Episode Details
Back to Episodes
The Epstein Files Expose How Prematurely DOJ Tried to Close the Case (Part 1) (10/23/26)
Published 3 hours ago
Description
In July 2025, the DOJ and FBI tried to close the book on Jeffrey Epstein by claiming they had found no incriminating client list, no credible blackmail evidence, and nothing that could justify investigations of uncharged third parties. That posture collapsed after Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act by overwhelming margins and forced millions of pages into public view. Once those records were released, New Mexico reopened its criminal investigation into alleged activity at Zorro Ranch, later sued the Justice Department for access to unredacted evidence, and filed a separate civil case accusing Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn of helping facilitate and conceal Epstein’s trafficking operation. Congress continued issuing subpoenas, taking testimony, and comparing witness statements against documentary evidence, while French prosecutors opened trafficking and financial-crime investigations based on newly released material. British authorities also opened Epstein-related investigations, including a public-corruption probe involving Peter Mandelson. None of those actions automatically prove criminal guilt, but they make one thing impossible to maintain with a straight face: the idea that every meaningful investigative avenue had already been exhausted.
That is where the administration’s handling becomes so hard to defend. Trump repeatedly dismissed the Epstein controversy as a hoax and mocked people who kept pressing for answers, while his own Justice Department was sitting on millions of pages that later generated new investigations in the United States and overseas. The administration’s defenders have since tried to move the goalposts by arguing that the released files do not automatically prove crimes, but that was never the question. The question was whether there were still credible leads, witnesses, financial trails, records, and third parties worth investigating, and the answer from New Mexico, Congress, France, and Britain has plainly been yes. The federal government told the public the road had ended, then watched other investigators walk straight past the supposed dead end using material that came out of federal files. At that point, the contradiction was no longer theoretical. Washington claimed the case had been picked clean, but once Congress forced the door open, investigators immediately found more rooms to search.
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
That is where the administration’s handling becomes so hard to defend. Trump repeatedly dismissed the Epstein controversy as a hoax and mocked people who kept pressing for answers, while his own Justice Department was sitting on millions of pages that later generated new investigations in the United States and overseas. The administration’s defenders have since tried to move the goalposts by arguing that the released files do not automatically prove crimes, but that was never the question. The question was whether there were still credible leads, witnesses, financial trails, records, and third parties worth investigating, and the answer from New Mexico, Congress, France, and Britain has plainly been yes. The federal government told the public the road had ended, then watched other investigators walk straight past the supposed dead end using material that came out of federal files. At that point, the contradiction was no longer theoretical. Washington claimed the case had been picked clean, but once Congress forced the door open, investigators immediately found more rooms to search.
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.