
Former US Attorney Joyce Vance has a great piece about the Epstein files that you should read to catch up on the latest. Riddled with redactions and unsurprisingly protective of Trump, the document release on Friday made absolutely no one happy. There was virtually nothing about Trump but they did manage to get a lot of pictures of Bill Clinton out there, most of them out of context and which seem obviously designed to make it appear that he is a pedophile:
Obviously, they were trying to make it look like he was consorting with Michael Jackson and young victims.
But Vance points out something important in all this which should inform the press as the DOJ tries to claim that they have to redact all this stuff because of “ongoing investigations”
Attorney General Pam Bondi told Trump in May that his name showed up in the Epstein Files. That’s unsurprising. The two men’s friendship is public and well known. Nonetheless, Trump campaigned on releasing the files, as though he had nothing to hide. But that changed after Bondi’s revelation. Back in September, CNN reported on the timeline of what followed: “The efforts to downplay Epstein conspiracy theories and previous promises for disclosure really kicked off on May 18, when top FBI officials Kash Patel and Dan Bongino appeared together on Fox News and suddenly said Epstein had indeed died by suicide.” They also point out that, “Elon Musk’s later-deleted claim that Trump wasn’t releasing the Epstein files because he was in them was lodged June 5, after the May briefing,” and “Trump’s recently launched, baseless claims that powerful Democrats ‘made up’ the Epstein files would fit with his tendency to deflect and distract when there’s something he doesn’t want out there.” Suffice it to say, whether it incriminates the president or not, the materials Bondi was referring to remain undisclosed to the public for the most part. On the campaign trail in 2024, when asked about releasing the Epstein Files, Trump responded, “I’d have no problem with it.”
The Epstein Files Transparency Act required the administration to turn over the files, but allowed it to withhold or redact records that could identify victims, including images of child sexual abuse, or documents that are otherwise classified. DOJ routinely declines to release records that could compromise an active federal investigation, and the new law permits that exception as well, although Trump’s social media post/order to Bondi to open a case into Democrats named in the files casts a serious pall over the legitimacy of any claims of that nature.
New York Times reporter Glenn Thrush noted that it took Bondi a mere 217 minutes following Trump’s directive to report that she had opened an investigation into Clinton and other Democrats. But since Trump is not under investigation, records that mention him should be fair game for release. There would be no reason to withhold them. Instead, the Justice Department focused on materials regarding Bill Clinton, who is explicitly part of the investigation Trump demanded that his Attorney General open. Any claim materials are being withheld because of the new investigation are highly suspect.
She is too well-mannered to say that it’s bullshit but it is.
Does this look like it’s protecting survivors? The message says “I have a female for him.”

And get a load of this on Meet the Press today:
Q: “Why was Ghislaine Maxwell moved [to a different prison] just days after you interviewed her?”
Deputy AG Todd Blanche: “That’s a Bureau of Prisons security issue that I will not talk about.”
Q: “Did you have anything to do with it?”
Blanche: “I am responsible for the Bureau of Prisons, so every decision that they make lands on my desk — to the extent it needs to…At the institution she was in, she was suffering numerous, numerous threats.”
So he moved her to a less secure prison? Does that make any sense at all?
Vance quotes a survivor advocate saying:
“The law is clear, the mandate is clear, and the Department of Justice’s failure to comply sends a message that the impunity of powerful individuals who benefited from Epstein’s criminal enterprise is still being prioritized over the pursuit of justice for survivors. To comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the Department of Justice must provide their full reasoning for the redactions. Any meaningful effort toward transparency for survivors demands a far more thorough explanation. We further urge an independent review of redactions to ensure individuals who caused harm and violated the law are not afforded the same protections as those who suffered harm.
How about this?
WELKER: Why was this photo of a desk with a drawer open containing photos of Trump taken down?
BLANCHE: You can see in that photo there are photographs of women. We learned after released it that there were concerns about those women.
WELKER: Are you saying that one or more of those women is a victim of Epstein?
BLANCHE: No, that’s not what I’m saying.
And this:
Pretty gross. I don’t think that redaction was done to protect the girl either.
They are insuring that this thing just keeps going. I guess they figure they can divert attention to Clinton or others but nobody buys that. Epstein and Trump were best buddies and their relationship was based on competing for women (and girls), not money or casual contacts.
This whole thing is an absolute dumpster fire. And the flames are just getting higher.
Happy Hollandaise!








