Where are the Epstein Records?! Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch are suing

Where are the Epstein Records?! @TomFittonhttps://t.co/CCWGuXDSmG pic.twitter.com/OKXWGA1UsZ

— Judicial Watch ⚖️ (@JudicialWatch) April 22, 2025

• Probably too many politicians and their major donors on the list as well as the rich and powerful who the spy agencies are using to blackmail for info, so they all object to the list of the pedophiles to be released. I say release allthe names and say toughski shitski – Jim Book
• Epstein was a Fed Bitch allowed to molest for his info true or not. I wonder if Epstein molested an FBI agent kid it been over long ago. Its not a crime to molest Sally but its a crime to molest FBI Agent kids – Kristi
• Tom, Tom! Didn’t you hear? Pam Bondi has a truckload of Epstein information sitting on her desk. Those ped_philes can run but they can’t hide from her. Any day now, she’s going to be releasing the information, so your lawsuit is totally unnecessary. – George Orwell
• Grok: Jeffrey Epstein, a financier and convicted sex offender, died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges. His case has fueled widespread speculation about a network of powerful individuals allegedly involved in or complicit with his crimes. In February 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), under Attorney General Pam Bondi, released a “first phase” of declassified Epstein files, including flight logs, a contact book, and an evidence list. However, these documents were heavily redacted, contained mostly previously leaked information, and lacked the “bombshell” revelations many anticipated. This led to accusations of a cover-up and renewed focus on why more comprehensive files, including rumored videos or recordings, remain unreleased.
  The DOJ has emphasized that redactions and delays in releasing documents are partly to protect the identities and personal information of Epstein’s victims, many of whom were underage at the time of the abuse. Over 250 victims have been identified, and releasing unredacted materials, especially videos, could re-traumatize survivors or expose them to public scrutiny. Court documents from prior releases, such as those in Virginia Giuffre’s 2015 lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell, have consistently redacted victim identities for this reason. However, critics argue that selective redactions could also shield powerful individuals, not just victims.

  Some speculate that Epstein’s operation may have had ties to intelligence agencies, potentially as a “honeypot” scheme to gather compromising material on influential figures. Posts on X and certain commentators have suggested links to Mossad or other agencies, though these claims lack concrete evidence and remain speculative. If true, releasing certain files or videos could compromise national security or expose sensitive operations, providing a rationale for withholding them. Attorney General Bondi has cited national security as a reason for redactions, which fuels suspicion among those who believe this is a pretext to protect elites.

  Bondi accused the FBI, particularly the Southern District of New York (SDNY), of withholding thousands of pages of documents. She demanded all files be delivered by February 28, 2025, and tasked FBI Director Kash Patel with investigating why her initial request was not fully honored. This suggests internal resistance, bureaucratic delays, or possible deliberate obstruction within federal agencies. Critics, including conservative influencers like Liz Wheeler, have labeled this a “deep state” cover-up, though it could also reflect logistical issues or differing interpretations of what constitutes releasable material.

  The release of the Epstein files has been politicized, with some arguing it serves as a distraction or a tool for settling scores. For example, journalist Julie K. Brown and others have suggested the February 2025 release was a politically motivated move by the Trump administration to target the SDNY, which previously investigated Trump. The lack of new revelations in the released files led to accusations that the DOJ overhyped the event for political gain, while withholding more damning materials to avoid implicating allies or creating broader political fallout. Conversely, Trump’s supporters argue that establishment figures across the political spectrum are blocking full disclosure to protect themselves.

  Journalists like Brown and Jacob Shamsian, who have covered Epstein extensively, argue that the public’s expectation of a definitive “client list” or incriminating videos may be misguided. While the FBI seized tens of thousands of pages, photos, and possibly videos during Epstein’s 2019 arrest, much of this material may not contain the clear evidence of wrongdoing people imagine. Some records remain heavily redacted in the FBI’s vault, and FOIA requests for them have been denied. The absence of a single, cohesive list or blockbuster video could mean the government is withholding fragmented or inconclusive evidence—or that the most damning materials don’t exist in the form people expect..

  Releasing unverified or salacious materials, especially videos, poses legal risks. Unredacted documents or recordings could implicate individuals who were not criminally involved, leading to defamation lawsuits or public backlash. For instance, many names in Epstein’s orbit (e.g., Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Prince Andrew) have appeared in court documents, but most are not accused of wrongdoing. The DOJ may be cautious about releasing materials that could be misinterpreted or weaponized without clear evidence of criminality. Additionally, ongoing lawsuits, like Judicial Watch’s against the DOJ for Epstein records, highlight tensions over transparency versus legal constraints

  A persistent theory is that powerful individuals implicated in Epstein’s network—potentially spanning politics, business, and academia—are exerting influence to suppress the files. Epstein’s “black book” included names like Mick Jagger, Alec Baldwin, and Naomi Campbell, but these connections don’t necessarily indicate criminality. The 2008 non-prosecution agreement, negotiated by then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, shielded Epstein and potential co-conspirators, raising questions about elite protection. Critics argue that this pattern continues, with institutions prioritizing the reputations of the powerful over justice for victims.

Hello! Where are the arrests – we are burning daylight! ‘Something is not right’ – Glenn Beck with Steve Bannon saying what all are…

WHERE ARE THE INDICTMENTS FROM THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT?

See a ton of humor clips, and quick smile, plus some fight clips – lots of all kinds- Choice 🤣

How can you move your 401K to Gold penalty free? Get the answer and more with Goldco’s exclusive Gold IRA Beginner’s Guide. Click here now! – Goldco Sponsor 🛑

Put On Your Tinfoil Hat: TOP 10 MEMES – Watch MAGA

We want more than prison for the Democrats and RINO Scum that have robbed and abused us all – we want a firing squad. No BS 

• The Miracle Drug from Joe Rogan and Mel Gibson That Everyone is Talking About – Wellness Sponsored
• Is Ivermectin the Key to Fighting Cancer? People are being cured all over the world…. – Wellness (Dr. McCullough’s company) Sponsored Post 🛑
• Be prepared for anything, including lockdowns with your own Emergency Med kit – see Wellness Emergency Kit (includes Ivermectin and other essential drugs, guide book, much more… peace of mind for you and your family) 🛑 – Dr. McCullough’s company! – Sponsor