More than a month past the deadline set by legislation passed last year, the US Department of Justice on Friday released over 3 million more pages of files relatedMore than a month past the deadline set by legislation passed last year, the US Department of Justice on Friday released over 3 million more pages of files related

A 'cover-up': Congressman issues code red on DOJ's new Epstein files release

More than a month past the deadline set by legislation passed last year, the US Department of Justice on Friday released over 3 million more pages of files related to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein, but one Democratic lawmaker who has led the push for the disclosure emphasized that the exact contents of the files must be determined to tell whether the release is simply another “cover-up.”

“What are we looking for? The FBI statements,” Khanna (D-Calif.) told MS NOW. “We need to see whether the 302 forms are being released. That’s where the survivors mention who the other rich and powerful men are who abused or raped them... and second, are the prosecution memos being released? This is the document that shows why these rich and powerful men weren’t prosecuted.

“If there’s no cover-up,” said the congressman, those files will be included.

Files that were released and circulated on social media on Friday afternoon included multiple descriptions of sexual assault in which President Donald Trump was named. Those did not appear to be official 302 forms from an FBI interview with victims, which typically contain the name of the agent who conducted the interview, the date, and other information.

The New York Times noted that “a significant number of uncorroborated tips” were included in the release.

Prem Thakker of Zeteo said the descriptions of sexual assault allegations appeared to come from an FBI tip line and it was not clear whether they had ever been investigated.

Soon after the documents were released, journalists including CNN‘s Jake Tapper reported on social media that many of the links that had led to the files on the DOJ’s website were no longer active.

MS NOW senior legal reporter Lisa Rubin reported that some of the documents had revealed “the names and other identifying details of known survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. In at least one case, MS NOW found a driver’s license with an unredacted photo among the documents produced.”

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said the release did not appear to comply with an earlier subpoena from the committee, which directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to release all of the Epstein files while protecting survivors.

“Donald Trump and his Justice Department have now made clear that they intend to withhold roughly 50% of the Epstein files, while claiming to have fully complied with the law,” said Garcia. “This is outrageous and incredibly concerning.”

“We are demanding the names of Epstein’s co-conspirators and the men and pedophiles who abused women and girls,” he said. “We will begin a thorough review of this latest limited production, but let’s be clear: Our work and investigation are just getting started.”

Khanna called on Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to meet with him and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) to assess what files were released.

“If you are serious about engaging members, let us have this meeting,” he said.

The congressman told the Times that a draft indictment prepared during the 2007 investigation into Epstein in Florida and “hundreds of thousands of emails and files from Epstein’s computers” must also be released.

“Refusing to release these files only shields the powerful individuals who were involved,” said Khanna, “and hurts the public’s trust in our institutions.”

  • george conway
  • noam chomsky
  • civil war
  • Kayleigh mcenany
  • Melania trump
  • drudge report
  • paul krugman
  • Lindsey graham
  • Lincoln project
  • al franken bill maher
  • People of praise
  • Ivanka trump
  • eric trump
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
Witness Bitcoin’s Dramatic Plunge in A Volatile Crypto Market

Witness Bitcoin’s Dramatic Plunge in A Volatile Crypto Market

The new Fed chairman and geopolitical risks affect cryptocurrency outlook. Bitcoin fails to maintain key levels, hitting lowest since October 2023. Continue
Share
Coinstats2026/02/01 03:04
Smart Money Accumulates SUI as Weekly Chart Signals Expansion Phase Ahead

Smart Money Accumulates SUI as Weekly Chart Signals Expansion Phase Ahead

TLDR: SUI preserves its long-term ascending channel, signaling macro strength despite deep corrective phases  Sell-side liquidity sweeps near trendline support
Share
Blockonomi2026/02/01 03:25