Lawmakers Blast DOJ Over 'Inappropriate' Epstein File Redactions

When Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie walked into a Department of Justice building on Monday to review unredacted Jeffrey Epstein files, they expected transparency. Instead, they found what they're calling a cover-up.

The two congressmen—one Democrat, one Republican—discovered that crucial names in the convicted sex offender's 3 million pages of files had been "inappropriately" blacked out, potentially shielding powerful figures from scrutiny.

The 20-Name Mystery

Under the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), which passed Congress almost unanimously last year, the FBI was supposed to provide unredacted documents to lawmakers. But when Massie and Khanna reviewed the files, they found a troubling pattern: a list of about 20 people where every name was redacted except Epstein's and his co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell's.

Most concerning? Massie says six of those names likely belong to men who are "incriminated by their inclusion in these files." The implication is clear—these aren't just casual acquaintances or business associates.

"The core issue is that they're not complying with my law, because these were scrubbed back in March by Donald Trump's FBI," Khanna told reporters, suggesting the redactions happened months before the files' official release.

Damage Control in Real Time

The lawmakers' complaints triggered immediate action from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who took to X to announce: "The DOJ is committed to transparency." Within hours of the congressmen's public criticism, his department "unredacted all non-victim names" from the disputed document.

But this reactive approach only fueled more suspicion. Why weren't these names visible from the start? And what other redactions might be hiding in plain sight across 3 million pages?

One document that caught Massie's attention appeared to show an email exchange between Epstein and an unknown person discussing a "torture video" and travel between China and the United States. Massie claimed "a Sultan seems to have sent this" and demanded the hidden identity be revealed. Blanche responded that the redacted text was merely an email address, adding curtly: "Stop grandstanding."

The Seven-Year Reading Challenge

Beyond specific redactions, lawmakers are frustrated with the viewing process itself. The DOJ has provided just four computers in a satellite office for Congress to review more than 3 million documents. Democrat Jamie Raskin calculated it would take lawmakers seven years to read everything at this pace.

"The DOJ is giving Members of Congress just four computers in a satellite office to read the unredacted Epstein File," Raskin wrote on X, calling the arrangement a "cover up."

Republican Lauren Boebert, who also viewed documents Monday, was more circumspect but telling: "I think there are folks who are definitely implicated" in the files, she said, without elaborating.

Victims Caught in the Crossfire

The transparency push has created an uncomfortable tension. Last week, lawyers for Epstein's victims criticized the DOJ for releasing files that included email addresses and nude photos where victims could be identified. Survivors called the disclosure "outrageous" and said they shouldn't be "named, scrutinized and retraumatized."

The DOJ acknowledged "technical or human error" and removed the flagged files. But this incident highlights the delicate balance between public accountability and victim protection—a balance that seems to be tilting toward protecting the powerful rather than the vulnerable.