In a furious outburst that’s rocked political circles, former President Bill Clinton’s team has erupted in anger over the Justice Department’s cherry-picked Epstein file revelations—dominated by decades-old photos of Clinton relaxing with the disgraced financier—accusing officials of weaponizing long-cleared secrets to distract from the real culprits still shielded in the shadows.
Just days after the initial release flooded with images of Clinton alongside Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, while redacting or downplaying others, spokesperson Angel Ureña blasted the selective drip as blatant manipulation: “Someone or something is being protected—we need no such protection.” Demanding immediate full disclosure of all remaining records mentioning Clinton, the statement charges the process with insinuation over true transparency.
As bipartisan critics pile on, one burning question lingers: If accountability is the goal, who exactly are these guarded files protecting—and at what cost?
In a furious outburst that has rocked political circles across Washington, former President Bill Clinton’s team has erupted in anger over the Justice Department’s handling of the Epstein file revelations. The initial release on December 19, 2025, was dominated by decades-old photographs of Clinton relaxing poolside, in hot tubs, and socializing with Jeffrey Epstein—the convicted sex trafficker who died in prison in 2019—and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20-year sentence. Clinton’s spokesperson accused officials of cherry-picking these images to insinuate wrongdoing while redacting or downplaying references to others, calling it a deliberate distraction from those “still shielded in the shadows.”
Just days after the partial disclosure flooded public view, spokesperson Angel Ureña blasted the process as blatant manipulation. “Someone or something is being protected—we need no such protection,” Ureña declared in a strongly worded statement. He charged the selective drip-feed with prioritizing insinuation over genuine transparency, demanding the immediate, unredacted release of all remaining records mentioning Clinton, including photos, interviews, and investigative notes. Ureña implied the Trump administration was weaponizing long-cleared associations to deflect scrutiny from its own past ties to Epstein.
The controversy exploded under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a bipartisan bill passed nearly unanimously by Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump on November 19, 2025. The legislation mandated the DOJ to release all non-classified Epstein-related records by December 19, 2025. However, the initial batch included only about 125,000 pages—less than 1% of the total, according to a January 2026 court filing—with heavy redactions to protect victim identities but also drawing accusations of overreach. Bipartisan critics, including co-sponsors Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), piled on, labeling the rollout incomplete and potentially unlawful.
Clinton has long insisted his limited contacts with Epstein in the 1990s and early 2000s were solely for philanthropic work, always accompanied by Secret Service agents, and ended in 2005 upon learning of Epstein’s crimes. He has never faced accusations of wrongdoing. In contrast, subsequent batches revealed mentions of Trump, including 1990s flight logs on Epstein’s private jet with his then-wife Marla Maples and children, as well as social photos—though the DOJ stressed no evidence of criminal involvement.
As of early January 2026, the DOJ admitted to reviewing over 2 million additional documents, with releases spilling into the new year amid complaints from victims’ attorneys about both over- and under-redactions. The episode has intensified partisan warfare, with Democrats accusing the administration of a cover-up and some Republicans frustrated by delays ahead of the 2026 midterms.
This standoff exposes deep divisions over accountability in Epstein’s sprawling network of influence among America’s elite. The partial disclosures have fueled demands for full transparency, highlighting how old associations continue to cast long shadows over the nation’s most powerful figures.
Leave a Reply