Honest, paywall-free news is rare. Please support our boldly independent journalism with a donation of any size.
Several members of Congress are expected this week to review hundreds, if not thousands, of files relating to disgraced financier and accused child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, amid claims that files are being improperly redacted and that victims’ names have been wrongly released to the public.
The Epstein Files Transparency Act — which passed last fall after considerable opposition from President Donald Trump, who campaigned to his advantage on releasing the files — required “all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials” in the case to be released two months ago. Yet millions of files have not been released, raising further doubt about the administration’s supposed commitment to transparency.
Meanwhile, many of the files within the latest batch of documents to be released improperly include the names and images of dozens of survivors of Epstein’s crimes. Lawyers for the victims say that as many as 100 people have had their lives “turned upside down” as a result of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) impropriety.
In other examples, it appears that names that were mandated to be made public by the Epstein Transparency Files Act are still being blocked out. The act specifically stipulates that a person’s name cannot be redacted to protect them from embarrassment or reputational harm — but multiple names appear to have been redacted for that purpose.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-California), who co-authored the bipartisan law alongside Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), shared an example in which a person sent an email to Epstein describing, in extremely disturbing terms, the attributes of a child who had “just arrived.” The name of the person who sent the email was redacted in the DOJ’s latest file release.
“Concealing the reputations of these powerful men is a blatant violation of the Epstein Transparency Act we passed,” Khanna wrote on Facebook.
Massie also expressed his discontent with the administration’s actions.
“Where are the rest of the documents? Why did they release victims’ names? They took extra time, they said, to be safe, and what are these redactions?” Massie said in a CNN interview this weekend.
Attorney General Pam Bondi “has no credibility on this,” Massie added, noting that Bondi had previously claimed files were on her desk before flipping positions, saying there was nothing new worth making public last year.
Several other members of Congress have complained about these issues. Earlier this month, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland), the ranking Democratic member on the House Judiciary Committee, requested that the DOJ allow him and other lawmakers to view unredacted versions of the files the department has made public.
“We seek to ensure that your redactions comply with the Act’s requirement that materials be withheld only in narrow circumstances, such as protecting victims’ personally identifiable information, and not on the basis of “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary,” Raskin wrote.
The DOJ appears to have relented to that request, allowing lawmakers, starting this week, to view unredacted versions of the files that have been made public. The agreement requires those members of Congress to give the department 24 hours notice. They cannot bring in electronic recording devices, but will be allowed to take handwritten notes while viewing the files.
Important Message: Please Read
For 25 years, Truthout has survived by publishing impactful investigative journalism and analysis; distributing full editions 365 days a year; and building a community of readers who support us with small, hard-earned donations.
Eighty percent of our $3 million yearly budget comes from small donors alone. Of those, 8,000 readers support us with monthly donations. Back in 2018, when Facebook decided to suppress the circulation of posts made by organizations, thereby cutting readers off from seeing many articles shared by the news organizations they had intentionally decided to follow, Truthout’s total traffic declined by 40 percent, as nearly all of our traffic from that platform disappeared.
Now, Google has recently rolled out its AI search bar, providing AI summaries instead of directing readers to our site. Google Search is our single largest source of traffic; it’s the route by which nearly one third of our readers find us. Much like in 2018, a shocking 40 percent of our Google traffic has disappeared overnight.
It will not be easy for Truthout to shoulder this blow. Nor will it be easy for our peers and collaborators — news sites that depend on traffic and aren’t bankrolled by large corporations.
If you can support Truthout with a donation today, you can help us resist the AI onslaught. Please give today.