveillance video from the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City is raising new questions about the prison cameras at the facility where Jeffrey Epstein died in his cell in 2019.
The videos were among a huge cache of materials released on Dec. 23 by the Department of Justice as congressionally mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Rather than clarifying events surrounding Epstein’s death, the footage appears to complicate the official narrative, and contradicts some prior statements about the prison’s surveillance system.
The Epstein jail videos
Epstein was found dead in his cell at approximately 6:30 a.m. on Aug. 10, 2019, by a corrections officer delivering breakfast at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, where he was awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. His death was ruled a suicide by the city’s chief medical examiner.
Three months later, then-Attorney General Bill Barr said he had personally reviewed prison surveillance footage and verified that no one entered Epstein’s cell area in the hours before his death, which supported his conclusion that Epstein died by suicide.
The FBI released that footage this summer and analysis by CBS News found that the footage did not provide a clear enough view to definitively prove that no one entered Epstein’s cell area, and there were other inconsistencies with official statements and witness interviews. The DOJ and FBI declined to comment at the time.
Specifics about what cameras were and were not operating comes mostly from a 2023 report by the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General. That report stated that although there were 11 cameras in the Special Housing Unit (SHU), 10 were not recording due to malfunctioning hard drives.
The single camera inside the common area of the SHU that was recording was positioned on an upper tier and showed only a sliver of the staircase that led to Epstein’s tier.
Image from security camera video inside the Metropolitan Correctional Center, dated Aug. 9, 2019.
U.S. Bureau of Prisons
In the 2023 report, the DOJ’s inspector general did acknowledge the existence of an additional camera covering a secondary entrance to the SHU. That footage was never released and, according to the report, did not show anything revealing about Epstein’s visitors or his death.
New footage brings questions, not answers
Among the files released by the Justice Department on Dec. 24 were more than 400 one-hour clips of surveillance videos from MCC. The footage spans non-sequential, seemingly arbitrary time periods dating back to July 5, 2019, more than a month before Epstein’s death.
According to internal DOJ emails included in the disclosure, the surveillance system was configured to retain only 30 days of footage. That raises an immediate question: Why do videos from July 5 exist at all?
One potential explanation, experts in video forensics that CBS News spoke with said, that if the system had excess storage capacity the old footage wouldn’t be overwritten, so footage outside of that 30-day window would be easily recovered.
“[The system] won’t overwrite anything until the space is needed,” said Stacy Eldridge with Silicon Prairie Cyber Services.
The new cache of video also includes footage from five more cameras inside the prison. Most notably, the release includes several hours of footage from a camera previously described as non-recording. It provides an unobstructed view of the primary entrance to the SHU and the stairs leading to Epstein’s tier.
Image from security video at the Metropolitan Correctional Center shows a view of the primary entrance to the Secure Housing Unit (SHU) and the stairs leading to Epstein’s tier.
U.S. Bureau of Prisons
The four non-sequential one-hour videos from this camera are all dated Aug. 12, 2019 — two days after Epstein’s death. However, Department of Justice correspondence states that the surveillance system stopped recording on July 29 and was not repaired until Aug, 14.
Released by Department of Justice
This raises questions about which cameras were in fact recording at the time of his death. One potential explanation is that, following Epstein’s death, the system could have been reconfigured so that this camera was attached to a different, functioning DVR recorder. Based on the fact that the on-screen display stays the same and the dates do not overlap, experts told CBS News they thought a wiring change was the most logical explanation.
“There is a plausible explanation for it, but it’s just odd,” said Nick Barreiro, a digital forensic expert with Principle Forensics.
If anything, this camera reveals the missed opportunity that a clear shot like this would have provided for investigators working to determine what happened that night.
“It fills in gaps that are obviously missing from the perspective of the other camera,” Barreiro said.
Another question is what happened with the footage from the night of July 23, less than three weeks before his death, when Epstein was found unconscious on the floor of his cell but then revived. That incident happened prior to the hard drive failures that led to the broken DVR system. Epstein’s tier had a camera positioned at the end and it would have captured his cellmate calling for assistance and corrections officers responding. The DOJ has previously said they have been unable to locate it.
Experts say that footage could have been damaged when the hard drive failed. Correspondence included in the release indicates efforts to recover the data from the damaged hard drives were abandoned because the process could have taken six months or more and wouldn’t necessarily yield results.
“They’re probably going to have to manually switch everything back together,” said Eldridge. “Like everything in every investigation, what’s your priority.”
Other cameras
In addition to the SHU footage, the DOJ also released 188 one-hour video clips from a camera covering an adjacent housing area known as “10 South,” which is designated for housing the most dangerous inmates, including suspected terrorists (although it was apparently mislabeled as “9S, L tier”). Those videos similarly do not run continuously, but instead span sporadic hours beginning July 5 and ending the day after Epstein’s death.
The disclosure also includes three one-hour videos showing a desk area from seemingly random hours on Aug. 11 and Aug. 12, as well as 26 one-hour clips from the previously acknowledged elevator bank, covering assorted hours between Aug. 7 and Aug. 11.
In addition to those videos, a 2-minute and 23-second-long video labeled “J tier” was included that shows several guards walking around a cell tier. No date is given for this video. According to the 2023 inspector general’s report, the J tier camera was not recording at the time of Epstein’s death.
Image from video at the Metropolitan Correctional Center labeled “J Tier.”
U.S. Bureau of Prisons
Additional video?
These videos are likely a fraction of the videos held by the DOJ. Documents obtained by CNN earlier this year revealed that the DOJ had footage from 147 cameras from the prison covering a 24-hour period before and after Epstein died, totaling over 8 terabytes of data. The internal documents indicate that the footage does not reveal anything significant “since the cameras in the Special Housing Unit … were not active at the time.”
After corrections officers discovered Epstein’s body, it was transported from his cell to a medical facility inside the prison, then to an ambulance waiting outside. It’s likely that some of that movement would have been captured on working cameras, but none of those have been made public.
It’s not clear if the DOJ plans to release additional video. If they do not, they could be in violation of the law which requires the release of “all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials” related to Epstein and his death.
CBS News has reached out to the Department of Justice for comment but has not received a response.
Donald Trump does not look on Jeffrey Epstein survivors with one SHRED of dignity — this according to Marjorie Taylor Greene!
The United States Representative sat down with The New York Times for a sprawling interview published on Monday, where she detailed more about her upcoming resignation in the wake of losing Trump’s support.
As we’ve been following, Marjorie has been a major proponent of releasing the Epstein files, and even helped pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which forced the government to release said files.
Trump has been extremely vocal about his disdain for Marjorie in the wake of her public support for Epstein survivors, with the Georgia politician claiming he called her “extremely angry” complaining his “friends will get hurt” if the files were released. But that wasn’t the only instance of his appalling lack of sympathy for the victims in the situation.
During her interview with the NYT, Marjorie revealed she encouraged the President to invite said survivors to the White House to give them a platform to raise awareness… but Trump didn’t give the idea the time of day. According to Marjorie, Trump said his pal’s victims had not done anything to earn such an honor.
After everything these women have been through… What a cruel and insensitive insult.
In response to Marjorie’s claims’ White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said in a statement to People:
“President Trump remains the undisputed leader of the greatest and fastest growing political movement in American history — the MAGA movement. On the other hand, Congresswoman Greene is quitting on her constituents in the middle of her term and abandoning the consequential fight we’re in — we don’t have time for her petty bitterness.”
That’s not a denial!
What are YOUR reactions to this shocking insult? Let us know in the comments down below.
If you or someone you know has experienced sexual violence and would like to learn more about resources, consider checking out https://www.rainn.org/resources
How will Republicans and Democrats respond to the delayed release of the Epstein files? – CBS News
Watch CBS News
Lawmakers may take action against the Department of Justice for the delayed release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. CBS News legal contributor Jessica Levinson weighs in.
An undated photo of Jeffrey Epstein and his defense attorney Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, released by House Oversight Committee Democrats on Dec. 12, 2025
House Oversight Committee Democrats
Jeffrey Epstein’s team of high-powered lawyers famously negotiated a lenient 2007 deal on his behalf with federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida that allowed the financier to avoid a lengthy prison sentence and plead guilty to only two state charges to settle allegations that he had abused dozens of teenage girls.
Never-before-seen documents released this week by the Department of Justice as part of the so-called Epstein Files show how his attorneys continued to try to influence federal prosecutors even after his deal was finalized, and mixed personal and business relationships with the attorneys who had agreed to settle Epstein’s case.
While federal prosecutors pushed back against Epstein’s lawyers, at the end of day, Epstein got what he wanted.
In mid-November of 2008, nearly five months after Epstein began his sentence at the Palm Beach County Jail, his attorney Jay Lefkowitz wrote to one of the Florida prosecutors on the case asking if the prosecutor could meet the week of Thanksgiving.
“Do we need to discuss anything related to Mr. Epstein or is this purely a social visit?,” asked the prosecutor, whose name is redacted.
Lefkowitz replied that he would be seeing Epstein and would provide the prosecutor updates on his client.
“But primarily,” Lefkowitz wrote, “I thought we could have a social visit. For once.”
Lefkowitz didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.
His correspondence with the unnamed prosecutor came roughly one week before the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida wrote to another of Epstein’s prominent attorneys, Roy Black, to raise a significant issue.
Miami criminal defense attorney Roy Black Handout
They learned that Epstein had applied for and been admitted to a work release program through the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office, which operated the county jail.
Under the terms of this program, Epstein was ultimately able to spend up to 12 hours a day, six days a week working at a nearby office he rented in West Palm Beach while he was serving his sentence. Epstein allegedly continued to abuse girls at this West Palm Beach Office while still technically serving his incarceration.
In the Nov. 24, 2008 letter, the U.S. Attorney’s Office wrote that Epstein’s participation in the program is a “material breach” of his deal with the government. Part of his agreement required that he spend his incarceration in jail, not on work release.
“Accordingly, the United States demands that Mr. Epstein withdraw his application to participate in the program and complete his eighteen-month term of imprisonment,” the letter states.
Neither of those things would happen.
Epstein continued to participate in the program, and he was released from custody after only 13 months.
Black died earlier this year.
‘A relaxed drink and conversation’
It wasn’t the first time federal prosecutors discussed the conditions of Epstein’s incarceration with his attorneys; the letter indicates that they raised concerns about it in June 2008 as his plea deal with the state was being finalized. It wouldn’t be the last time, either.
Another of Epstein’s attorneys, Alan Dershowitz, met for a drink in March 2009 with an attorney from the U.S. Attorney’s Office who Dershowitz identified as Jeffrey Sloman, the then-deputy U.S. attorney in Miami.
Sloman at the time was overseeing the Epstein case and succeeded Alexander Acosta as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida two months later.
“It was so nice having a relaxed drink and conversation on the porch of our neighborhood bistro,” Dershowitz wrote. “I appreciate your kind words of advice, encouragement and friendship.”
But the visit clearly wasn’t all social.
“I especially appreciate your assurance that the feds will not interfere with how the Palm Beach sheriff administers jefferey’s sentence as long as he is treated like any similarly situated inmate,” Dershowitz added, misspelling Epstein’s name. “My understanding is that if the sheriff were to decide, in the normal course of events, that the circumstances warranted Jeffrey completing the custodial portion of his sentence under alternative custody/in-home detention, your office would not intrude.”
Sloman responded saying that he looked “forward to maintaining and growing our friendship.”
He went on to say that the U.S. Attorney’s Office “will not interfere with how the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office administers the sentence imposed by the Court.”
But he added that “this does not mean that [The U.S. Attorney’s Office] condones or encourages [The Palm Beach Sheriffs Office] to mitigate the terms and conditions of his sentence.”
If the office was contacted to offer their position on Epstein being allowed to serve out the remainder of his sentence in “alternative custody or in-home detention,” Sloman wrote, “we will object.”
Dershowitz wrote back the following day with a compliment.
“You are a real mensch,” he said.
A few months later Epstein was released from the Palm Beach County jail, five months before the scheduled end of his 18-month sentence.
Dershowitz told the Miami Herald that he did for Epstein what he would do for any client.
“I try to get the best possible situation,” he said.
He added that there was “nothing unusual” about the negotiations between Epstein’s legal team and the U.S. Attorney’s Office throughout the entire process.
Sloman didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.
‘The possibility of working together’
The prospect of future work complicated the relationship between federal prosecutors in the Southern District of Florida and Epstein’s legal team.
Acosta, who formally signed off on Epstein’s non-prosecution deal with the feds, recused himself from the case in December 2008 because he was in discussions about going to work for the law firm Kirkland & Ellis, according to the Justice Department’s internal investigation into the Epstein deal released in 2020. Kirkland & Ellis employed both Lefkowitz and another of Epstein’s high-powered attorneys, former Solicitor General Ken Starr.
The report also showed that Acosta had met with Lefkowitz for breakfast in October 2007 at a West Palm Beach Marriott.
In a letter to Acosta, Lefkowitz wrote that Acosta had assured him that the U.S. Attorney’s Office would “not intervene with the State Attorney’s Office regarding this matter” and not intervene in Epstein’s state sentence. Acosta disputed that characterization in a letter sent to Lefkowitz in response, the report said. Agreeing to those terms would equate to “the imposition of a gag order,” the response to Lefkowitz said.
Epstein himself was in direct contact with one of the prosecutors who oversaw his case after he was released from custody.
The Herald previously reported that Epstein met with former prosecutor Matthew Menchel several times in 2011, 2013 and 2017, according to Epstein’s calendars released by the House Oversight Committee from material it received through a subpoena to Epstein’s estate.
The new Epstein files include another new piece of information, an October 2010 e-mail between Menchel and Epstein, less than a year and a half after Epstein’s sentence ended.
“I very much enjoyed our talk the other night,” Menchel wrote. “I look forward to the possibility of working together, but regardless let’s keep in touch.” A spokesperson for Menchel provided the Herald with a statement indicating that Menchel never met with Epstein during the time he was involved with the Epstein investigation at the U.S. Attorney’s Office and that the law firm where Menchel went to work after leaving the government, Kobre & Kim, was one of several firms Epstein considered hiring to address various legal issues.
“There was nothing inappropriate about any of Mr. Menchel’s communications or conduct,” the statement said. “Ultimately, neither Mr. Menchel nor anyone else at his firm ever represented Epstein or otherwise did business with him.”
Julie K. Brown is a member of the Miami Herald’s Investigative Team. Her 2017 probe into Palm Beach sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein won multiple journalism awards, including a George Polk Award. She was also a member of the Herald’s 2022 Pulitzer-Prize-winning team recognized for its coverage of the Surfside condo collapse. Support my work with a digital subscription
The Department of Justice said Wednesday it may have more than a million more documents related to the late Jeffrey Epstein that it needs to review and that the process could take weeks to complete.
The DOJ said two of its components, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, had just handed over the missing tranche of files, days after the Epstein Files Transparency Act deadline had passed.
“We have lawyers working around the clock to review and make the legally required redactions to protect victims, and we will release the documents as soon as possible,” the DOJ wrote in a statement on social media.
Attorney General Pam Bondi speaks alongside President Donald Trump on recent Supreme Court rulings in the briefing room at the White House on June 27, 2025.(Getty Images)
The “mass volume of material” could “take a few more weeks” to review, the DOJ said.
“The Department will continue to fully comply with federal law and President Trump’s direction to release the files,” the department wrote.
The DOJ has been sharing on a public website since Friday tens of thousands of pages of files related to Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s sex-trafficking cases as part of its obligation under the transparency bill.
Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in federal custody in 2019.(New York State Sex Offender Registry via AP, File)
President Donald Trump signed the bill into law Nov. 19, giving the DOJ 30 days to review and release all unclassified material related to the cases.
The file rollout has stirred controversy as critics have blasted the DOJ for what they say are excessive redactions and the law’s lapsed deadline Friday. Initially, the DOJ said it would miss the deadline by a couple of weeks, but Wednesday’s announcement signals that might extend further into the new year than the administration had anticipated.
Todd Blanche, then-deputy attorney general nominee, appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 12.(Daniel Heuer/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said on “Meet the Press” Sunday there was “well-settled law” that supported the DOJ missing the bill’s deadline because of a need to meet other legal requirements, like redacting victim-identifying information.
The transparency bill required the DOJ to withhold information about victims and material that could jeopardize open investigations or litigation. Officials could also leave out information “in the interest of national defense or foreign policy,” the bill said.
The bill also explicitly directed the DOJ to keep visible any details that could be damaging to high-profile and politically connected people.
Ashley Oliver is a reporter for Fox News Digital and FOX Business, covering the Justice Department and legal affairs. Email story tips to ashley.oliver@fox.com.
The Justice Department said Wednesday that it may need a “few more weeks” to release all of its records on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein after suddenly discovering more than a million potentially relevant documents, further delaying compliance with last Friday’s congressionally mandated deadline.Related video above: Justice Department releases extensive Epstein files mentioning President TrumpThe Christmas Eve announcement came hours after a dozen U.S. senators called on the Justice Department’s watchdog to examine its failure to meet the deadline. The group, 11 Democrats and a Republican, told Acting Inspector General Don Berthiaume in a letter that victims “deserve full disclosure” and the “peace of mind” of an independent audit.The Justice Department said in a social media post that federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the FBI “have uncovered over a million more documents” that could be related to the Epstein case — a stunning 11th-hour development after department officials suggested months ago that they had undertaken a comprehensive review that accounted for the vast universe of Epstein-related materials.In March, Attorney General Pam Bondi told Fox News that a “truckload of evidence” had been delivered to her after she ordered the Justice Department to “deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office” — a directive she said she made after learning from an unidentified source that the FBI in New York was “in possession of thousands of pages of documents.”In July, the FBI and Justice Department indicated in an unsigned memo that they had undertaken an “exhaustive review” and had determined that no additional evidence should be released — an extraordinary about-face from the Trump administration, which for months had pledged maximum transparency. The memo did not raise the possibility that additional evidence existed that officials were unaware of or had not reviewed.Wednesday’s post did not say when the Justice Department was informed of the newly uncovered files.In a letter last week, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Manhattan federal prosecutors already had more than 3.6 million records from sex trafficking investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, though many were copies of material already turned over by the FBI.The Justice Department said its lawyers are “working around the clock” to review the documents and remove victims’ names and other identifying information as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the law enacted last month that requires the government to open its files on Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell.“We will release the documents as soon as possible,” the department said. “Due to the mass volume of material, this process may take a few more weeks.”The announcement came amid increasing scrutiny on the Justice Department’s staggered release of Epstein-related records, including from Epstein victims and members of Congress.Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, of Kentucky, one of the chief authors of the law mandating the document release, posted Wednesday on X, “DOJ did break the law by making illegal redactions and by missing the deadline.” Another architect of the law, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said he and Massie will “continue to keep the pressure on” and noted that the Justice Department was releasing more documents after lawmakers threatened contempt.“A Christmas Eve news dump of ‘a million more files’ only proves what we already know: Trump is engaged in a massive coverup,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said after the DOJ’s announcement. “The question Americans deserve answered is simple: WHAT are they hiding — and WHY?”The White House on Wednesday defended the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein records.“President Trump has assembled the greatest cabinet in American history, which includes Attorney General Bondi and her team — like Deputy Attorney General Blanche — who are doing a great job implementing the President’s agenda,” spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.After releasing an initial wave of records Friday, more batches were posted over the weekend and on Tuesday. The Justice Department has not given any notice when more records might arrive.Records that have been released, including photographs, interview transcripts, call logs, court records and other documents, were either already public or heavily blacked out, and many lacked necessary context. Records that had not been seen before include transcripts of grand jury testimony from FBI agents who described interviews they had with several girls and young women who described being paid to perform sex acts for Epstein.Other records made public in recent days include a note from a federal prosecutor from January 2020 that said Trump had flown on the financier’s private plane more often than had been previously known and emails between Maxwell and someone who signs off with the initial “A.” They contain other references that suggest the writer was Britain’s former Prince Andrew. In one, “A” writes, “How’s LA? Have you found me some new inappropriate friends?”The senators’ call Wednesday for an inspector general audit comes days after Schumer introduced a resolution that, if passed, would direct the Senate to file or join lawsuits aimed at forcing the Justice Department to comply with the disclosure and deadline requirements. In a statement, he called the staggered, heavily redacted release “a blatant cover-up.”Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joined Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., in leading the call for an inspector general audit. Others signing the letter were Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Adam Schiff of California, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, both of New Jersey, Gary Peters of Michigan, Chris van Hollen of Maryland, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.“Given the (Trump) Administration’s historic hostility to releasing the files, politicization of the Epstein case more broadly, and failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a neutral assessment of its compliance with the statutory disclosure requirements is essential,” the senators wrote. Full transparency, they said, “is essential in identifying members of our society who enabled and participated in Epstein’s crimes.”__Sisak reported from Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
WASHINGTON —
The Justice Department said Wednesday that it may need a “few more weeks” to release all of its records on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein after suddenly discovering more than a million potentially relevant documents, further delaying compliance with last Friday’s congressionally mandated deadline.
Related video above: Justice Department releases extensive Epstein files mentioning President Trump
The Christmas Eve announcement came hours after a dozen U.S. senators called on the Justice Department’s watchdog to examine its failure to meet the deadline. The group, 11 Democrats and a Republican, told Acting Inspector General Don Berthiaume in a letter that victims “deserve full disclosure” and the “peace of mind” of an independent audit.
The Justice Department said in a social media post that federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the FBI “have uncovered over a million more documents” that could be related to the Epstein case — a stunning 11th-hour development after department officials suggested months ago that they had undertaken a comprehensive review that accounted for the vast universe of Epstein-related materials.
In March, Attorney General Pam Bondi told Fox News that a “truckload of evidence” had been delivered to her after she ordered the Justice Department to “deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office” — a directive she said she made after learning from an unidentified source that the FBI in New York was “in possession of thousands of pages of documents.”
In July, the FBI and Justice Department indicated in an unsigned memo that they had undertaken an “exhaustive review” and had determined that no additional evidence should be released — an extraordinary about-face from the Trump administration, which for months had pledged maximum transparency. The memo did not raise the possibility that additional evidence existed that officials were unaware of or had not reviewed.
Wednesday’s post did not say when the Justice Department was informed of the newly uncovered files.
In a letter last week, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Manhattan federal prosecutors already had more than 3.6 million records from sex trafficking investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, though many were copies of material already turned over by the FBI.
The Justice Department said its lawyers are “working around the clock” to review the documents and remove victims’ names and other identifying information as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the law enacted last month that requires the government to open its files on Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell.
“We will release the documents as soon as possible,” the department said. “Due to the mass volume of material, this process may take a few more weeks.”
The announcement came amid increasing scrutiny on the Justice Department’s staggered release of Epstein-related records, including from Epstein victims and members of Congress.
Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, of Kentucky, one of the chief authors of the law mandating the document release, posted Wednesday on X, “DOJ did break the law by making illegal redactions and by missing the deadline.”
Another architect of the law, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said he and Massie will “continue to keep the pressure on” and noted that the Justice Department was releasing more documents after lawmakers threatened contempt.
“A Christmas Eve news dump of ‘a million more files’ only proves what we already know: Trump is engaged in a massive coverup,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said after the DOJ’s announcement. “The question Americans deserve answered is simple: WHAT are they hiding — and WHY?”
The White House on Wednesday defended the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein records.
“President Trump has assembled the greatest cabinet in American history, which includes Attorney General Bondi and her team — like Deputy Attorney General Blanche — who are doing a great job implementing the President’s agenda,” spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.
After releasing an initial wave of records Friday, more batches were posted over the weekend and on Tuesday. The Justice Department has not given any notice when more records might arrive.
Records that have been released, including photographs, interview transcripts, call logs, court records and other documents, were either already public or heavily blacked out, and many lacked necessary context. Records that had not been seen before include transcripts of grand jury testimony from FBI agents who described interviews they had with several girls and young women who described being paid to perform sex acts for Epstein.
Other records made public in recent days include a note from a federal prosecutor from January 2020 that said Trump had flown on the financier’s private plane more often than had been previously known and emails between Maxwell and someone who signs off with the initial “A.” They contain other references that suggest the writer was Britain’s former Prince Andrew. In one, “A” writes, “How’s LA? Have you found me some new inappropriate friends?”
The senators’ call Wednesday for an inspector general audit comes days after Schumer introduced a resolution that, if passed, would direct the Senate to file or join lawsuits aimed at forcing the Justice Department to comply with the disclosure and deadline requirements. In a statement, he called the staggered, heavily redacted release “a blatant cover-up.”
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joined Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., in leading the call for an inspector general audit. Others signing the letter were Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Adam Schiff of California, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, both of New Jersey, Gary Peters of Michigan, Chris van Hollen of Maryland, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
“Given the (Trump) Administration’s historic hostility to releasing the files, politicization of the Epstein case more broadly, and failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a neutral assessment of its compliance with the statutory disclosure requirements is essential,” the senators wrote. Full transparency, they said, “is essential in identifying members of our society who enabled and participated in Epstein’s crimes.”
The Justice Department said Wednesday that it may need a “few more weeks” to release all of its records on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein after suddenly discovering more than a million potentially relevant documents, further delaying compliance with last Friday’s congressionally mandated deadline.Related video above: Justice Department releases extensive Epstein files mentioning President TrumpThe Christmas Eve announcement came hours after a dozen U.S. senators called on the Justice Department’s watchdog to examine its failure to meet the deadline. The group, 11 Democrats and a Republican, told Acting Inspector General Don Berthiaume in a letter that victims “deserve full disclosure” and the “peace of mind” of an independent audit.The Justice Department said in a social media post that federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the FBI “have uncovered over a million more documents” that could be related to the Epstein case — a stunning 11th-hour development after department officials suggested months ago that they had undertaken a comprehensive review that accounted for the vast universe of Epstein-related materials.In March, Attorney General Pam Bondi told Fox News that a “truckload of evidence” had been delivered to her after she ordered the Justice Department to “deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office” — a directive she said she made after learning from an unidentified source that the FBI in New York was “in possession of thousands of pages of documents.”In July, the FBI and Justice Department indicated in an unsigned memo that they had undertaken an “exhaustive review” and had determined that no additional evidence should be released — an extraordinary about-face from the Trump administration, which for months had pledged maximum transparency. The memo did not raise the possibility that additional evidence existed that officials were unaware of or had not reviewed.Wednesday’s post did not say when the Justice Department was informed of the newly uncovered files.In a letter last week, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Manhattan federal prosecutors already had more than 3.6 million records from sex trafficking investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, though many were copies of material already turned over by the FBI.The Justice Department said its lawyers are “working around the clock” to review the documents and remove victims’ names and other identifying information as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the law enacted last month that requires the government to open its files on Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell.“We will release the documents as soon as possible,” the department said. “Due to the mass volume of material, this process may take a few more weeks.”The announcement came amid increasing scrutiny on the Justice Department’s staggered release of Epstein-related records, including from Epstein victims and members of Congress.Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, of Kentucky, one of the chief authors of the law mandating the document release, posted Wednesday on X, “DOJ did break the law by making illegal redactions and by missing the deadline.” Another architect of the law, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said he and Massie will “continue to keep the pressure on” and noted that the Justice Department was releasing more documents after lawmakers threatened contempt.The White House on Wednesday defended the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein records.“President Trump has assembled the greatest cabinet in American history, which includes Attorney General Bondi and her team — like Deputy Attorney General Blanche — who are doing a great job implementing the President’s agenda,” spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.After releasing an initial wave of records Friday, more batches were posted over the weekend and on Tuesday. The Justice Department has not given any notice when more records might arrive.Records that have been released, including photographs, interview transcripts, call logs, court records and other documents, were either already public or heavily blacked out, and many lacked necessary context. Records that had not been seen before include transcripts of grand jury testimony from FBI agents who described interviews they had with several girls and young women who described being paid to perform sex acts for Epstein.Other records made public in recent days include a note from a federal prosecutor from January 2020 that said Trump had flown on the financier’s private plane more often than had been previously known and emails between Maxwell and someone who signs off with the initial “A.” They contain other references that suggest the writer was Britain’s former Prince Andrew. In one, “A” writes, “How’s LA? Have you found me some new inappropriate friends?”The senators’ call Wednesday for an inspector general audit comes days after Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., introduced a resolution that, if passed, would direct the Senate to file or join lawsuits aimed at forcing the Justice Department to comply with the disclosure and deadline requirements. In a statement, he called the staggered, heavily redacted release “a blatant cover-up.”Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joined Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., in leading the call for an inspector general audit. Others signing the letter were Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Adam Schiff of California, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, both of New Jersey, Gary Peters of Michigan, Chris van Hollen of Maryland, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.“Given the (Trump) Administration’s historic hostility to releasing the files, politicization of the Epstein case more broadly, and failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a neutral assessment of its compliance with the statutory disclosure requirements is essential,” the senators wrote. Full transparency, they said, “is essential in identifying members of our society who enabled and participated in Epstein’s crimes.”__Sisak reported from Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
WASHINGTON —
The Justice Department said Wednesday that it may need a “few more weeks” to release all of its records on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein after suddenly discovering more than a million potentially relevant documents, further delaying compliance with last Friday’s congressionally mandated deadline.
Related video above: Justice Department releases extensive Epstein files mentioning President Trump
The Christmas Eve announcement came hours after a dozen U.S. senators called on the Justice Department’s watchdog to examine its failure to meet the deadline. The group, 11 Democrats and a Republican, told Acting Inspector General Don Berthiaume in a letter that victims “deserve full disclosure” and the “peace of mind” of an independent audit.
The Justice Department said in a social media post that federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the FBI “have uncovered over a million more documents” that could be related to the Epstein case — a stunning 11th-hour development after department officials suggested months ago that they had undertaken a comprehensive review that accounted for the vast universe of Epstein-related materials.
In March, Attorney General Pam Bondi told Fox News that a “truckload of evidence” had been delivered to her after she ordered the Justice Department to “deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office” — a directive she said she made after learning from an unidentified source that the FBI in New York was “in possession of thousands of pages of documents.”
In July, the FBI and Justice Department indicated in an unsigned memo that they had undertaken an “exhaustive review” and had determined that no additional evidence should be released — an extraordinary about-face from the Trump administration, which for months had pledged maximum transparency. The memo did not raise the possibility that additional evidence existed that officials were unaware of or had not reviewed.
Wednesday’s post did not say when the Justice Department was informed of the newly uncovered files.
In a letter last week, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said Manhattan federal prosecutors already had more than 3.6 million records from sex trafficking investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, though many were copies of material already turned over by the FBI.
The Justice Department said its lawyers are “working around the clock” to review the documents and remove victims’ names and other identifying information as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the law enacted last month that requires the government to open its files on Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell.
“We will release the documents as soon as possible,” the department said. “Due to the mass volume of material, this process may take a few more weeks.”
The announcement came amid increasing scrutiny on the Justice Department’s staggered release of Epstein-related records, including from Epstein victims and members of Congress.
Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, of Kentucky, one of the chief authors of the law mandating the document release, posted Wednesday on X, “DOJ did break the law by making illegal redactions and by missing the deadline.”
Another architect of the law, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said he and Massie will “continue to keep the pressure on” and noted that the Justice Department was releasing more documents after lawmakers threatened contempt.
The White House on Wednesday defended the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein records.
“President Trump has assembled the greatest cabinet in American history, which includes Attorney General Bondi and her team — like Deputy Attorney General Blanche — who are doing a great job implementing the President’s agenda,” spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement.
After releasing an initial wave of records Friday, more batches were posted over the weekend and on Tuesday. The Justice Department has not given any notice when more records might arrive.
Records that have been released, including photographs, interview transcripts, call logs, court records and other documents, were either already public or heavily blacked out, and many lacked necessary context. Records that had not been seen before include transcripts of grand jury testimony from FBI agents who described interviews they had with several girls and young women who described being paid to perform sex acts for Epstein.
Other records made public in recent days include a note from a federal prosecutor from January 2020 that said Trump had flown on the financier’s private plane more often than had been previously known and emails between Maxwell and someone who signs off with the initial “A.” They contain other references that suggest the writer was Britain’s former Prince Andrew. In one, “A” writes, “How’s LA? Have you found me some new inappropriate friends?”
The senators’ call Wednesday for an inspector general audit comes days after Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., introduced a resolution that, if passed, would direct the Senate to file or join lawsuits aimed at forcing the Justice Department to comply with the disclosure and deadline requirements. In a statement, he called the staggered, heavily redacted release “a blatant cover-up.”
Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joined Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., in leading the call for an inspector general audit. Others signing the letter were Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Adam Schiff of California, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, both of New Jersey, Gary Peters of Michigan, Chris van Hollen of Maryland, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island.
“Given the (Trump) Administration’s historic hostility to releasing the files, politicization of the Epstein case more broadly, and failure to comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a neutral assessment of its compliance with the statutory disclosure requirements is essential,” the senators wrote. Full transparency, they said, “is essential in identifying members of our society who enabled and participated in Epstein’s crimes.”
Washington — The Justice Department said Wednesday that it was informed by the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York and the FBI that “they have uncovered over a million more documents potentially related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.”
In a post on X, the Justice Department said it had received the documents for review, noting that the process of releasing the files may take “a few more weeks” due to the volume of materials.
“We have lawyers working around the clock to review and make the legally required redactions to protect victims, and we will release the documents as soon as possible,” the Justice Department said.
DOJ said it will “continue to fully comply with federal law and President Trump’s direction to release the files.” It did not say when it was informed of the new documents.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Congress approved and the president signed into law last month, set a Dec. 19 deadline for the Justice Department to release all the unclassified materials it has related to the late sex offender and his co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell. The law makes exceptions for protecting survivors’ personal information and other narrow categories.
The Justice Department released an initial tranche of documents on the day of the deadline, and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the remaining documents would be released on a rolling basis. On Tuesday, the Justice Department released another huge batch of documents, including more than 11,000 files totaling nearly 30,000 pages.
The files released so far include thousands of photos, court records, grand jury transcripts, FBI and DOJ documents, emails, news clippings, videos and other records.
The Justice Department said Wednesday that it’s received a new tranche of records — more than 1 million documents — “potentially” related to Jeffrey Epstein’s case, requiring additional time to process them before release.
The DOJ said it “may take a few more weeks” to review the files produced by the FBI and the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.
“The US Attorney for the Southern District of New York and the FBI have informed the Department of Justice that they have uncovered over a million more documents potentially related to the Jeffrey Epstein case,” the Justice Department said on its X accountWednesday afternoon.
“The DOJ has received these documents from SDNY and the FBI to review them for release, in compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, existing statutes, and judicial orders. We have lawyers working around the clock to review and make the legally required redactions to protect victims, and we will release the documents as soon as possible. Due to the mass volume of material, this process may take a few more weeks.”
Spokespeople for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the Department of Justice did not immediately respond to NBC News requests for comment about the contents of the documents and why they weren’t uncovered earlier. A spokesperson for the FBI declined to comment.
Epstein died in his jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges in the Southern District of New York. Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s accomplice, was indicted in July 2020 on federal sex trafficking charges. She was found guilty in December 2021 in New York and is serving a 20-year prison sentence.
The Justice Department publicly released thousands of pages of Epstein files on Friday, the statutory deadline for releasing all of the files as outlined in the Epstein Files Transparency Act that was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump last month. Another tranche was released Tuesday.
After the initial batch, Justice Department officials said they needed more time to review the files they have on hand and redact text and images related to Epstein’s victims. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in an interview with Fox News on Friday that he expected the entirety of the Epstein files to be online by Jan. 2.
“The reason why we are still reviewing documents and still continuing our process is simply to protect victims,” Blanche told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday.
“We’re going through a very methodical process with hundreds of lawyers looking at every single document and making sure that victims’ names and any of the information from victims is protected and redacted, which is exactly what the [Epstein Files] Transparency Act expects,” he added.
As of Wednesday, the Justice Department had released about 40,000 documents related to Epstein, according to an NBC News analysis.
The files released so far have included several documents that mentioned President Donald Trump, including one that indicated he had flown on Epstein’s private jet more times than previously known.
Trump has not been accused of any wrongdoing, and he has denied doing anything improper. The president has said he cut ties with Epstein at some point in the early 2000s because he was a “creep.”
The Justice Department said Tuesday in a post on X that the documents release included “untrue and sensationalist claims” about Trump.
Some members of Congress have criticized the delay in releasing all of the Epstein files.
Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who both spearheaded the bipartisan effort in Congress this year to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, have promised to hold officials accountable for the holdup, floating impeachment or charges of contempt.
On Wednesday, after the Justice Department said more Epstein files were found, Khanna said his threat with Massie to pursue contempt charges helped lead to the DOJ’s announcement.
“@RepThomasMassie & I will continue to keep the pressure on. After we said we are bringing contempt, the DOJ is now finding millions more documents to release,” the California congressman wrote.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., responded to the Justice Department’s announcement of a longer timeline for releasing the files by accusing them of a “coverup.”
“A Christmas Eve news dump of ‘a million more files’ only proves what we already know: Trump is engaged in a massive coverup. The question Americans deserve answered is simple: WHAT are they hiding—and WHY? Justice delayed is justice denied. Release the files. Follow the law,” Schumer wrote in a post on X.
Schumer this week introduced a resolution that would direct the Senate to “initiate legal action against the DOJ” for not releasing the full Epstein files by last Friday.
Congress is scheduled to be back in session the first full week of January.
Democrats in the House of Representative released 19 images, including photos of Jeffrey Epstein with presidents Trump and Clinton, Ghislaine Maxwell, billionaire Bill Gates, film director Woody Allen and conservative firebrand Steve Bannon. NBC New York’s Jonathan Dienst reports.
