DDF and a team of outside legal counsel are actively reviewing the Department of Justice’s latest release of files related to Jeffrey Epstein. As has been widely reported, the materials produced are incomplete and do not comply with the requirements Congress set forth in the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

“Instead of the transparency required by law, this appears to be a document dump designed to obscure the truth,” said Amb. Norm Eisen (ret.), executive chair of Democracy Defenders Fund. “Congress overwhelmingly voted on a bipartisan basis to require meaningful disclosure, not a document dump filled with redactions and filler. What the DOJ has produced so far falls far short of what the law demands and raises serious questions about why key records are being unlawfully withheld.”

Following are key takeaways from DDF’s review of the files:

• DOJ missed the mark on the scope of disclosure. Just hours before the statutory deadline, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that the DOJ would release “several hundred thousand” documents. As of 2:00 PM today, just over 4,000 files had been produced. That shortfall is a fundamental failure to meet what the DOJ publicly promised and what the law requires.

• Searches for Trump-related material produced almost nothing new. After machine-searching the files last night for dozens of Trump-related terms, including his businesses, we found only a handful of matches, mostly false positives, despite press reports that his name was repeatedly flagged during the government’s original review.

• Many files appear to be filler and lack substantive value. A large portion of the production consists of low-resolution, blurry photos, including vacation-style images, clouds, and airplane windows. Images that do include people are redacted inconsistently, with some appearing both redacted and unredacted.

• Redactions are broad and uneven. DOJ redacted the names and faces of most individuals except Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Bill Clinton or others appearing in photos with him. The law only permits redactions of victim identifying information, and these redactions clearly go beyond that scope.

• Financial networks and intermediaries are largely absent. Epstein’s operations depended on a complex network of banks, financial institutions, and professional gatekeepers. Yet these files contain virtually no meaningful information about those intermediaries and only a handful of images of checks, payroll lists, or similar documents that shed little light on how Epstein’s money moved or who enabled it.

“Incomplete, heavily redacted document dumps only deepen public suspicion and raise more questions than they answer,” said Amb. Norm Eisen (ret.), Executive Chair of Democracy Defenders Fund.  “The survivors deserve answers, and so does the public. DDF has filed FOIA requests to force the lawful release of these records, and we will continue to use every legal tool available to demand transparency and accountability until the truth is fully disclosed.”

# # #

Democracy Defenders Fund brings together a nonpartisan team to work with national, state, and local allies across the country to defend in real-time the foundations of our democracy.