2.5 Million Reasons the DOJ is Lying to Us

I am writing to express my profound concern regarding the Department of Justice’s failure to fully comply with the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), which passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support. The American public was promised complete transparency. However, the DOJ’s recent assertions—repeated by former Attorney General Pam Bondi during her May 29, 2026, congressional testimony—that all "required" documents have been produced is demonstrably insufficient. An estimated 2.5 million potentially responsive records remain withheld under overly broad definitions of executive privilege and responsiveness. The current administrative approach to this statutory mandate severely undermines the rule of law: - Obstruction of Congressional Oversight: The use of DOJ counsel to coach witnesses and prevent them from answering direct questions about the document review process actively impedes the Legislative branch’s constitutional duty to provide oversight. - The Transparency Gap: The DOJ is currently acting as both the entity under investigation and the final arbiter of what constitutes "transparency," creating an inherent conflict of interest. - Administrative Capture: The current vacuum in the Inspector General’s office—led by an acting official rather than a Senate-confirmed appointee—further compromises the independence of any internal review. The presence of allegations within the already-released, heavily redacted files makes the withholding of the remaining millions of pages a matter of urgent public interest, not an administrative detail. I urge you to move beyond closed-door interviews and take immediate, decisive action: 1. Demand the immediate release of the full, un-redacted set of documents to a bipartisan panel of lawmakers, bypassing the DOJ’s current gatekeeping process. 2. Pressure the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to expedite their independent audit of the DOJ’s classification and redaction methodology. 3. Reject the "To the best of my knowledge" defense as an acceptable substitute for factual compliance from administration officials. Transparency must not be subject to the political convenience of whichever administration is in power. We demand the accountability that was legally mandated and promised to the victims and the public.