New court filings from the Justice Department reveal more details about what Brian Cole, the man accused of placing two pipe bombs around Washington, D.C., on the eve of Jan. 6, 2021, allegedly told investigators. Scott MacFarlane has the latest.
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.
Trump mentioned in newly released Epstein files – CBS News
Watch CBS News
The Justice Department released thousands of new documents from the Jeffrey Epstein files, including many that mention President Trump. Scott MacFarlane reports.
At least 15 files that were released by the Justice Department Friday in relation to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were no longer available on the department’s website on Saturday, CBS News has determined.
CBS News downloaded the complete set of documents on Friday and compared it to what is available Saturday.
It was unclear why the files are missing. CBS News has reached out to the Justice Department for comment.
One of the missing files showed a mass of framed photos on a credenza desk. The photos showed former President Bill Clinton, and another was of the pope. In an open drawer, there was a photo of President Trump, Epstein, and Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell.
Other missing files included photos of a room with what appeared to be a massage table and nude photos and nude paintings.
The episode has deepened concerns that had already emerged from the Justice Department’s much-anticipated document release. The tens of thousands of pages made public offered little new insight into Epstein’s crimes or the prosecutorial decisions that allowed him to avoid serious federal charges for years, while omitting some of the most closely watched materials, including FBI interviews with victims and internal Justice Department memos on charging decisions.
Some of the most consequential records expected about Epstein are nowhere to be found in the Justice Department’s initial disclosures, which span tens of thousands of pages.
Missing are FBI interviews with survivors and internal Justice Department memos examining charging decisions — records that could have helped explain how investigators viewed the case and why Epstein was allowed in 2008 to plead guilty to a relatively minor state-level prostitution charge.
The records, required to be released under a recent law passed by Congress, hardly reference several powerful figures long associated with Epstein, including Britain’s former Prince Andrew, renewing questions about who was scrutinized, who was not, and how much the disclosures truly advance public accountability
Among the fresh nuggets: insight into the Justice Department’s decision to abandon an investigation into Epstein in the 2000s, which enabled him to plead guilty to that state-level charge, and a previously unseen 1996 complaint accusing Epstein of stealing photographs of children.
The releases so far have been heavy on images of Epstein’s homes in New York City and the U.S. Virgin Islands, with some photos of celebrities and politicians.
There was a series of never-before-seen photos of Clinton but fleetingly few of Mr. Trump. Both have been associated with Epstein, but both have since disowned those friendships. Neither has been accused of any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein and there was no indication the photos played a role in the criminal cases brought against him.
Despite a Friday deadline set by Congress to make everything public, the Justice Department said it plans to release records on a rolling basis. It blamed the delay on the time-consuming process of obscuring survivors’ names and other identifying information. The department has not given any notice when more records might arrive.
The Justice Department released thousands of files relating to Jeffrey Epstein on Friday, including photos featuring people like former President Bill Clinton and Mick Jagger. However, survivors are concerned with how much information was redacted from the files.
The records were released in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which passed last month and required the government to release virtually all Epstein-related files within 30 days.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said more files will be released “over the next couple of weeks,” even though the law required the documents to be disclosed by Friday. He later told lawmakers that the Justice Department needed more time to pore through the records and redact victims’ names.
Congressional Democrats have accused the Justice Department of failing to comply with the law, arguing the documents are too heavily redacted and should have been released in full on Friday.
Where to find the Epstein files
The files that were disclosed Friday under the Epstein Files Transparency Act are available on the Justice Department’s website, broken into five different data sets. The total number of files is roughly 3,900, nearly all of which are PDFs.
Thousands of the files are images, including photos that were seemingly taken in Epstein’s mansion in Manhattan or his private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Those include photos of his bedroom in New York, his risque wall art and a taxidermied tiger.
Many photos show Epstein socializing with his convicted associate, Ghislaine Maxwell. Former President Bill Clinton also appears in several of the images — in some cases, the former president is posing with celebrities like Michael Jackson and Mick Jagger. A spokesperson has acknowledged that Clinton traveled with Epstein on several occasions, but says he was not aware of Epstein’s crimes, and accused the Justice Department of trying to scapegoat Clinton on Friday.
Some of the photos are redacted — in certain cases, they show Epstein posing with people whose faces are obscured.
There are also a number of investigative documents, some of which have heavy redactions. In a few cases, documents are almost entirely redacted.
Why were some of the Epstein files redacted?
The law that requires the Justice Department to release the files only allows redactions under narrow circumstances, including to take out Epstein survivors’ personal information, violent images or child sexual abuse material. The government is also allowed to temporarily withhold records that “would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution.”
Records cannot be withheld solely because they would cause “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.”
Some redactions in the documents released Friday appeared to omit victims’ names, but the exact reasons for every redaction are unclear. The law also requires the department to give Congress a list of its redactions within 15 days.
What was Epstein investigated for and charged with?
The files that were released Friday are expected to stem from the litany of investigations surrounding Epstein and Maxwell, stretching back at least 20 years.
Allegations about Epstein’s conduct appeared to emerge on the government’s radar as early as the 1990s, when survivor Maria Farmer says she reported to the FBI that Epstein had abused her. In a lawsuit, she has accused the government of failing to look into her allegations.
Epstein was investigated by local police in Florida and federal prosecutors starting in the mid-2000s. That probe ended with a controversial 2007 deal in which federal prosecutors in Miami agreed not to charge him, in exchange for a guilty plea on prostitution charges in state court.
More than a decade later, Epstein was charged in New York federal court with abusing and trafficking dozens of underage girls. Maxwell was charged with sex trafficking conspiracy the following year, and was convicted at trial and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Files from several other probes could be made public. The government has investigated the circumstances surrounding Epstein’s death in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial in 2019, officially ruled a suicide. And it has investigated Miami prosecutors’ decision to cut a non-prosecution deal.
Why the Epstein files are being released now
The files are being released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Congress passed and President Trump signed into law in November. The legislation gave the attorney general 30 days to publicly release documents related to Epstein, his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, the government’s investigations into both and internal records about the cases.
The legislation was the result of years of pressure from Epstein and Maxwell’s survivors, who pushed lawmakers for more transparency about how the government handled both of their cases. Epstein’s death fueled conspiracy theories about his connections to high-powered figures in government and the business world.
The calls for transparency reached new heights over the summer. The Justice Department conducted a review of the Epstein files in the government’s possession, and concluded that there was no “client list” or evidence that he had blackmailed prominent figures. The findings infuriated many of the president’s supporters who had been calling for the release of the Epstein files for years, and opened the door for a bipartisan push to unveil the records.
California Rep. Ro Khanna, a Democrat, was the lead sponsor of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. He introduced the bill in July, and GOP Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky filed a discharge petition aimed at forcing a vote on the measure. The push was delayed by opposition from House Speaker Mike Johnson and the government shutdown in the fall. But in November, the petition received the final signature required to bring the bill up for a vote.
It passed the House by a vote of 427 to 1 and the Senate unanimously approved it. President Trump signed it into law on Nov. 19, despite spending months pressuring Republicans to oppose it, starting the clock on the 30-day deadline.
In the wake of Congress’ passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, three separate judges approved Justice Department requests to unseal grand jury transcripts from investigations into Maxwell and Epstein. One of those rulings stemmed from grand jury proceedings in South Florida in 2005 and 2007. Epstein ultimately escaped federal charges there and instead agreed to plead guilty to state prostitution charges.
The other two courtorders came from judges in New York, where Epstein and Maxwell were charged in 2019 and 2020, respectively.
When will the next group of Epstein files be released?
It’s unclear. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Fox News earlier Friday that the department would release more files “over the next couple of weeks.”
“We are looking at every single piece of paper that we are going to produce making sure every victim — their name, their identity, their story, to the extent that it needs to be protected — is completely protected,” Blanche said.
That timeline does not comply with the law, which required the release of all eligible files by Dec. 19. The department’s office of public affairs said before Friday’s release that the “initial deadline is being met as we work diligently to protect victims.”
Blanche’s comments, and the department’s failure to release all of the files, angered many Democrats who have harshly criticized the administration for its handling of the documents. Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, accused the Trump administration of violating the law and suggested they could take legal action.
“Donald Trump and the Department of Justice are now violating federal law as they continue covering up the facts and the evidence about Jeffrey Epstein’s decades-long, billion-dollar, international sex trafficking ring,” Raskin and Garcia said in a joint statement. “For months, Pam Bondi has denied survivors the transparency and accountability they have demanded and deserve and has defied the Oversight Committee’s subpoena. The Department of Justice is now making clear it intends to defy Congress itself, even as it gives star treatment to Epstein’s convicted co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell.”
Raskin and Garcia said they are “examining all legal options” given Blanche’s earlier admission.
“The survivors of this nightmare deserve justice, the co-conspirators must be held accountable, and the American people deserve complete transparency from DOJ,” they said.
The Justice Department released a new batch of files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein on Friday. Epstein survivor Sharlene Rochard joins with her reaction. Then, Spencer Kuvin, an attorney who represents some Epstein survivors, provides further analysis.
CBS News reporters and producers are poring through thousands of newly released documents related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. CBS News justice reporter Jake Rosen joins with the latest details.
Federal prosecutors announced new indictments Thursday in the widening Minnesota fraud scandal, this time involving two Philadelphia-based men accused of traveling to Minneapolis after a friend told them the taxpayer-funded programs there presented “a good opportunity to make money.”
“Minnesota has become a magnet for fraud, so much so that we have developed a fraud tourism industry – people coming to our state purely to exploit and defraud its programs,” said First Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Thompson, who brought the new charges. “This is a deeply unsettling reality that all Minnesotans should understand.”
The two men, Anthony Waddel Jefferson and Lester Brown, were accused of siphoning millions from federally funded programs administered by Minnesota officials that were meant to help the disabled and those suffering from addiction, according to court filings.
Unlike previous individuals caught up in the sprawling fraud dragnet, they don’t appear to be tied to Minnesota’s large Somali-American community.
Court filings allege the men submitted up to $3.5 million in “fake and inflated bills” for Medicaid reimbursements after they set up a company intended to provide housing and other services to individuals who qualified for the program.
They allegedly fleeced the housing program in Minnesota despite “living on the other side of the country and having no network in or connections to Minnesota or its communities,” the filings stated.
Thursday’s indictments alleged that one man registered a company to help channel state resources to the families of children with autism. But the man, Abdinajib Hassan Yussuf, allegedly spent some of the $6 million he took from the program on the purchase of a Freightliner semi-truck.
CBS News reached out to an attorney representing Yussuf, who declined to comment. Attorneys for the other defendants have not yet responded to requests for comment.
Federal prosecutors have been looking into large-scale fraud in several Minnesota programs ever since dozens were indicted and convicted starting in 2022 in the Feeding Our Future scandal, which saw the theft of $250 million in taxpayer funds meant to feed children in need.
The number of convictions is now up to 62 after one defendant pleaded guilty on Thursday morning. The three new indictments now bring the total number charged in fraud to 90.
On Thursday, a top prosecutor suggested that the total amount of fraud in Minnesota could be $9 billion or more.
Below is an overview of three of the state’s other high-profile fraud controversies.
The nonprofit partnered with the state’s Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to distribute meals, but federal prosecutors say the group submitted fake meal count sheets and invoices claiming they helped feed thousands, making millions of dollars in administrative fees and taking kickbacks from meal distribution sites, according to court documents.
“What we can say from that enormous volume of evidence is that the predominant motive of all of these individuals was their self-enrichment and their self-indulgence,” said U.S. Attorney Daniel N. Rosen. “And that’s where they spent the money overwhelmingly.”
The majority of those charged and convicted in the Feeding Our Future scheme are of Somali descent. The nonprofit’s founder, Aimee Bock, is White. Bock was convicted for her role back in March.
In recent weeks, President Trump, other Republican politicians and conservative media outlets have alleged Minnesota’s Democratic establishment — with Gov. Tim Walz as the prime focus — was bullied into inaction by the nonprofit, which contracted within the state’s Somali community. Critics claim Bock successfully shut down early scrutiny by dubbing it as racially motivated.
Mr. Trump has claimed Somali migrants “ripped off” Minnesota and has referred to the state as a “hellhole.” He has called people from Somalia “garbage” who “contribute nothing” and said: “I don’t want them in our country, I’ll be honest with you.” The U.S. Department of the Treasury says it is also investigating whether money was funneled to the Somali terror group al-Shabaab.
Earlier this month, Immigration and Customs Enforcement ramped up its presence in the Twin Cities in what is dubbed Operation Metro Surge. The Twin Cities are home to the majority of Minnesota’s 100,000-plus Somali population, according to census data. The state has the nation’s largest Somali population.
Housing Stabilization Services
Federal prosecutors have also charged nearly a dozen more people in cases involving other alleged COVID-related fraud in the state involving housing assistance and behavioral health services.
Housing Stabilization Services is a Medicaid program started in 2020 that aimed to help people with disabilities and addictions find and maintain housing. The program was under the umbrella of the Minnesota Department of Human Services and has previously been accused of being the target of widespread fraud.
In July, the state paused payments to 50 housing stabilization providers connected to the program. Eight people have been charged so far with allegedly taking millions of dollars.
On Thursday, federal agents raided a Bloomington business claiming it was helping vulnerable people live at home, but wasn’t.
“I didn’t even know what was going on,” a Bloomington woman, who wanted to remain anonymous, said. “I saw a whole group of people who had never been there before. That business is so quiet. Nothing happens there.”
She said she was shocked when she saw federal agents carrying boxes and computer equipment out of a quiet Bloomington strip mall.
“This morning we also executed a search warrant to another medicaid program here in Minnesota,” Thompson said. “It was designed to help people with disabilities live more independently in the community with assistance.”
Thompson says the company, called Ultimate Home Health Services, billed a lot but provided very little of that assistance.
New court documents reveal one of the people under its supposed “constant” care died, and no one noticed for days. The program is called Integrated Community Supports, also known as ICS.
A new search warrant says a St. Paul man with “severe mental illness” needed that help. Rick C. was one of its clients, but his mother says she “rarely saw anyone at the apartment to assist” him. He died less than a year after moving into his apartment and he “appeared to have been deceased for some period of time before police found him.”
Ultimate Home Health Services claimed to be providing 12 hours of services a day for him.
Last week, Walz unveiled a new statewide fraud prevention program led by Tim O’Malley, a former FBI agent who previously led the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension and was chief judge on the state’s Court of Administrative Hearings.
The Justice Department on Friday asked a court to unseal grand jury transcripts in the sex trafficking cases of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell.
The motion, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida by Attorney General Pam Bondi, follows the congressional passage this week of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a bill that compels the Justice Department to release all unclassified records related to Epstein within 30 days.
“In the light of the Act’s clear mandate, the Court should authorize the Department of Justice to release the grand jury transcripts and lift any preexisting protective orders that would otherwise prevent public disclosure,” the Justice Department wrote in its motion.
It stated that it would “make appropriate redactions of victim-related and other personal identifying information.”
The motion, which was also signed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and U.S. Attorney Jason Quinones, asks the court to “lift any and all preexisting protective orders that would prevent the Department from complying with the Act.”
The Justice Department filed an expedited ruling given the Epstein Act’s 30-day deadline.
President Trump, who at one time had a friendship with Epstein and had been against the bill, dropped his opposition and signed it into law on Wednesday. Mr. Trump, who cut ties with Epstein years ago, has not been accused of wrongdoing.
In July 2019, a New York federal grand jury indicted Epstein on child sex trafficking charges, about five weeks before he was found dead in a Manhattan jail. His death was later ruled a suicide.
Then, in June 2020, a New York federal grand jury indicted Maxwell, Epstein’s former partner, of conspiring with Epstein and helping to facilitate and operate his sex trafficking ring. She was convicted in December 2021 and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
This marks the latest attempt by the Justice Department to unseal Epstein and Maxwell’s grand jury records.
In August, a New York judge denied a similar Justice Department request to unseal grand jury material in the Maxwell case, arguing that anyone “who reviewed these materials expecting, based on the Government’s representations, to learn new information about Epstein’s and Maxwell’s crimes and the investigation into them, would come away feeling disappointed and misled. There is no ‘there’ there.”
Epstein, a wealthy financier known for his connections to political elites and high-profile people, was under federal probes for decades over allegations of sex trafficking. In 2008, he pleaded guilty in Florida to state charges of soliciting prostitution in exchange for having a federal case against him dropped. He served 13 months in county jail and had to register as a sex offender.
The Epstein case received renewed attention starting in July when the Justice Department released a two-page memo stating that a “systematic review” had “revealed” that Epstein had “incriminating ‘client list,’ and that “no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions.”
The memo, which prompted an outcry from Epstein accusers, came after Bondi had said in a February interview that there was an Epstein client list “sitting on my desk right now.”
Several batches of Epstein-linked documents have been intermittently released throughout the years. The latest such release occurred earlier this month, when a tranche of tens of thousands of pages of documents were released by both House Democrats and the House Oversight Committee.
Democratic Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick of Florida was indicted in federal court Wednesday for allegedly stealing millions of dollars in federal emergency funds and routing some of it to her campaign account, the Justice Department said in a statement.
The Justice Department alleged that in 2021, a year before Cherfilus-McCormick was elected to Congress, a health care company that she ran was overpaid $5 million on a Federal Emergency Management Agency-funded contract related to coronavirus vaccinations. The defendants in the case allegedly “conspired to steal” the money by sending it through multiple accounts.
Some of that overpaid money was then used to help fund Cherfilus-McCormick’s campaign to represent South Florida in the House, the Justice Department alleged. In particular, she was accused of funneling some of the money to friends and family members who donated it to her campaign, in what’s known as a “straw donor” scheme.
“Using disaster relief funds for self-enrichment is a particularly selfish, cynical crime,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. “No one is above the law, least of all powerful people who rob taxpayers for personal gain. We will follow the facts in this case and deliver justice.”
The Justice Department’s statement did not specify the charges against Cherfilus-McCormick or any other defendants. An indictment for Cherfilus-McCormick was not posted on the federal court database as of Wednesday evening.
File photo: Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick of Florida at a news conference in Washington, Sept. 20, 2024.
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
“This is an unjust, baseless, sham indictment — and I am innocent,” Cherfilus-McCormick said in a statement provided to CBS News early Thursday morning. “The timing alone is curious and clearly meant to distract from far more pressing national issues. From day one, I have cooperated with every lawful request, and I will continue to do so until this matter is resolved. I am deeply grateful for the support of my district, and I remain confident that the truth will prevail. I look forward to my day in court. Until then, I will continue fighting for my constituents.”
Cherfilus-McCormick’s legal team said in a statement the congresswoman “is a committed public servant, who is dedicated to her constituents. We will fight to clear her good name.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters late Wednesday that he would issue a statement on the criminal charges after speaking with Cherfilus-McCormick, but added: “She’s innocent until proven guilty.”
The congresswoman’s company, Trinity Healthcare Services, was also sued by emergency officials in Florida earlier this year over an alleged multimillion-dollar overpayment.
The Florida Department of Emergency Management said it contracted with Trinity to sign people up for COVID-19 vaccines. At one point, the company was accidentally paid more than $5 million rather than $50,000 due to a “clerical error,” and the company “knowingly” processed the invoice and refused to give the money back, the lawsuit says.
In response, Trinity said in court papers that the state waited three years to inform the company about the overpayments. The company said it told the Florida Department of Emergency Management it was willing to discuss the dispute, but the agency didn’t respond.
The state dropped the case last year following mediation between the two parties.
Cherfilus-McCormick has also faced a House Ethics Committee probe, after the Office of Congressional Ethics said last year she may have “requested community project funding that would be directed to a for-profit entity.”
President Trump has asked the Justice Department and FBI to investigate convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement with prominent Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton, and major financial institutions. Scott MacFarlane reports.
Washington — President Trump on Friday asked the Justice Department and FBI to investigate convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement with prominent Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton, and major financial institutions.
In a post on Truth Social, Mr. Trump accused Democrats of focusing on what he calls the “Epstein hoax” to deflect blame for the government shutdown, which ended Wednesday and was the longest in U.S. history.
“I will be asking A.G. Pam Bondi, and the Department of Justice, together with our great patriots at the FBI, to investigate Jeffrey Epstein’s involvement and relationship with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers, Reid Hoffman, J.P. Morgan, Chase, and many other people and institutions, to determine what was going on with them, and him,” the president wrote. “This is another Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, with all arrows pointing to the Democrats. Records show that these men, and many others, spent large portions of their life with Epstein, and on his ‘Island.’ Stay tuned!!!”
Attorney General Pam Bondi soon said she had asked Jay Clayton, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, to lead the investigation. Clayton’s office covers matters from Manhattan and the Bronx, as well as the counties north of New York City.
“As with all matters, the Department will pursue this with urgency and integrity to deliver answers to the American people,” she wrote on X.
Mr. Trump’s announcement comes as the House is expected to vote next week on a bill that would force the Justice Department to release files from its investigation into Epstein. The president opposes the release of that material and has accused Republicans who backed the effort to force a vote on the proposal of being “soft and foolish.” GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia told “CBS Mornings” on Friday that she believes the president’s stance on the Epstein files is a “huge miscalculation.”
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is conducting its own investigation into the federal government’s handling of its probe into Epstein, released earlier this week more than 20,000 pages of material it obtained from Epstein’s estate.
Among the records are emails and messages exchanged with Epstein that mention Mr. Trump. In one email from Epstein to author Michael Wolff in January 2019, Epstein wrote, “Of course he knew about the girls as he asked ghislaine to stop,” referencing Mr. Trump and Ghislaine Maxwell, a longtime associate of Epstein’s. It’s unclear what Epstein was referring to.
Maxwell was convicted in 2021 and is serving a 20-year prison sentence for her role in helping Epstein recruit, groom and abuse underage girls.
In another email from Epstein to Maxwell in April 2011, he wrote, “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is trump.. virginia spent hours at my house with him ,, he has never once been mentioned.”
The president has not been accused of wrongdoing. While he and Epstein ran in the same social circles in New York and Palm Beach, Florida, from the late 1980s to early 2000s, Mr. Trump has said the two had a falling out around 2004 and had not spoken in the years leading up to Epstein’s 2019 death.
The latest release from the Oversight Committee also shows that Epstein corresponded regularly with Summers, who was treasury secretary during Clinton’s presidency and led the National Economic Council under former President Barack Obama.
The Wall Street Journal reported in 2023 on Epstein’s contacts with Summers. A spokesperson for Summers said at the time that he “deeply regrets being in contact with Epstein after his conviction.” Epstein was investigated with federal and state officials between 2005 and 2006. Under a deal reached with federal prosecutors in 2007, Epstein agreed to plead guilty to two state prostitution charges and serve an 18-month sentence to avoid federal charges. He served less than 13 months and was released in 2009.
As part of its review, the House Oversight panel issued a subpoena to Clinton in August for testimony because of his past ties to Epstein and Maxwell in the early 2000s.
A spokesperson for Clinton said in 2019 after Epstein was indicted that the former president took four trips on Epstein’s plane in 2002 and 2003, traveling to Europe, Asia and Africa. Angel Ureña, the spokesperson, said the trips included stops in connection with the Clinton Foundation, and staff, foundation supporters and Clinton’s Secret Service detail were on every leg of every trip. Clinton also had a meeting with Epstein in 2002 and made “one brief visit” to Epstein’s apartment with a staff member and his security detail, Ureña said.
Trish Wexler, a spokesperson for JPMorganChase, said Friday that the federal government “had damaging information” about Epstein’s crimes and failed to share it with JPMorganChase or other financial institutions.
“We regret any association we had with the man, but did not help him commit his heinous acts,” she said. “We ended our relationship with him years before his arrest on sex trafficking charges.”
In 2023, JPMorgan agreed to settle a lawsuit filed by an unnamed victim of Epstein’s on behalf of herself and others that alleged the bank overlooked his sex trafficking and abuse in order to profit from its financial relationship with him. JPMorgan agreed to pay $290 million to the victims as part of the settlement.
Hoffman, a co-founder of LinkedIn and a major Democratic donor, said in 2019 after Epstein’s arrest that he had some interactions with Epstein and regretted participating in fundraising activity with him, according to Axios. Hoffman said in an email to the news outlet that his last interaction with Epstein had been in 2015.
Still, during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in October, Bondi attacked Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, for accepting political contributions from Hoffman, who she claimed was “one of Epstein’s closest confidants.”
The Justice Department and FBI said in a July memo that they had conducted an “exhaustive review” of material related to Epstein and “did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” They also wrote there was no “client list” or “credible evidence” that Epstein blackmailed prominent figures.
The Justice Department and FBI said that while they worked to provide the public with “maximum information” about Epstein, they determined “no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.”
The conclusions from the Trump administration sparked immense backlash against Mr. Trump and Bondi from some of the president’s supporters, many of whom were skeptical of the Justice Department’s claim that there was nothing further to be released.
Meanwhile, the Oversight Committee has continued to release records as part of its investigation, including court filings, flight records, videos and messages. In September, the panel made public pages from a book compiled by Maxwell for Epstein’s 50th birthday in 2003, which includes a letter allegedly signed by Mr. Trump and a drawing that appears to be the outline of a woman’s body. The president has denied penning the message.
Documents released by the committee show Mr. Trump and Clinton’s names are listed under the “friends” subheading in the book’s table of contents. Clinton appears to have written a handwritten note that reads, in part, “It’s reassuring isn’t it, to have lasted as long, across all the years of learning and knowing … and also to have your childlike curiosity, the drive to make a difference and the solace of friends.”
A Trump administration housing official has referred Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California to the Justice Department over allegations involving mortgage fraud, according to sources. Swalwell, who served as an impeachment manager in President Trump’s first term, has denied any wrongdoing.
Attorneys representing both James Comey and Letitia James appeared in court on Thursday to argue for the dismissal of their federal indictments on the grounds that the prosecutor who obtained them was appointed unlawfully. CBS News justice correspondent Scott MacFarlane has the details.
The NBA is now playing under a cloud of suspicion after arrests in sports rigging and illegal gambling probes. Chris Mannix, senior writer at Sports Illustrated, joins to discuss what he’s learned from his NBA sources. Then, Ethan Shackelford, a principal security consultant at IOActive, who has conducted extensive research into rigging casino card-shuffling machines, joins us to share his findings.
Norfolk, Virginia — New York Attorney General Letitia James will be appearing in court Friday for her arraignment on federal charges of bank fraud in Norfolk, Virginia, after the Justice Department indicted her earlier this month.
U.S. District Judge Jamar Walker, appointed to the federal bench by former President Joe Biden, is presiding over the case.
The indictment alleges that James misrepresented how she would use a house she bought in Norfolk in 2020, in order to obtain a lower interest rate on her mortgage. Instead of using the property as a second home, the indictment says, she rented it to a family member, treating it as an investment property, in contravention of the mortgage terms.
According to the indictment, James purchased the home for $137,000 and borrowed $109,600 — and because she received more favorable lending terms and a larger seller credit, she allegedly saved $18,933 over the life of the loan.
“This is nothing more than a continuation of the president’s desperate weaponization of our justice system,” she said.
James’ attorney, Abbe Lowell, said James “flatly and forcefully denies these charges” and said he is “deeply concerned that this case is driven by President Trump’s desire for revenge.”
In a pair oflegal filings Thursday, James’ legal team took aim at the Trump-appointed prosecutor overseeing her bank fraud case, accusing interim U.S. attorney Lindsey Halligan of an improper conversation with a journalist and vowing to seek dismissal of the indictment on the grounds that Halligan was unlawfully named to the job.
Days before James was indicted, a grand jury impaneled by the same federal prosecutor’s office handed up an indictment against former FBI Director James Comey, on charges of lying to Congress, with whom Mr. Trump clashed during his first term.
Last month, Mr. Trump publicly urged Attorney General Pam Bondi to take action against Comey and James, as well as Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California, another vocal critic of his administration.
The Justice Department launched a criminal probe into James in May regarding mortgage fraud. Three months later, it expanded its investigation into the Office of the New York Attorney General’s handling of the Trump Organization probe.
In February 2024, the state of New York won a civil fraud judgment against Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization for $354 million in fines for submitting what the judge said was “blatantly false financial data” to accountants in order to borrow more money at more favorable interest rates.
The ruling also barred the Trump Organization from seeking loans from financial institutions in New York for three years and also banned Mr. Trump from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation for three years. An appellate court erased the fine in August, but James is appealing the ruling. The court kept the other sanctions in place, however.
Mr. Trump announced last month that he had selected Halligan, a former White House aide, to temporarily lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia after the abrupt ouster of the prosecutor he had originally named to the post, Erik Siebert.
Sources told CBS News that Halligan presented evidence to the Comey and Letitia James grand juries alone, rather than with line prosecutors who had worked on the cases. Since Halligan became the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, several prosecutors have left the office or been fired.
Two federal prosecutors in the office, Kristin Bird and Elizabeth Yusi, were terminated last week from their posts as assistant U.S. attorneys in the Norfolk office after they voiced opposition to the criminal case against James. The office’s top national security official, Michael Ben’Ary, was also terminated in recent weeks.
As a result of the turnover, two North Carolina federal prosecutors have been brought in to handle the Comey case, and a federal prosecutor from Missouri will be presenting the James case.
President Trump and his legal team have asked the Justice Department to pay him about $230 million to settle two federal damage claims over investigations into him during both his first administration and the Biden administration, according to a source familiar with the claims. This raises the possibility of a conflict of interest, since some of the top Justice Department officials tasked with settling the claims defended Mr. Trump in those cases.
Both claims were filed before Mr. Trump was inaugurated for his second term.
It’s unclear whether discussions between the Trump legal team and the Justice Department are underway or whether they have occurred, but the paperwork on both claims relating to past investigations into him has been filed, the source said.
The first claim is related to the FBI and special counsel investigation into Mr. Trump regarding alleged interference by Russia in the 2016 presidential election, and the second claim concerns the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago that centered around Mr. Trump’s handling of classified documents after he left the White House in 2021. The claims were first reported by The New York Times on Tuesday.
According to the Justice Department manual, any settlement of the claims would have to be approved by the deputy attorney general or the associate attorney general. Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general, was one of Mr. Trump’s criminal defense attorneys. Stanley Woodward, associate attorney general, was Trump co-defendant Walt Nauta’s defense attorney in the classified documents case. If any compensation is approved, it would be paid for by American taxpayers.
“There is such a thing as restitution in criminal cases, but that’s for the victims of the crimes, not for those under investigation for committing one. Maybe this has happened in the past, but it’s very rare,” longtime D.C. attorney Paul Dueffert said in an interview. “I’d love to see the backup on these numbers.”
“It’s hard to imagine how with these two cases you could get to $230 million in legal fees,” Dueffert added. “I could see tens of millions, but not hundreds of millions.”
The claims were first referenced by Mr. Trump last week during an Oval Office event with FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi and Blanche.
“I have a lawsuit that was doing very well, and when I became president I said, ‘I’m sort of suing myself.’ I don’t know, how do you settle the lawsuit, I’ll say give me X dollars, and I don’t know what to do with the lawsuit,” Trump said in reference to the claims, although administrative claims are not lawsuits. “It sort of looks bad, I’m suing myself, right?”
When asked by reporters at a White House event Tuesday about a potential settlement, Mr. Trump said of the federal government that “they probably owe me a lot of money” for those investigations, later adding that he would “donate” any compensation he receives.
“I don’t know what the numbers are. I don’t even talk to them about it,” Mr. Trump said, seeming to refer to whether he was consulting with his personal legal team or the Justice Department. “All I know is that they would owe me a lot of money. But I’m not looking for money. I’d give it to charity or something.”
A spokesperson for Mr. Trump’s legal team said in a statement, “President Trump continues to fight back against all Democrat-led Witch Hunts,” including the Russian interference investigation and the federal indictments he faced before winning reelection last year.
A Justice Department spokesperson said in a statement regarding the possibility of a conflict of interest involving top Justice Department officials that “in any circumstance, all officials at the Department of Justice follow the guidance of career ethics officials.”
“[Blanche and Woodward] were both personally involved in this very case, and you don’t get more of a conflict of interest than that,” Dueffert said. “It’s just unimaginable that they should proceed.”
He called on both to recuse themselves, though he said, “I’m skeptical that will happen.”
Stacey Young, a former Justice Department attorney, said,”This is a clear example of the conflicts posed by installing the president’s personal defense lawyers to run the Justice Department.”
“These same loyalists ousted senior ethics officials who would have helped guide them through the proper way to handle the president’s unprecedented demand for taxpayer money,” said Young, who now leads the Justice Connection, a networking organization to help former Justice Department employees who have resigned or been fired.
On Capitol Hill, GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina said he has “a lot of optics concerns” about the president’s claims.
“I don’t think the president should be treated any differently than anyone else who was maybe a target of prosecution,” he told reporters Wednesday. “Obviously, if the prosecution prevailed, it should be a no-brainer that there wouldn’t be any compensation. If it’s one where the president as a defendant prevailed, … let’s talk about how that’s been handled in the past.”
Before a trial in either of the federal cases against Mr. Trump could take place, both were dismissed after the election at the request of the special counsel because the Justice Department’s longstanding policy is not to prosecute a sitting president.
Why Trump reportedly wants $230 million from the DOJ over previous cases – CBS News
Watch CBS News
President Trump believes the Justice Department should pay him $230 million as compensation for past investigations, according to a report by the New York Times. CBS News’ Nancy Cordes has more details.
Erez Reuveni, a fired Department of Justice lawyer who’s now blowing the whistle, says he witnessed a disregard of due process and for the rule of law at the DOJ.
Reuveni previously won commendations for his work and was so effective defending President Trump’s first-term immigration policy that he was promoted quickly in Mr. Trump’s second term. But he says he was put on leave and then fired after refusing to sign a brief in the mistaken deportation case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Reuveni’s whistleblower disclosure helped highlight a growing concern in many courts across the country that the Justice Department is allegedly abusing the limits of the law.
“I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. And my view of that oath is that I need to speak up and draw attention to what has happened to the department, what is happening to the rule of law,” Reuveni said. “I would not be faithfully abiding by my oath if I stayed silent right now.”
From devoted DOJ lawyer to shock over orders
Reuveni says he knew he wanted to be involved in public service before he started law school. He started at the Department of Justice in 2010 and was there for 15 years defending the policies of several presidents, regardless of political party. Reuveni specialized in immigration law and, during Mr. Trump’s first term, he defended the controversial ban on travelers from predominantly Muslim countries, among many other cases.
“I defended everything they put on my plate. That was my job,” he said.
Erez Reuveni
60 Minutes
Shortly after Mr. Trump’s return to office, Reuveni was selected to be the acting deputy director of the Department of Justice’s immigration section, overseeing about a hundred attorneys and every case that arose in the federal district courts.
On March 14, the same day he found out about his promotion, Reuveni and others were called to a meeting with Emil Bove, number three at the Justice Department. Bove was also once Mr. Trump’s criminal defense attorney.
According to Reuveni, they were told the president would be invoking the Alien Enemies Act, a law not invoked since World War II, to allow rapid expulsion of citizens of enemy nations during a time of war. Without a declared war, the administration used it for a mass deportation of more than 100 Venezuelans the government said were terrorists.
The Venezuelans were to be denied the right to be heard by a judge and Reuveni said Bove expected a challenge.
“Bove emphasized, those planes need to take off, no matter what,” Reuveni said. “Then after a pause, he also told all in attendance, and if some court should issue an order preventing that, we may have to consider telling that court, ‘f*** you.'”
Reuveni says he was shocked.
“I felt like a bomb had gone off,” he said. “Here is the number three official using expletives to tell career attorneys that we might just have to consider disregarding federal court orders.”
“A real gut punch”
The next day, a Saturday, lawyers for some of the prisoners sued. Chief Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia called a hearing and asked government lawyer Drew Ensign whether the planes were leaving that weekend.
Ensign told Boasberg he didn’t know whether the planes were leaving that weekend, even though Reuveni says he was at the same meeting where they were told the planes would be taking off over the weekend, no matter what. Reuveni said that moment in court was “stunning.”
“It is the highest, most egregious violation of a lawyer’s code of ethics to mislead a court with intent,” he said.
Ensign’s intent is unknown. It was during the hearing that planes took off.
The judge issued an order and, immediately, Reuveni emailed the agencies involved, writing “…the judge specifically ordered us to not remove anyone … and to return anyone in the air.”
“And then it really hit me. It’s like, we really did tell the court, screw you. We really did just tell the courts, we don’t care about your order. You can’t tell us what to do,” Reuveni said. “That was just a real gut punch.”
While the Department of Justice can disagree with and appeal orders, it is required to obey all court orders when they’re in effect, according to Peter Keisler, who ran the department as acting attorney general for a time in 2007 for then-President George W. Bush.
Peter Keisler
60 Minutes
Keisler said that detainees must be given the chance to contest the charges, even if those being deported are terrorists or gang members. He emphasized that there are lawful means to get terrorists out of the country.
“We have a saying in this country. It’s deeply embedded in who we are. Everybody deserves their day in court,” Keiseler said. “And all of us want to know that if the government acts against us, we will at least have the opportunity to go to a neutral decision-maker, present evidence and legal argument, and make sure that the government stays within its legal bounds.”
What happened in the Abrego Garcia case
When more facts were known about the weekend flights, it turned out a Salvadoran man, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, had been deported by mistake.
While people deported in error are normally returned, Reuveni said that in a phone call from a superior, he was ordered to argue that Abrego Garcia was an MS-13 member and a terrorist to prevent his return.
“I respond up the chain of command, no way. That is not correct. That is not factually correct. It is not legally correct. That is, that is a lie. And I cannot sign my name to that brief,” Reuveni said.
Reuveni said what was important was not whether or not Abrego Garcia was a member of MS-13 or a terrorist, but whether or not he received due process.
“What’s to stop them if they decide they don’t like you anymore, to say you’re a criminal, you’re a member of MS-13, you’re a terrorist,” Reuveni said. “What’s to stop them from sending in some DOJ attorney at the direction of DOJ leadership to delay, to filibuster, and if necessary, to lie? And now that’s you gone and your liberties changed.”
Reuveni was fired after refusing to sign a brief that called Abrego Garcia a terrorist. In June, he filed a whistleblower complaint with the help of attorneys from the Government Accountability Project.
The state of the Justice Department
Reuveni is not alone in identifying a troubling pattern of behavior at the Department of Justice. Ryan Goodman, a New York University law professor who heads a nonpartisan law journal, “Just Security,” said his team has analyzed hundreds of suits filed against the Trump administration. He published his team’s study online.
“We found over 35 cases in which the judges have specifically said, what the government is providing me is false information. It might be intentionally false information, including false sworn declarations time and again,” Goodman said.
In court records compiled by Goodman, Democratic and Republican appointed judges are critical of the Trump Justice Department’s work. One judge described it as “…highly misleading…” Another judge warned that “trust that had been earned over generations has been lost in weeks.”
“The one entity, or person, or institution that gets hurt the most is the Justice Department,” Goodman said.
Ryan Goodman
60 Minutes
60 Minutes requested interviews with Attorney General Pam Bondi, her former deputy Emil Bove, and Drew Ensign, the attorney who said he didn’t know when the planes were taking off, according to the court transcript. All declined 60 Minutes’ requests.
Bove, who was nominated for a judgeship, was asked in June about Reuveni’s claims during a confirmation hearing. He said he’d never advised a Justice Department attorney to violate a court order. Bove said, in part, that Reuveni was in no position to tell his superiors what to do.
“There’s a suggestion that a line attorney, not even the head of the Office of Immigration Litigation, was in a position or considered himself to be, to bind the department’s leadership and other cabinet officials,” Bove said.
Bove was confirmed for the judgeship. And in a statement to 60 Minutes he wrote, “…Mr. Reuveni’s claims are a mix of falsehoods and wild distortions of reality …”
Abrego Garcia was returned to the U.S. He’s now charged with transporting illegal immigrants. He pleaded not guilty. A judge criticized the Justice Department’s “poor attempts” to connect Abrego Garcia to MS-13. He was not charged with terrorism.
The Venezuelans that were sent to El Salvador were later released to their home country. This spring, the Supreme Court agreed, unanimously, that everyone deported under the Alien Enemies Act is entitled to due process.
