By Johnathon Shaffer / Sports editor, Naomi Amaize / Feature editor and Gabe Merida / Staff writer
On Nov. 19, the U.S. Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the Department of Justice to release all unclassified materials involving Jeffrey Epstein. They were given a deadline of one month later, Dec. 19. However, the DOJ went 40 days past the deadline, and released them, while still having redactions, on Jan. 30.
Recently, attorney general Pam Bondi was called on before Congress to testify in regards to the Epstein files, particularly focused on the redactions made. Whenever a congressman asked her a question however, she elected to not answer the question, or answer the question in a roundabout way. For example, when Rep. Ted Lieu (D) asked Bondi whether or not there were any underage girls at any party that Trump attended with Epstein, she refused to give a direct answer.
“There is no evidence that Donald Trump has committed a crime,” Bondi said to him. “Everyone knows this.”
Lieu, in lieu of this statement, accused her of lying under oath, referencing Trump’s 34 felonies charged against him in New York and Georgia courts, and that there is visible video evidence of Trump and Epstein being present in the same room.
Another example of this is Rep. Thomas Massie (R) informed her that survivors of Epstein’s trafficking ring were in the same room as her, directly behind the very stand she was giving her testimony, and also noted that she wouldn’t even turn around to look at their faces. He also accused her of not exercising caution in the redactions, and revealing some victims’ identities that were expressly directed to not be revealed.
“Literally the worst thing you could do to the survivors, you did, and they’re getting phone calls. A lot of these people didn’t want to be known, we know you touched the document because you redacted one name and you redacted the lawyer’s name, but you left the survivor’s name there. … These are the documents that we need that you’re holding on to and overredacting because they have the names of the men who are implicated. How do we know? Because the survivors gave testimony to the FBI and it’s in there. And what happens when you go to the portal at the DOJ to look at what’s behind this redaction? Another redaction. So, we can’t even see them.
“And then there’s some of these files you’ve pulled down from the website that we will never see because we can’t search the redactions. So, I have several questions for you. Who’s responsible? Are you able to track who in your organization made this massive failure and released the victim’s names? Are you able to track who it was that obscured Les Wexner’s name as a co-conspirator in an FBI document? Do you have that kind of accountability?” Massie said.
Bondi responded in a way that once again did not address the issue, and interrupted the exposition of his question before he could even ask it.
“Within 40 minutes, Wexner’s name was added back,” Bondi said. “This guy has Trump derangement syndrome. You’re a failed politician.”
A few days later, members of the House of Representatives were permitted to view the unredacted files that the DOJ had access to. (The FBI have not provided all the files that were requested). With this, some files with redactions that seem to protect powerful people have been revealed to the public. One example of redactions made that members of Congress have questioned was the exclusion of billionaire entrepreneur Les Wexner.
“Les Wexner is in this now. Your assistant deputy attorney general said, “Oh, well, he appears hundreds of times in the files, but he doesn’t appear in this file until I forced you to release it.” Where he’s listed as a co-conspirator, not to tax evasion, but to child sex trafficking, not to prostitution, not to money laundering, child sex trafficking,” Massie said.
Multiple members of congress came out of the DOJ office audibly disgusted, and condemning everything about the whole situation.
Some issues with the DOJ allowing this have arisen since, such as the DOJ monitoring the searches of congressmen. Particularly, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D) took issue with the searches, and posted on X to raise awareness to this issue.
“It is totally inappropriate and against the separations of powers for the DOJ to surveil us as we search the Epstein files. Bondi showed up today with a burn book that held a printed search history of exactly what emails I searched. That is outrageous and I intend to pursue this and stop this spying on members,” Jayapal said.
The DOJ also announced they released all necessary information and files that can be released, including what they called “justified redactions and omissions.”
There are 3.5 million files available at this point in time, and Massie alleged that the FBI has even more in store that they are withholding from the DOJ.
From a report of uncovered FBI emails, in terms of file size, the DOJ and FBI have not even begun to scratch the surface of the files. In fact, we have only reached 2% according to the report.
“We expect the data to be somewhere around 20-40 (Terabytes),” an investigator wrote in an email in June 2020.
In another email sent in March 2025, another investigator said, “(There are) a total of approximately 14.6 Terabytes of archived data to unpack.”
At this point in time, there are only 300 Gigabytes of files released in total file size, taking up a minimal percentage of the alleged total file size.
The main issue that is on people’s minds is the lack of justice for the victims. Rep. Dan Goldman (D) had Epstein survivors who had gone public with their story in the back of the room, and asked them questions.
“Now, with the survivors and victims who are here, please stand up one more time. Just by show of hands, how many of you or your loved ones actually have met with the Department of Justice and provided testimony and estimate and evidence? None. And of those of you who have not met, which is everyone, how many of you have reached out either individually or through a lawyer or representative to offer to provide testimony and evidence? All of them. And of those of you, all of you who have reached out, how many of you were denied or ignored by the Department of Justice? All of them. And despite the shameful and despicable efforts by Ms. Bondi and her department to intimidate you, how many of you are still willing to speak to the Department of Justice? All of them,” Goldman said.
In the files, there are also unverified tips that implicate people that people are taking as concrete fact, but they are also unsubstantiated tips that the FBI never investigated, for various reasons.
Some action has been taken for justice recently. However, it has been taken not domestically, but rather in the UK. Andrew Mountbadden-Windsor (formerly Prince Andrew) was arrested in Britain for his connection in the Epstein files. Two photos of particular concern include him awkwardly hunched over a woman who appears to be passed out, which was featured in the Epstein Files, and another photo recently uncovered by TMZ features him and a child who appears to be toddler age playing with a certain explicit toy in the shape of a ball.
Although some action has been taken, there are many owners of organizations that have been speculated to be involved in the files have not been found guilty of any charges. One of these being Lifetouch, a photography company for many school yearbooks. While not being directly mentioned in the files the former CEO of Apollo Global Management Leon Black, is named in the Epstein files. This company works in close relation to lifetouch, a Salinas, California school district claims that the photos taken may be exploiting children.
“Sharing photos of children with unauthorized third parties without consent, for nefarious purposes.”
Leading to many school districts cancelling picture days. Lifetouch denies all allegations against them and they claim that lifetouch is strictly for school records.
“Lifetouch does not – and has never provided – images to any third party.” A public statement from Ken Murphy the CEO of Lifetouch on February 10th.
Overall many Congressmen turn a blind eye to the evidence revealed in the files and turn away from the realities of the truth behind the “power” and “money” that the transgressors display, which has irritated those who do care.
“George Orwell, in his famous book 1984, wrote of a time when, ‘The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.’,” Rep. Joe Neguse (D) said.
