Khaberni - The US Department of Justice completed, on Friday, the release of a large batch of files related to the late businessman Jeffrey Epstein, placing nearly 3.5 million documents on its website, in a move it said aimed to enhance transparency.
The "Washington Post" reported that this move sparked a wave of wide criticism, amid confirmations that millions of other documents are still blocked or were published after extensive redaction.
Criticism of the Justice Department
Opponents of President Donald Trump’s administration criticized what they described as incomplete disclosure, arguing that the published documents did not answer fundamental questions related to the sexual assault crimes committed by Epstein against underage girls, his connections with influential figures, and how he escaped strict legal accountability despite years of scrutiny.
The majority of the documents were published under the "Epstein Files Transparency Act," which was passed by both the Republican and Democratic parties.
Representatives Ro Khanna (Democrat from California) and Thomas Massie (Republican from Kentucky), who were among the architects of the law, said they spoke to victims whose statements have not been released to the authorities yet, raising doubts about the completeness of the file releases.
They affirmed that some redactions may not comply with the text of the law, which prohibits withholding documents or redacting them for reasons related to embarrassment, reputation, or political sensitivity, allowing only for the protection of victims' privacy.
Sensitive Documents
In turn, Representative Massie said that "the authorities failed, due to mismanagement, to redact the names of the victims, while deliberately withholding documents and redacting the names of persons supposed to be investigated."
He referred to a draft of the federal indictment against Epstein in 2007, which included serious sexual crime charges before reaching a lenient judicial agreement, considering that some redactions hid the names of potential culprits.
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche confirmed that investigators identified more than 6 million relevant files, but only 3.5 million have been allowed for publication so far.
He explained that the majority of these documents were disclosed on Friday, including correspondences between Epstein and influential figures and sensitive photos, before some images were later removed from their site.
Commitment to the Law
In a joint message, Attorney General Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche said: "The publication process represents the end of a comprehensive review to ensure transparency and compliance with the law," mentioning efforts to obtain judicial permission to publish part of the documents related to the grand jury investigation of Epstein’s associate, Ghislaine Maxwell.
Khanna and Massie expressed their desire to meet with Blanche, to discuss the unpublished or redacted documents, while the latter stated that "the doors of the department are open" for reviewing the materials.
The Department of Justice also announced its intention to submit a report to Congress within 15 days, explaining the reasons for the redactions, according to the law.
In a striking comment, President Donald Trump, on Monday, deemed the efforts to publish the documents "a waste of time," saying that "the Department of Justice should focus on other matters."
New Documents
Meanwhile, James Marsh, an attorney for several victims of Epstein, said his team is still examining the new documents for answers, hoping to reveal more, but described the publishing process as "scattered and lacking context."
He added that "one of his clients, Maria Farmer, felt vindicated after previous documents showed that she had warned the FBI in 1996 about Epstein's possession of child pornography, a decade before the federal investigation began."
Marsh noted that the current documents might contain additional leads, but he emphasized that definitive answers may come from interviews with former investigators.
At the same time, Khanna called for greater focus on holding the elite associated with Epstein accountable, stressing the need for an "ethical review" of what happened on Epstein’s island.
