Two days after the Justice Department’s court-ordered deadline to release all Epstein files passed with thousands of pages still withheld and others blanked out in thick black bars, the bipartisan architects of the transparency law struck back hard—renewing threats to prosecute Attorney General Pam Bondi for obstruction of justice.
Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), who co-authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act signed by President Trump last month, blasted the partial December 19 release as a blatant violation, pointing to missing bombshells like a draft 60-count indictment from 2007 that could implicate powerful accomplices.
Massie warned Bondi risks criminal charges from a future administration, while Khanna said they’re drafting impeachment articles and exploring contempt options. Survivors, furious at the redactions shielding names, joined the outrage, demanding full accountability.
With tensions boiling over, will the DOJ finally cough up the hidden truth—or dig in deeper?
Two days after the Justice Department’s court-ordered deadline to release all Epstein files passed—with thousands of pages still withheld and others obscured by thick black bars—the bipartisan architects of the transparency law have struck back fiercely, renewing threats to prosecute Attorney General Pam Bondi for obstruction of justice.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act, signed by President Trump on November 19, 2025, mandated the full public disclosure of all unclassified DOJ records related to Jeffrey Epstein by December 19. Co-authored by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), the law aimed to uncover details of Epstein’s sex trafficking network, his lenient 2008 plea deal, and potential accomplices among the elite.
On December 19, the DOJ released an initial tranche: thousands of documents, including photos of celebrities like Bill Clinton, Michael Jackson, and Mick Jagger with Epstein, along with investigative files and evidence logs. However, vast sections were heavily redacted—entire pages blacked out—to protect victim identities or ongoing probes. Critically missing were explosive items, such as a rumored 2007 draft 60-count indictment that could name powerful co-conspirators and internal memos justifying the controversial non-prosecution agreement under Alex Acosta.
Massie and Khanna immediately condemned the partial release as a “blatant violation.” Massie warned that Bondi risks criminal charges for obstruction from a future administration, stating the DOJ “grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law.” Khanna announced they are drafting articles of impeachment against Bondi and exploring contempt of Congress options, emphasizing that the law explicitly required these missing documents.
Survivors of Epstein’s abuse, who have campaigned tirelessly for transparency, joined the outrage. Many expressed fury over redactions that appear to shield non-victim names, arguing it denies them full accountability and perpetuates a sense of cover-up. Victim advocates highlighted a 1996 FBI complaint detailing child pornography allegations, newly confirmed in the release, yet lamented the absence of deeper revelations.
The DOJ defended the rollout as the “first phase,” citing the need to review hundreds of thousands of pages and redact over 1,200 potential victim references. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche promised more releases in coming weeks, but critics dismissed this as a delaying tactic.
With tensions boiling over on Capitol Hill—uniting unlikely allies across party lines—the central question looms larger: Will the DOJ finally release the hidden truth, or dig in deeper to protect influential figures? As threats of subpoenas, hearings, and legal action escalate, this scandal tests the Trump administration’s commitment to the transparency it once championed.
Leave a Reply