It seems so simple — if people in power have nothing to hide, why wouldn’t they want to release the so-called Epstein Files?
After years of playing chicken — each party demanding the files be released when they are out of power or withholding the documents when they are in control — a rare moment of unity occurred this week when Congress passed H.R.4405, the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Five hundred and twenty-seven representatives and senators voted for it, while but one sole congressman voted against it.
Who is this crazy renegade, and how could he possibly object to the long-sought public viewing of the mythical Epstein Files? Maybe we should start with what the "files" actually are.
If you're like me, you're wondering why, when the Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee released 20,000 pages of documents from convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's estate last week, that didn't count as "releasing the Epstein files." How many files are still out there, in the estate or otherwise? Which are the elusive ones that Congress just voted to release, and why couldn't they simply make those documents available, as they just did with the emails?
The act Congress just passed seeks "To require the Attorney General to release all documents and records in possession of the Department of Justice relating to Jeffrey Epstein, and for other purposes." It directs that, "In General, Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall, subject to subsection (b), make publicly available in a searchable and downloadable format all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in the possession of the Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and United States Attorneys’ Offices, that relate to:…" Here follows a list of subjects these documents might cover, all related to inquiry into the whole Epstein situation.
So we are countenancing the release of federal investigation notes and materials. And there are reasons why such things aren't routinely thrown to the public, media, and internet wolves.
In a statement he posted on X, Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) explains his lone vote against the Epstein Files Transparency Act (emphasis in the original):
I have been a principled “NO” on this bill from the beginning. What was wrong with the bill three months ago is still wrong today. It abandons 250 years of criminal justice procedure in America. As written, this bill reveals and injures thousands of innocent people – witnesses, people who provided alibis, family members, etc. If enacted in its current form, this type of broad reveal of criminal investigative files, released to a rabid media, will absolutely result in innocent people being hurt. Not by my vote. The Oversight Committee is conducting a thorough investigation that has already released well over 60,000 pages of documents from the Epstein case. That effort will continue in a manner that provides all due protections for innocent Americans. If the Senate amends the bill to properly address privacy of victims and other Americans, who are named but not criminally implicated, then I will vote for that bill when it comes back to the House.
Section C of the act makes the provision that "(1) The Attorney general may withhold or redact the segregable portions of records that— (A) contain personally identifiable information of victims or victims’ personal and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;" so there's that. But it only protects "victims" — presumably of Epstein's predations — and no one else. So Higgins's concern about the exposure of uninvolved people seems founded.
I'll go him one better.
Why are these protected people referred to as "victims" in the bill's language? Why is the universally required "alleged" not in front of that word? Because to use the unqualified descriptor "victims" for these people implies that their accusations are settled facts, when they are, in many cases, not at all settled.
In fact, the only crimes for which Jeffrey Epstein was ever tried and convicted were two state-level felony charges — solicitation of prostitution and solicitation of prostitution involving a minor under 18 — in Florida in 2008.
The Epstein Files that Congress is opening up to the public are documents from an investigation, not a fair trial. They will contain all manner of allegations against numerous people. Some of these may be truthful, some may be false, and some may lie somewhere in between. There will be subjective statements. There will be inaccuracies. There will be hearsay. There will be statements that any self-respecting judge would refuse to allow in his or her courtroom because they are inadmissible and unreliable as evidence.
Ordinarily, accused people are protected from unproven allegations by defamation laws. That will not be the case here, because the statements were not made publicly by the accusers. They were made as part of a private interview or investigation.
As a result, many people are about to be judged by the public — by, as Rep. Higgins puts it, a "rabid media," as well as countless internet partisans who will spread their one-sided arguments around their bubbles — without ever having had the benefit of a trial or the ability to refute accusations.
So much for being presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Recommended: Chill Out, Everyone — There Was a Nearly Identical Anti-Trump Reaction in 2017
But for better or for worse, the nation is rolling full steam ahead into this highly charged, politicized, unprecedented experiment. Trump will likely sign the act into law, and thousands of documents will osmose to the public as a result. They will no doubt be chock full of titillating tidbits that inflame both sides of our political divide. Maybe someday, years in the future, this may actually lead to some sort of legitimate justice for an actual abuser or two, though I doubt it. Overall, I suspect it will have little positive effect. But here we go, at any rate.
PJ Media has never galloped along with the herd. We take the time to consider all angles of today's biggest news. Support our work AND treat yourself to terrific perks! Use the promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your new VIP subscription today!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member