Why unsealing Epstein grand jury records could be a long process
On Friday, the Department of Justice filed court papers to try to unseal grand jury records pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein's New York criminal case following an uproar over releasing investigative files related to the disgraced financier.
The filing, in Manhattan federal court, requested the release of "grand jury transcripts associated with the above-referenced indictment" and said that Epstein's case, as well as that of his convicted associate Ghislaine Maxwell, were "a matter of public interest."
The move comes after Trump requested Thursday night that Attorney General Pam Bondi request any "pertinent" grand jury testimony related to the case.
The release of any grand jury materials, which are secret, would be subject to a legal process and the approval of a federal judge in the Southern District of New York, where Epstein was charged before he died by suicide in 2019.
A judge would likely consider the impact of the release on victims, which courts have gone to great lengths to protect, as well as any parties who may be implicated in the case and want the information to remain secret.
Crucially, the 2019 case pertains to allegations against Epstein and his alleged sex crimes, not the broader questions posed by many of Trump's supporters about who else, if anyone, might have been involved.
The DOJ and FBI have numerous other unclassified records in the case that they said they will not disclose, despite vowing in February to "release the remaining documents upon review and redaction to protect the identities of Epstein’s victims."
An "evidence list" released in February offers a roadmap to some of these unreleased records, including visitor records to Epstein's private island as well as wiretap records for Maxwell.
Earlier this month, the DOJ and FBI released a memo stating no further records in the case would be released, saying "much of the material is subject to court-ordered sealing" and that the agencies "will not permit the release of child pornography" or sensitive details pertaining to the victims.
The agencies found no evidence that Epstein kept a "client list" of associates or that he blackmailed any prominent individuals and concluded no investigation into uncharged third party was warranted.
The brief memo put out by the DOJ and FBI stoked furor among Trump's diehard supporters after years of prominent right-wing figures pushing accusations about Epstein and the "deep state" that's protecting elites.
Trump's since sought various ways to put out the political firestorm, coming to Bondi's defense while also saying she should release what she deems "credible."
Shifting explanation from Trump
In Trump's call for Bondi to produce the grand jury testimony, he said it was a "SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats," and that it "should end, right now!"
This is a shift from his previous statement of calling the Epstein files a "hoax" and those Republican supporters who are questioning his administration's handling of it as "stupid" and "foolish."
Trump, in a phone interview with "Just the News" on Real America's Voice on Wednesday night, alleged without providing evidence that Democrats and former officials doctored files relating to the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender.
The comments came when Trump was asked if he wanted one prosecutor to look into the broad subject of political prosecution.
"Well, I think it's in the case of Epstein, they've already looked at it, and they are looking at it, and I think all they have to do is put out anything credible," Trump said.
"But you know, that was run by the Biden administration for four years. I can imagine what they put into files, just like they did with the others," Trump continued. "I mean, the Steele dossier was a total fake, right? It took two years to figure that out for the people, and all of the things that you mentioned were fake."
"So I would imagine if they were run by Chris Wray and they were run by Comey, and because it was actually even before that administration, they've been running these files, and so much of the things that we found were fake with me," Trump said.
Despite Trump's claims that Democrats "put" things in the files, many documents relating to Epstein, including those that mention Trump and several prominent Democrats, have been public for years.
No special prosecutor
And the White House on Thursday shut down the idea of appointing a special prosecutor in the Epstein case.
"The idea was floated from someone in the media to the president. The president would not recommend a special prosecutor in the Epstein case. That's how he feels," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters at the briefing.
Asked to clarify what part of the Epstein saga is a "hoax" as Trump claimed, Leavitt only continued to criticize Democrats.
"The president is referring to the fact that Democrats have now seized on this as if they ever wanted transparency when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein, which is an asinine suggestion for any Democrat to make," she said. "The Democrats had control of this building, the White House, for four years, and they didn't do a dang thing when it came to transparency in regards to Jeffrey Epstein and his heinous crimes."
Epstein was arrested in 2019 and died in prison by suicide while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges while Trump was president.
"Some of the naive Republicans fall right into line, like they always do," the president said on "Just the News."
Calls for transparency
Calls for transparency on Epstein came from several Republicans on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. And Trump's own former vice president, Mike Pence, called for the administration to "release all of the files" regarding the Epstein investigation.
Leavitt on Thursday defended the administration's handling of the Epstein files and attempted to distance Trump from further decision-making on the case.
Leavitt said it would be up to the Justice Department and Bondi to release any other "credible" evidence.
“In terms of redactions or grand jury seals, those are questions for the Department of Justice. Those are also questions for the judges who have that information under a seal. And that would have to be requested and judge would have to approve it. That's out of the president's control,” she said when asked why they wouldn’t release the files, with sensitive information redacted, in order to provide more transparency.
