Washington / LondonThe more than three million documents released by the Justice Department regarding convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein are a controlled bomb that raises more questions than answers about Donald Trump's relationship with the billionaire, who died in prison in 2019. The documents were reviewed by a congressional committee last year. A letter stands out containing a list of allegations of alleged sexual assaults perpetrated by Trump against minors, which were compiled by the FBI last summer and have not been verified. The Justice Department had already made it clear that the published compilation could "include fabricated images, documents, or videos," but that these were included in the package to comply with the requirements of the Justice Department.the law passed by Congress to force its disclosure. The question now is whether the FBI investigated the leads it received further, or if not, why it deemed it unwarranted.
Despite the fact that the release of these new documents only muddies the waters further, Deputy Attorney General and former presidential lawyer Todd Blanche considers the controversy closed. "There was nothing that would allow us to prosecute anyone," he said on CNN Sunday night. Shortly afterward, in another interview on ABC, he emphasized that this batch of documents, along with the other 100,000 pages releasedOn December 19th, It was the end of the department's transparency process regarding the Epstein case. "This review is complete," it stated, fully complying with the public disclosure mandated by law passed by lawmakers in November. Trump had been reluctant to release the documents, despite it being one of his campaign promises, and only relented when public pressure became unbearable for the tycoon.
Censored and classified material
The Department of Justice –turned into Trump's personal ministry, which he has filled with loyalists—wants to put the matter to rest once and for all to prevent further damage to the president's image. But several members of Congress, both Republican and Democrat, are demanding the release of additional documents and access to the redacted and classified material. Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia, a member of the House committee overseeing the case, stated in a press release that the Justice Department is ignoring a subpoena that requires Attorney General Pam Bondi to hand over the unredacted files to the group, including all sensitive information. This handover has not yet occurred, and Garcia accuses the department of violating the law.
"We demand the names of Epstein's accomplices and the men and pedophiles who abused women and girls," the congressman said in the statement. "We will initiate a thorough review of this latest limited release, but let's be clear: our work and investigation are just beginning." Kentucky Republican Congressman Thomas Massie, one of the driving forces behind the Epstein Papers transparency law, has also said that files are missing. In a post on X, Massie asserts that "too many documents are still being withheld or censored, but we will get them." The way the law was worded to force the release of the Epstein papers gave the Justice Department considerable discretion in choosing what to release. The Attorney General could withhold documents that, among other criteria, she deemed could jeopardize a federal investigation. Trump's control over the department, demonstrated by the investigations he has launched against his political enemies, raised doubts about the extent to which the release of the files would remain unaffected. The president's name appears more than 3,000 times in the new documents, but all references are vague or contain unproven accusations. The documents include episodes that portray the tycoon in a negative light as a show of transparency, but which Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche considers insufficient to warrant any kind of investigation. Furthermore, Trump's name appears alongside a long list of other prominent figures in the emails and other released files. In some cases, it reveals a much deeper relationship than previously admitted, as is the case with billionaire Elon Musk and Norwegian Princess Mette-Marit. Musk had acknowledged that Epstein had invited him to his island, but that he had declined the invitation. Now, the new documents suggest that the South African, at some point, was keen to visit the island. "What day or night will be the wildest party on your island?" he wrote. Musk in an email to Epstein In November 2012. As for the Norwegian princess, who has already apologized for her relationship with Epstein, numerous emails have surfaced in which she corresponded with Epstein in a very close, almost flirtatious tone.
The revelation of deeper relationships and new names has also prevented the entire focus of the controversy from being solely on Trump. This Monday, the magnate once again seized the opportunity to turn the scandal against his political enemies. This time, he hosted journalist Michael Wolff, known for being highly critical of the Republican, and who allegedly advised Epstein, according to the published emails.
"Not only was I not a friend of Jeffrey Epstein, but according to information just released by the Department of Justice, Epstein and a disgusting, lying 'author' named Michael Wolff conspired to harm me and/or my presidency. No, I'm never going to be president," he wrote to Truth Social: "Epstein's island, but almost all of these corrupt Democrats and their donors did show up."
Corruption erupts in Westminster and implicates the 'Darth Vader' of New Labour
The shockwaves of the Epstein case and the latest revelations over the weekend have exploded in Westminster, adding to the scandal that has surrounded the royal family and the former Prince Andrew for over a decade . Peter Mandelson, one of the most influential Labour leaders of recent decades, as well as one of the darkest figures in British politics since the 1980s, allegedly shared critical and confidential British government information with the American financier while serving as a minister. In light of these revelations, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has urged Mandelson to leave the House of Lords, and the former prime minister... Labour leader Gordon Brown has called for a "broad and intensive" investigation into his former business minister. After more than 40 years as a Labour member, Mandelson resigned from the party on Sunday night.
Documents released Friday by the Justice Department indicate that in 2010, Mandelson informed Epstein in advance of a nearly €500 billion European bailout plan to stabilize the euro during the global financial crisis. According to the leaks, the information was circulated via email and accompanied by other classified data. Mandelson denies any knowledge of the misuse of this information. Furthermore, Epstein's bank statements, which experts consider authentic, suggest that Mandelson received at least $75,000 from the convicted sex offender in the 2000s, a claim he also denies.
Political pressure is directly affecting Starmer and his judgment, as evidenced by his appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States in late 2024, bringing him back into public service. However, Starmer dismissed him last September when the first compromising reports about Mandelson, who had also served as a minister under Tony Blair and as a European Commissioner, surfaced. Despite his remarkable political survival over the past 45 years, his downfall now appears inevitable. A year ago, the man considered the Darth Vader of British politics downplayed his relationship with Epstein in an interview with the Financial Times .
