A watchdog group is asking the Justice Department to explain why it hasn't included communications from top Trump administration officials in its release of over 2 million pages tied to Jeffrey Epstein, according to a complaint filed Friday.
Why it matters: The letter, from the Democracy Defenders Fund, alleges that the DOJ "impermissibly" narrowed the scope of disclosed documents that were required under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
- The complaint calls it "deeply troubling" that only a "handful" of communications from Attorney General Pam Bondi, deputy attorney general Todd Blanche and FBI director Kash Patel appear in the ream of documents, despite their involvement in releasing the files to the public.
What they're saying: "AG Bondi, DAG Blanche, and FBI Director Patel have spoken extensively on issues related to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell," the letter says.
- "They have been at the very center of DOJ's response (or lack thereof) to congressional and public calls for production of the Epstein files."
- "If DOJ were adhering to the broad scope of the EFTA, the Epstein Library should be replete with their communications. It is not."
- "The obvious conclusion is that these communications have been withheld, destroyed, or redacted to the point that they are not traceable in the Epstein Library."
Context: Friday's release of Epstein-related files was the last coming from the DOJ. They arrived more than a month past Congress' deadline to release any record tied to the convicted sex offender and his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell.
- The files were heavily redacted and included unverified information from the FBI's tip line, including some claims that implicated President Trump in Epstein's crimes.
- Trump has not been convicted and has denied any wrongdoing. Blanche assured reporters that the DOJ "complied with the act" and "did not protect Trump. We didn't protect or not protect anybody."
- Blanche also said members of Congress are welcome to review the unredacted files, but added that there is "a hunger or thirst for information that I do not think will be satisfied by the review of these documents."
What's inside: The group's complaint alleges the Epstein Transparency Act's "sweeping language" was designed to maximize disclosure, minus narrowly tailored exemptions for victim privacy, national security and to protect ongoing investigations.
- Those exemptions are "largely inapplicable" to communications from Bondi, Blanche and Patel, the complaint alleges.
The other side: "This is a tired narrative," a DOJ spokesperson said in an emailed statement.
- "Just because you wish something to be true, doesn't mean it is. This Department produced more than 3.5 million pages in compliance with the law and, in full transparency, has disclosed to the public and to Congress what items were not responsive."
- "I assume all members of Congress read the actual language before voting on it, but if not, our press release and letter to Congress clearly spells this out."
What we're watching: The Democracy Defenders Fund is calling for an immediate audit by the DOJ's inspector general to ensure compliance with the EFTA.
- The inspector general's office did not respond to Axios' request for comment.
Go deeper: Why the Epstein scandal may never die
Editor's note: This story has been corrected to reflect that the Democracy Defenders Fund said in its complaint that only a "handful" of communications from Bondi, Blanche and Patel appear in the released Epstein documents (not that none appear).
