files

For Marina Lacerda, the upcoming publication of U.S. government files on Jeffrey Epstein represents more than an opportunity for justice.

She says she was just 14 when Epstein started sexually abusing her at his New York mansion, but she struggles to recall much of what happened because it is such a dark period in her life.

Now, she’s hoping that the files will reveal more about the trauma that distorted so much of her adolescence.

“I feel that the government and the FBI knows more than I do, and that scares me, because it’s my life, it’s my past,” she told the Associated Press.

President Trump signed legislation last week that will force the Justice Department to release documents from its voluminous files on Epstein.

“We have waited long enough. We’ve fought long enough,” Lacerda said.

It isn’t clear yet how much new information will be in the files, gathered over two decades of investigations into Epstein’s alleged sexual abuse of many girls and women.

Some of his accusers expect the files to provide a level of transparency they had hardly allowed themselves to believe would materialize, but the release of the documents will be a more complicated moment for others.

Two federal investigations cut short

The FBI and police in Palm Beach, Fla., began investigating Epstein in the mid-2000s after several underage girls said he had paid them for sex acts. He pleaded guilty in 2008 to charges including procuring a minor for prostitution, but a secret deal with the U.S. attorney in Florida — future Trump Cabinet member Alex Acosta — allowed him to avoid a federal prosecution. He served little more than a year in custody.

Jena-Lisa Jones says she was abused by Epstein in Palm Beach in 2002, when she was 14. She did not report the abuse to the police at the time, but she later became one of many accusers to sue the multimillionaire.

The Miami Herald published a series of articles about Epstein in 2018 that exposed new details about how the federal prosecution was shelved. A year later, federal prosecutors in New York, where Epstein owned a mansion, revived the case and charged him with sex trafficking.

Jones said she was interviewed during that federal investigation and was prepared to testify in court.

“It was very important for me to have my moment, for him to see my face and hear my words, and me have that control and power back,” Jones said.

But that day never came.

Epstein killed himself in a federal jail cell in New York City in August 2019.

In lieu of her day in court, Jones and others are hoping for a public reckoning with the publication of the government files on Epstein.

While the government only ever charged two people in connection with the abuse case — Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell, who is in prison for her related crimes — at least one of Epstein’s accusers has claimed she was instructed to have sex with other rich and powerful men.

Jones didn’t make similar claims, but said she believes the documents could map out a “broad scheme” involving others.

“I’m hoping they’re shaking a little bit and that they have what’s coming for them,” Jones said.

Filling in the gaps

Lacerda, now 37, is also hoping the files will clarify her own personal experience, which is muddled by the pain she said she endured at that time in her life.

“I was just a child and it’s just trauma. That’s what trauma does to your brain,” Lacerda said.

An immigrant from Brazil, Lacerda said she was working three jobs to support herself and her family the summer before 9th grade when a friend said she could make $300 if she gave Epstein massages.

The first time she massaged Epstein, he told her to remove her shirt, she said.

Lacerda said she was soon spending so much time working for Epstein that she dropped out of school. The sexual abuse persisted until she turned 17, when Epstein informed her that she was “too old,” she said.

Lacerda wondered whether the files might include videos and photographs of her and other victims at Epstein’s properties.

“I need to know — for my healing process and for the adult in me — what I did as a child,” Lacerda said. “It will be re-traumatizing, but it’s transparency — and I need it,” she said.

Accusers wonder, why now?

For Lacerda, the elation around the upcoming release of the files gave way to familiar feelings for many women who survive abuse: fear and paranoia.

“In the heat of the moment, we were like, ‘Wow, this is like, everything that we’ve been fighting for.’ And then we had to take a moment and be like, ‘Wait a minute. Why is he releasing the files all of a sudden?’ ” Lacerda said.

The abrupt change in the political momentum made her uneasy. She wondered whether the documents would be doctored or redacted to protect people connected to Epstein.

Others echoed her concerns, and wondered if the government would sufficiently protect victims who have remained anonymous, who fear scrutiny and harassment if their names were to become public.

“For the rest of my life, I will never truly trust the government because of what they’ve done to us,” Jones said.

Haley Robson, who says she was abused by Epstein when she was 16, has the same concerns.

Robson was a leading voice in advocating for the Florida legislation signed in 2024 that unsealed the grand jury transcripts from the 2006 state case against Epstein.

She said the political maneuvering in recent months about the files led to nonstop anxiety, reminiscent of how she felt when she was abused as a teenager.

“I guess it really comes from the trauma I’ve endured, because this is kind of what Jeffrey Epstein did to us. You know, he wasn’t transparent. He played these manipulation tactics,” she said. “It’s triggering for anybody who’s been in that situation.”

Still, Robson said she is trying to savor the victory while she can.

“This is the first time since 2006 where I don’t feel like the underdog,” she said.

Riddle writes for the Associated Press.

Abuse survivors urge accountability and support ahead of the much-anticipated release of the files related to the late sex offender in the United States.

A group of survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s decades-long sexual abuse have said that they have been receiving death threats, which they expect to escalate, as the date nears for the release of files concerning the deceased convicted paedophile financier.

In a statement titled “What we’re bracing for” and made public on Thursday, Epstein’s survivors have demanded accountability and legal support to face their abusers and get justice.

“Many of us have already received death threats and other threats of harm. We are bracing for these to escalate,” they said.

“We ask every federal and state law enforcement agency that has jurisdiction over these threats to investigate them and protect us.”

They also warned that there have been attempts to blame the victims for their own or each other’s abuse.

Some of the survivors have increased the pace of their campaigning efforts recently to pressure the United States administration to release the Justice Department’s files on the late sex offender, speaking publicly about their stories.

The furore has dominated the national agenda in the US with President Donald Trump backpedalling on his opposition against the Justice Department releasing the files with a sudden about-face last week.

Trump signed a bill on Wednesday requiring the Justice Department to release all of the files related to the disgraced financier.

That was one day after the legislation was unanimously approved in the US Senate.

After he signed the move into law, the department has 30 days to make them public.

‘Continue fighting’

The development follows weeks of intense political fighting about how far to go in disclosing records tied to Epstein.

The release could identify some of the most high-profile figures in politics, entertainment and business.

“Years ago, Epstein got away with abusing us by portraying us as flawed and bad girls,” said the statement by the survivors, demanding full disclosure of the files.

“We cannot let his enablers use this tactic to escape accountability now,” added the appeal, signed by 18 named survivors and 10 Jane Does.

“We ask our champions in Congress and in the public to continue fighting to make sure all materials are released, not selected ones.”

For one survivor, Marina Lacerda, the upcoming publication of the files represents more than an opportunity for justice.

Lacerda says she was just 14 when Epstein started sexually abusing her at his New York mansion, but she struggles to recall much of what happened because it is such a dark period in her life. Now, she’s hoping that the files will reveal more about the trauma that distorted so much of her adolescence.

“I feel that the government and the FBI knows more than I do, and that scares me, because it’s my life, it’s my past,” she told The Associated Press news agency.

Epstein was found dead in his New York City jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial. He pleaded guilty and was convicted in 2008 of procuring a minor for prostitution.

Virginia Giuffre, an Epstein survivor whose painful story has been one of the most high-profile cases, had reportedly faced a campaign of intimidation and threats before she died by suicide in April.

Giuffre had accused Epstein and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the disgraced and expelled former United Kingdom royal Prince Andrew, of sexual abuse.

The battle over the files in the investigation of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has reached a new turn with the United States Congress voting for the Department of Justice to release its information on the case. As the world waits for what the full files may reveal, what do we know about the rich and elite who surrounded Epstein?

Donald Trump has signed a law requiring the US Justice Department to release the remaining Epstein files within 30 days. The Attorney General said her department would comply – but hinted some documents could be withheld for legal reasons.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Wednesday night signed into law legislation demanding that the Justice Department release all documents related to its investigation into sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

With little fanfare, the president announced the action in a lengthy social media post that attacked Democrats who have been linked to the late financier, a line of attack that he has often deployed while ignoring his and other Republicans’ ties to the scandal.

“Perhaps the truth about these Democrats and their associations with Jeffrey Epstein, will soon be revealed, but I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!” Trump wrote in a post on his social media platform Truth Social.

Now the focus turns to Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, whom the legislation compels to make available “all unclassified records, documents, communications and investigative materials” in the Department of Justice’s possession no later than 30 days after the legislation becoming law.

The action on the bill marks a dramatic shift for Trump, who worked for months to thwart release of the Epstein files — until Sunday, when he reversed course under pressure from his party and called on Republican lawmakers to back the measure. Within days, the Senate and House overwhelmingly voted for the bill and sent it to Trump’s desk.

Although Trump has now signed the bill into law, his resistance to releasing the files has led to skepticism among some lawmakers on Capitol Hill who question whether the Justice Department may try to conceal information.

“The real test will be, will the Department of Justice release the files or will it all remain tied up in investigations?” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said at a news conference Tuesday before the House and Senate passed the bill. Greene was among a small group of GOP defectors who joined Democrats in forcing the legislation to the floor over Trump’s objections.

The legislation prohibits the attorney general from withholding, delaying or redacting the publication of “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

Carve-outs in the bill could allow Trump and Bondi to withhold documents that include identifying information of victims or depictions of child sexual abuse materials.

The law also would allow them to conceal information that would “jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary.”

Trump directed the Justice Department last week to investigate Epstein’s links with major banks and several prominent Democrats, including former President Clinton.

Bondi abided, and appointed a top federal prosecutor to pursue the investigation with “urgency and integrity.” In July, the Justice Department determined after an extensive review that there was not enough evidence that “could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties” in the Epstein case.

At a news conference Wednesday, Bondi said the department had opened another case into Epstein after “new information” emerged.

Bondi did not say how the new investigation could affect the release of the files.

Asked if the Epstein documents would be released within 30 days, as the law states, Bondi said her department would “follow the law.”

“We will continue to follow the law with maximum transparency while protecting victims,” Bondi said.

United States President Donald Trump has announced that he has signed a bill ordering the full release of files related to the late sex offender and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump made the announcement on social media late on Wednesday.

“Perhaps the truth about these Democrats, and their associations with Jeffrey Epstein, will soon be revealed, because I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The legislation compels the US Justice Department to release all documents related to Epstein, who died in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges, within 30 days.

US Attorney General Pam Bondi had earlier told a news conference that the administration would “follow the law and encourage maximum transparency” in the case.

More to follow…

The vote represents a major step in the years-long effort to make government documents on the late sex offender public.

The United States Congress has approved a bill to release government documents related to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, clearing the way for making the files public.

The House of Representatives adopted the measure in a 427-1 vote on Tuesday, sending it to the Senate, which swiftly agreed to pass it by unanimous consent even before it was formally transmitted to the chamber.

Once the bill is formally approved, it will go to the desk of President Donald Trump, who said he would sign it into law.

The case of Epstein – a financier who sexually abused girls and young women for years – has sparked intrigue in the US for years, given his connections to powerful people in the media, politics and academia, including ties to Trump.

Trump initially opposed releasing the files, calling the controversy around the late sex offender a “hoax” before reversing course this month.

The president and his Department of Justice do not need to wait for Congress to pass the legislation to release the files. They have the authority to make them public.

Before the vote on Tuesday, members of Congress who have been leading the bill – Democrat Ro Khanna and Republicans Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene – spoke alongside survivors of Epstein’s abuse outside the US Capitol.

“We fought the president, the attorney general, the FBI director, the speaker of the House and the vice president to get this win. They’re on our side today, so let’s give them some credit as well,” Massie told reporters.

Jena-Lisa Jones, one of the survivors, held up a photo of herself when she was 14 – the age when she met Epstein.

“I was a child. I was in ninth grade. I was hopeful for life and what the future had held for me. He stole a lot from me,” she said.

Epstein first pleaded guilty to charges of solicitation of prostitution with a minor in 2008. He served 13 months in a minimum-security prison and was allowed to leave for 12 hours a day to work. Critics said the punishment did not match the severity of the offence.

After the Miami Herald investigated the prosecution against Epstein, federal authorities reopened the case against him, arrested him and charged him with sex trafficking of minors in 2019.

Two months later, he was found dead in his jail cell in New York City. His death was ruled a suicide.

Epstein’s associates over the years included former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, the United Kingdom’s Prince Andrew and former US President Bill Clinton.

Even after his first conviction, Epstein continued to have close personal relationships with influential figures, including former Harvard University President Larry Summers, who recently apologised for maintaining ties to the sex offender.

On Tuesday, Trump lashed out at an ABC News reporter who quizzed him about why he would not release the files on his own, stressing that Epstein was a major donor for Democratic politicians.

“You just keep going on the Epstein files. And what the Epstein is is a Democrat hoax,” the US president said.

Earlier in the day when asked why Trump would not make the documents public, Massie said Epstein’s connections were above partisan politics.

“I believe he’s trying to protect friends and donors. And by the way, these aren’t necessarily Republicans,” Massie said. “Once you get to a billion dollars, you see, you transcend parties.”

The US House of Representatives voted 427 to 1 to pass the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which if enacted will require the Department of Justice to release documents related to sexual offender Jeffrey Epstein. It still needs to pass the Senate and be signed by President Trump into law.

WASHINGTON — The House is poised to vote overwhelmingly on Tuesday to demand the Justice Department release all documents tied to its investigation of the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

President Trump, who initially worked to thwart the vote before reversing course on Sunday night, has said he will sign the measure if it reaches his desk. For that to happen, the bill will also need to pass the Senate, which could consider the measure as soon as Tuesday night.

Republicans for months pushed back on the release of the Epstein files, joining Trump in claiming the Epstein issue was being brought up by Democrats as a way to distract from Republicans’ legislative successes.

But that all seismically shifted Sunday when Trump had a drastic reversal and urged Republicans to vote to release the documents, saying there was “nothing to hide.”

“It’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The reversal came days after 20,000 documents from Epstein’s private estate were released by lawmakers in the House Oversight Committee. The files referenced Trump more than 1,000 times.

In private emails, Epstein wrote that Trump had “spent hours” at his house and “knew about the girls,” a revelation that reignited the push in Congress for further disclosures.

Trump has continued to deny wrongdoing in the Epstein saga despite opposing the release of files from the federal probe into the conduct of his former friend, a convicted sex offender and alleged sex trafficker. He died by suicide while in federal custody in 2019.

Many members of Trump’s MAGA base have demanded the files be released, convinced they contain revelations about powerful people involved in Epstein’s abuse of what is believed to be more than 200 women and girls. Tension among his base spiked when Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said in July that an “Epstein client list” did not exist, after saying in February that the list was sitting on her desk awaiting review. She later said she was referring to the Epstein files more generally.

Trump’s call to release the files now highlights how he is trying to prevent an embarrassing defeat as a growing number of Republicans in the House have joined Democrats to vote for the legislation in recent days.

The Epstein files have been a hugely divisive congressional fight in recent months, with Democrats pushing the release, but Republican congressional leaders largely refusing to take the votes. The issue even led to a rift within the MAGA movement, and Trump to cut ties with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia who had long been an ardent support of the president.

“Watching this actually turn into a fight has ripped MAGA apart,” Greene said at a news conference Tuesday in reference to the resistance to release the files.

Democrats have accused Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) of delaying the swearing-in of Rep. Adelita Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat, because she promised to cast the final vote needed to move a so-called discharge petition, which would force a vote on the floor. Johnson has denied those claims.

If the House and Senate do vote to release the files, all eyes will turn to the Department of Justice, and what exactly it will choose to publicly release.

“The fight, the real fight, will happen after that,” Greene said. “The real test will be: Will the Department of Justice release the files? Or will it all remain tied up in an investigation?”

Several Epstein survivors joined lawmakers at the news conference to talk about how important the vote was for them.

Haley Robson, one of the survivors, questioned Trump’s resistance to the vote even now as he supports it.

“While I do understand that your position has changed on the Epstein files, and I’m grateful that you have pledged to sign this bill, I can’t help to be skeptical of what the agenda is,” Robson said.

If signed into law by Trump, the bill would prohibit the attorney general, Bondi, from withholding, delaying or redacting “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

But caveats in the bill could provide Trump and Bondi with loopholes to keep records related to the president concealed.

In the spring, FBI Director Kash Patel directed a Freedom of Information Act team to comb through the entire trove of files from the investigation, and ordered it to redact references to Trump, citing his status as a private citizen with privacy protections when the probe first launched in 2006, Bloomberg reported at the time.

Rep. Thomas Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, said the Trump administration will be forced to release the files with an act of Congress.

“They will be breaking the law if they do not release these files,” he said.

US Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene and survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse sharply criticised President Donald Trump for previously attempting to block a House vote on the release of files related to Epstein. Trump on Sunday dropped his opposition and the measure now is expected to overwhelmingly pass.

Vote on release of Justice Department files on late sex offender is expected to pass in the Republican-controlled House.

WASHINGTON — In political exile at his mansion in Florida, under investigation for possessing highly classified documents, Donald Trump summoned his lawyer in 2022 for a fateful conversation. A folder had been compiled with 38 documents that should have been returned to the federal government. But Trump had other ideas.

Making a plucking motion, Trump suggested his attorney, Evan Corcoran, remove the most incriminating material. “Why don’t you take them with you to your hotel room, and if there’s anything really bad in there, like, you know, pluck it out,” Corcoran memorialized in a series of notes that surfaced during criminal proceedings.

Trump’s purported willingness to conceal evidence from law enforcement as a private citizen is now fueling concern on Capitol Hill that his efforts to thwart the release of Justice Department files in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation could lead to similar obstructive efforts — this time wielding the powers of the presidency.

Since resuming office in January, Trump has opposed releasing files from the federal probe into the conduct of his former friend, a convicted sex offender and alleged sex trafficker who is believed to have abused more than 200 women and girls. But bipartisan fervor has only grown over the case, with House lawmakers across party lines expected to unite behind a bill on Tuesday that would compel the release of the documents.

Last week, facing intensifying public pressure, the House Oversight Committee released over 20,000 files from Epstein’s estate that referenced Trump more than 1,000 times.

Those files, which included emails from Epstein himself, showed the notorious financier believed that Trump had intimate knowledge of his criminal conduct. “He knew about the girls,” Epstein wrote, referring to Trump as the “dog that hasn’t barked.”

Rep. Dave Min (D-Irvine), a member of the oversight committee, noted Trump could order the release of the Justice Department files without any action from Congress.

“The fact that he has not done so, coupled with his long and well documented history of lying and obstructing justice, raises serious concerns that he is still trying to stop this investigation,” Min said in an interview, “either by trying to persuade Senate Republicans to vote against the release or through other mechanisms.”

A spokesperson for Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said that altering or destroying portions of the Epstein files “would violate a wide range of federal laws.”

“The senator is certainly concerned that Donald Trump, who was investigated and indicted for obstruction, will persist in trying to stonewall and otherwise prevent the full release of all the documents and information in the U.S. government’s possession,” the spokesperson said, “even if the law is passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.”

After the House votes on the bill, titled the Epstein Files Transparency Act, bipartisan support in the Senate would be required to pass the measure. Trump would then have to sign it into law.

Trump encouraged Republican House members to support it over the weekend after enough GOP lawmakers broke ranks last week to compel a vote, overriding opposition from the speaker of the House. Still, it is unclear whether the president will support the measure as it proceeds to his desk.

On Monday, Trump said he would sign the bill if it ultimately passes. “Let the Senate look at it,” he told reporters.

The bill prohibits the attorney general, Pam Bondi, from withholding, delaying or redacting the publication of “any record, document, communication, or investigative material on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.”

But caveats in the bill could provide Trump and Bondi with loopholes to keep records related to the president concealed.

“Because DOJ possesses and controls these files, it is far from certain that a vote to disclose ‘the Epstein files’ will include documents pertaining to Donald Trump,” said Barbara McQuade, who served as the United States attorney for the eastern district of Michigan from 2010 until 2017, when Trump requested a slew of resignations from U.S. attorneys.

Already, this past spring, FBI Director Kash Patel directed a Freedom of Information Act team to work with hundreds of agents to comb through the entire trove of files from the investigation, and directed them to redact references to Trump, citing his status as a private citizen with privacy protections when the probe first launched in 2006, Bloomberg reported at the time.

“It would be improper for Trump to order the documents destroyed, but Bondi could redact or remove some in the name of grand jury secrecy or privacy laws,” McQuade added. “As long as there’s a pending criminal investigation, I think she can either block disclosure of the entire file or block disclosure of individuals who are not being charged, including Trump.”

Destroying the documents would be a taller task, and “would need a loyal secretary or equivalent,” said Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, a professor emeritus and FBI historian at the University of Edinburgh.

Jeffreys-Jones recalled J. Edgar Hoover’s assistant, Helen Gandy, spending weeks at his home destroying the famed FBI director’s personal file on the dirty secrets of America’s rich and powerful.

It would also be illegal, scholars say, pointing to the Federal Records Act that prohibits anyone — including presidents — from destroying government documents.

After President Nixon attempted to assert executive authority over a collection of incriminating tapes that would ultimately end his presidency, Congress passed the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act, asserting that government documents and presidential records are federal property. Courts have repeatedly upheld the law.

While presidents are immune from prosecution over their official conduct, ordering the destruction of documents from a criminal investigation would not fall under presidential duties, legal scholars said, exposing Trump to charges of obstructing justice if he were to do so.

“Multiple federal laws bar anyone, including the president or those around him, from destroying or altering material contained in the Epstein files, including various federal record-keeping laws and criminal statutes. But that doesn’t mean that Trump or his cronies won’t consider trying,” said Norm Eisen, who served as chief ethics lawyer for President Obama and counsel for the House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment trial.

The Democracy Defenders Fund, a nonprofit organization co-founded by Eisen, has sued the Trump administration for all records in the Epstein investigation related to Trump, warning that “court supervision is needed” to ensure Trump doesn’t attempt to subvert a lawful directive to release them.

“Perhaps the greatest danger is not altering documents but wrongly withholding them or producing and redacting them,” Eisen added. “Those are both issues that we can get at in our litigation, and where court supervision can be valuable.”

Jeffreys-Jones also said that Trump may attempt to order redactions based on claims of national security. But “this might be unconvincing for two reasons,” he said.

“Trump was not yet president at the time,” he said, and “it would raise ancillary questions if redactions did not operate in the case of President Clinton.”

Last week, Trump directed the Justice Department to investigate Epstein’s ties to Democratic figures, including Clinton, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, and Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn’s co-founder and a major Democratic donor.

He made no request for the department to similarly investigate Republicans.

Times staff writer Ana Ceballos contributed to this report.

In recent days, as the United States House of Representatives approached a potential vote about releasing the Epstein files, President Donald Trump pivoted on the hot-button topic.

Trump and members of his administration had sought to undermine efforts to release the files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. And Trump has been dismissive of the push to make the files public, calling the case “pretty boring stuff” in July and repeatedly referring to it as a Democratic “hoax.”

Then, on November 16, he told House Republicans to vote in favour of the release.

His shift came after lawmakers cleared a significant hurdle on November 12, netting 218 signatures on a petition to force a vote on a bill to release the files within 30 days. The House is expected to vote on that bill this week. Previously, it was considered unlikely the legislation would pass in the Senate; it remains to be seen whether Trump’s latest statement will cause senators to reconsider.

Epstein moved in the same social circles as Trump in the 1990s, including attending parties at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s private Palm Beach, Florida, club. The two were photographed together in social settings multiple times. They later had a falling out, a rift that some reporters dated to late 2007.

Palm Beach County prosecutors investigated Epstein after reports that a 14-year-old girl was molested at his mansion. In 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges related to soliciting prostitution from someone under 18. He received preferential treatment during the criminal investigation and served about a year in jail, largely on work release.

In 2018, The Miami Herald published an extensive investigation into the case, and the next year, Epstein was arrested on federal charges for recruiting dozens of underage girls to his New York City mansion and Palm Beach estate from 2002 to 2005 to engage in sex acts for money. He was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell on August 10, 2019, and investigators concluded he died by suicide.

We asked the White House why Trump changed his stance on releasing the files. White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement, “President Trump has been consistently calling for transparency related to the Epstein files for years – by releasing tens of thousands of pages of documents, cooperating with the House Oversight Committee’s subpoena request” and calling for investigations into “Epstein’s Democrat friends”.

Here’s what Trump has said in 2024 and 2025 about releasing the Epstein files.

While campaigning in 2024, Trump said he would release the files

In June 2024, Fox and Friends co-host Rachel Campos-Duffy asked Trump if he would declassify various files, including those related to 9/11 and former President John F Kennedy.

“Would you declassify the Epstein files?” Campos-Duffy said.

“Yeah, yeah, I would,” Trump said.

The clip spread on social media, and Trump’s campaign account also shared it.

🚨 President Trump says he will DECLASSIFY the 9/11 Files, JFK Files, and Epstein Files pic.twitter.com/JalLWFkRDZ

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) June 3, 2024

During the same interview, Trump also said, “I guess I would.” He added, “You don’t want to affect people’s lives if it’s phoney stuff in there because there is a lot of phoney stuff with that whole world, but I think I would.”

On a September 2024 episode of the Lex Fridman podcast, during a discussion about releasing some of the Epstein documents, Trump said, “Yeah, I’d certainly take a look at it.” He added that he’d be “inclined” to do it and said, “I’d have no problem with it.”

In 2025, Trump was dismissive of the Epstein files

Early in the second Trump administration, Trump officials –  including Attorney General Pam Bondi and Kash Patel, who became the FBI director – said they supported releasing the files.

In late February at a White House event, Bondi released what she called the “first phase” of “declassified Epstein files” to conservative influencers. It largely consisted of documents that had already been made public.

In a July 12 Truth Social post, Trump expressed frustration about the Epstein files. Speaking to reporters on July 15 on the White House lawn, Trump said the files “were made up by Comey. They were made up by Obama. They were made up by Biden.” We rated that claim Pants on Fire.

Trump said the FBI should focus on investigating other issues, such as voter fraud, and that his administration should “not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about”.

In a July 16 interview with Real America’s Voice, a conservative outlet, Trump said, “I think in the case of Epstein, they’ve already looked at it and they are looking at it and I think all they have to do is put out anything credible. But you know, that was run by the Biden administration for four years.”

On August 22, a reporter asked Trump if he was in favour of releasing the files.

“I’m in support of keeping it open,” he said. “Innocent people shouldn’t be hurt, but I’m in support of keeping it totally open. I couldn’t care less. You got a lot of people that could be mentioned in those files that don’t deserve to be, people – because he knew everybody in Palm Beach. I don’t know anything about that, but I have said to Pam (Bondi) and everybody else, give them everything you can give them because it’s a Democrat hoax.”

On September 3, a reporter asked Trump a question about efforts to release the Epstein files and if the Justice Department was protecting any friends or donors.

Trump said it was a “Democrat hoax that never ends” and “we’ve given thousands of pages of files”.

This month, Trump called for releasing the files

Trump came out in support of releasing the files after it became clear the House was headed in that direction.

The House Oversight Committee, on November 12, released about 20,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate.

Trump directed prosecutors to investigate Democrats and told Republicans to vote in favour of releasing the files.

Trump has often noted Epstein’s ties to former President Bill Clinton. In a November 14 Truth Social post, Trump asked the Justice Department to investigate Epstein’s involvement with Clinton.

Typically, prosecutors do not release files during an ongoing investigation, so Trump’s announcement raised questions about whether the Justice Department will withhold certain files even if Congress votes to release them.

When a reporter asked Trump on November 14 about releasing the files, he said, “I don’t care about it, released or not.”

Two days later, in a November 16 post, Trump said, “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown.’’

Nov. 16 (UPI) — Rep. Thomas Massie said as many as 100 Republicans may vote to release files related to convicted sex offender Jeffery Epstein, amid a last-ditch effort by the White House to stall their release.

Massie, R-Ky., said Sunday on ABC News’ This Week that at least 100 Republicans will join Democrats in the House and vote this week for the rest of the Epstein documents to be released.

President Donald Trump this week also ordered the Department of Justice to investigate Democrats and their supporters whose names appear in the files after more than 20,000 documents related to Epstein were released by Congress.

With newly sworn in Rep. Adelita Grijalva, D-Ariz., there were enough members of the House to sign a discharge petition forcing a vote on whether to force the Department of Justice to release all of the files it has on Epstein — over the objections of Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and other Republicans in Congress.

Massie cautioned that while there are ways to push the Senate to vote on the bill, the chamber does not have a discharge petition-like method to force a vote over the objection of the majority leader. If the bill passes both houses of Congress, Trump still would have to sign it.

But Massie also noted that Trump’s order to the Department of Justice could potentially delay some part of the documents from being released, regardless of what Congress does.

“If they have ongoing investigations in certain areas, those documents can’t be released,” he said. “So, this might be a big smokescreen, these investigations, to open a bunch of them to, as a last-ditch effort to prevent the release of the Epstein files.”

Trump has fought the release of the files, at least partially because of widespread speculation that he figures prominently in them over of his years-long friendship with Epstein.

Despite the president’s claims that “Jeffery Epstein and I had a very bad relationship for many years,” they were close for more than a decade before the friendship went south.

“This is a hoax put out by the Democrats and a couple, a few Republicans have gone along with it because they’re weak and ineffective,” Trump said about the Democrats push for the release of the files.

Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi and the FBI to investigate alleged Epstein ties to former President Bill Clinton and other Democrats whose names appear in the files.

Bondi said last week that she would pursue the investigation with “urgency and integrity to deliver answers to the American people.”

Bondi announced that Manhattan U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton will lead the investigation just days after the House Oversight Committee released tens of thousands of emails released by Epstein’s estate, which documented his ties to friends and associates over a decade.

The emails made several direct references to Trump, Clinton and prominent media figures, Hollywood personalities and high-ranking politicians.

US President Donald Trump has called on House Republicans to vote to release the Epstein files, in a reversal from his previous position.

“House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Sunday night.

The major shift in Trump’s stance comes as potentially dozens of Republicans signalled they were willing to break ranks, and vote for the release of the documents.

The House is expected to vote this week on legislation that would compel the justice department to publicly release the files. Supporters of the bill appear to have enough votes for it to pass the House, though it is unclear whether it would pass the Senate.

Trump would also have to sign off on the release of the documents if it passes both chambers.

Both Democrats and some Republicans have been backing the legislation. Republican Representative Thomas Massie, a co-sponsor of the bill, said in an interview with ABC News on Sunday that as many as 100 Republicans could vote in favour.

Known as the Epstein Files Transparency Act, the aim of the bill is to make the justice department release all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials linked to paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump posted the statement shortly after landing at Joint Base Andrews following a weekend in Florida.

“The Department of Justice has already turned over tens of thousands of pages to the Public on “Epstein,” are looking at various Democrat operatives (Bill Clinton, Reid Hoffman, Larry Summers, etc.) and their relationship to Epstein, and the House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to, I DON’T CARE!,” Trump wrote, adding that he wanted Republicans to get “BACK ON POINT”.

Trump’s reference to Clinton comes after the US justice department confirmed it will investigate Epstein’s alleged links to major banks and several prominent Democrats, including former US President Bill Clinton.

Trump said he would ask Attorney General Pam Bondi and the FBI to look into Epstein’s “involvement and relationship” with Clinton and others.

Clinton has strongly denied he had any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.

Trump’s reversal comes after Democrats on the House Oversight Committee last week published three email exchanges, including correspondence between Epstein, who died in 2019 in prison, and his long-time associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for sex trafficking.

Some of those exchanges make references to Trump. In one email, sent in 2011, Epstein writes to Maxwell: “I want you to realize that that dog that hasn’t barked is Trump.. [VICTIM] spent hours at my house with him.”

Hours after the release of those exchanges, House Republicans released a far larger tranche of 20,000 files to counter what they said was a Democratic effort to “cherry-pick” documents. They also said it was an attempt to “create a fake narrative to slander President Trump”.

The House of Representatives then announced there would be a vote next week on a much wider release of Epstein material.

In his comments on Sunday night, Trump repeated White House dismissals of the Epstein files as a Democrat-led “hoax”. His post came after House Speaker Mike Johnson suggested in comments to Fox News that a vote on releasing the documents would put to rest allegations that Trump had any connection to Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of teenage children.

Trump and Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, traditionally one of his fiercest defenders, have been feuding publicly over the files.

On Friday, Trump called Greene “wacky” in social media posts and said she should be unseated in next year’s elections. On Saturday, he called her a “traitor”.

Greene in turn questioned whether Trump was still putting “America First” and criticised his handling of the Epstein files.

In a letter addressed to Congress, Epstein survivors and the family of Virginia Giuffre – a prominent Epstein accuser – called for US lawmakers to vote in favour of releasing the files.

“Remember that your primary duty is to your constituents. Look into the eyes of your children, your sisters, your mothers, and your aunts,” the letter reads.

“Imagine if they had been preyed upon. Imagine if you yourself were a survivor. What would you want for them? What would you want for yourself? When you vote, we will remember your decision at the ballot box.”

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers seeking to force the release of files related to the sex trafficking investigation into Jeffrey Epstein are predicting a big win in the House this week with a “deluge of Republicans” voting for their bill and bucking the GOP leadership and President Trump, who for months have disparaged their effort.

The bill would force the Justice Department to release all files and communications related to Epstein, as well as any information about the investigation into his death in federal prison. Information about Epstein’s victims or ongoing federal investigations would be allowed to be redacted.

“There could be 100 or more” votes from Republicans, said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), among the lawmakers discussing the legislation on Sunday news show appearances. “I’m hoping to get a veto-proof majority on this legislation when it comes up for a vote.”

Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) introduced a discharge petition in July to force a vote on their bill. That is a rarely successful tool that allows a majority of members to bypass House leadership and force a floor vote.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) had panned the discharge petition effort and sent members home early for their August recess when the GOP’s legislative agenda was upended by the clamoring for an Epstein vote.

Democrats also contend that the seating of Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.) was stalled to delay her becoming the 218th member to sign the petition and gain the threshold needed to force a vote. She became the 218th signature moments after taking the oath of office last week.

Massie said Johnson, Trump and others who have been critical of his efforts would be “taking a big loss this week.”

“I’m not tired of winning yet, but we are winning,” Massie said.

The view from GOP leadership

Johnson seems to expect the House will decisively back the Epstein bill.

“We’ll just get this done and move it on. There’s nothing to hide,” the speaker said. He continued to deride the Massie-Khanna effort, however, asserting that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee has been releasing “far more information than the discharge petition, their little gambit.”

The vote comes at a time when new documents are raising fresh questions about Epstein and his associates, including a 2019 email that Epstein wrote to a journalist that said Trump “knew about the girls.” The White House has accused Democrats of selectively leaking the emails to smear the Republican president, though lawmakers from both parties released emails last week.

Johnson said Trump “has nothing to hide from this.”

“They’re doing this to go after President Trump on this theory that he has something to do with it. He does not,” Johnson said.

Trump’s former friendship and association with Epstein is well-established, and the president’s name was included in records that his Justice Department released in February as part of an effort to satisfy public interest in information from the sex-trafficking investigation.

Trump has never been accused of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein and the mere inclusion of someone’s name in files from the investigation does not imply otherwise. Epstein, who killed himself in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial, also had many prominent acquaintances in political and celebrity circles besides Trump.

Khanna voiced more modest expectations on the vote count than Massie. Still, Khanna said he was hoping for 40 or more Republicans to join the effort.

“I don’t even know how involved Trump was,” Khanna said. “There are a lot of other people involved who have to be held accountable.”

Khanna also asked Trump to meet with some of Epstein’s victims. Some will be at the Capitol on Tuesday for a news conference, he said.

Massie said Republican lawmakers who fear losing Trump’s endorsement because of how they vote will have a mark on their record if they vote “no,” which could hurt their political prospects in the long term.

“The record of this vote will last longer than Donald Trump’s presidency,” Massie said.

A MAGA split

On the Republican side, three Republicans joined with Massie in signing the discharge petition: Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Lauren Boebert of Colorado.

Trump publicly broke with Greene last week and said he would endorse a challenger against her in 2026 “if the right person runs.”

Greene, a MAGA stalwart throughout her time in Congress, attributed her fallout with Trump to the Epstein debate. “Unfortunately, it has all come down to the Epstein files,” she said, adding that the country deserves transparency on the issue and that Trump’s criticism of her is confusing because the women she has talked to say he did nothing wrong.

“I have no idea what’s in the files. I can’t even guess. But that is the question everyone is asking: … ‘Why fight this so hard?’” Greene said.

Even if the bill passes the House, there is no guarantee that Senate Republicans will go along. Massie said he just hopes Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) “will do the right thing.”

“The pressure is going to be there if we get a big vote in the House,” said Massie, who thinks “we could have a deluge of Republicans.”

Massie appeared on ABC’s “This Week,” Johnson was on “Fox News Sunday,” Khanna spoke on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” and Greene was interviewed on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Freking writes for the Associated Press.

If you’ve seen some of Glen Powell’s movies, including “Top Gun: Maverick,” “Hit Man,” “Anyone But You” or “Twisters,” you probably already know that a large part of the actor’s appeal is that he goes down smooth and easy.

With good looks and lots of charm, he’s certainly leading man material. But there’s also a streak, particularly in his Richard Linklater film “Hit Man,” of a goofball comedy nerd dying to break out from that handsome shell (see also: Jon Hamm), even if he was there to promote a new action film, “The Running Man.”

It sure feels like that sensibility is what helped make for a remarkable episode of “Saturday Night Live” with Powell hosting for the first time. It was the silliest episode so far this season, and by some miracle, just about every sketch in the episode worked, at least on a basic comedic level.

Powell wore wigs, most notably in a military sketch about bobs versus bangs; yes, the hairstyles. He did Norwegian and Irish accents in respective sketches about overenthusiastic actors in a Nordic film and one modeled after Liam Neeson’s “Taken” films. He even wore a long ponytail and sang in a pre-recorded musical number about men who miss their ex-girlfriend’s dad (Powell was one of the dads). But he was also a great supporting player to Marcello Hernández in a sketch about comedian Sebatian Maniscalco at a bachelor party and one about a woman (Ashley Padilla) who joins friends at a restaurant after a disastrous hair salon visit. And he did some good silent acting in a visual gag-driven sketch in which AI technology brings old photos to life badly.

It was a week where even the return of former cast member Will Forte, who appeared in three new MacGruber sketches where the character finds out he’s in the Epstein files (explosions follow), didn’t fully overshadow a lot of other very good pieces.

Two quick notes about this week’s episode: Padilla continues to help anchor the show with excellent sketch performances, this time as the hair styling victim, a shocked grandmother in a nursing home and as White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt in the cold open. As each episode goes by with Padilla billed as a featured player instead of a full cast member, it feels like a mistake that’s growing.

Second, this was the first time in years that “Weekend Update” had no guest segments. We’ll get to that in a bit.

Musical guest Olivia Dean performed “Man I Need” and “Let Alone the One You Love.”

President Trump (James Austin Johnson) cold opens are getting to be a mixed blessing; the impression is still solid, and the president is certainly in the news enough to warrant addressing every week. But the format of the sketch, beginning with the premise of the news of the week and then being interrupted by a meta Trump monologue, feels reflexive at this point, the easy answer for wrapping up increasingly disjointed and weird news cycles. At the White House, Leavitt downplays news of the release of Jeffery Epstein’s emails, defending the president as, “loving too much and possibly too young.” When a reporter asks about millions of dollars being sent to Argentina, she tries to turn attention back to the files, which leads to Trump appearing and asking questions such as, “If there were something incriminating in the files, why would I cover them up?” and “If I were innocent, wouldn’t I just release the files?” The president offers to sell framed copies of the Epstein emails at $800 a pop. The rambling defense leads to a Trump Multiverse Theory, which posits that Trump exists across many timelines and we happen to live in the worst one.

In Powell’s monologue, the actor admits he’s been so publicized that even he’s tired of seeing his own face. “You know who is not tired of seeing my face?” he asked. “Your mom.” Powell pushed back against the narrative that he was an overnight success; he’s been acting since he was 10, starting with commercials and safety videos, while growing up in Austin, Texas. Powell revealed that he was supposed to host “SNL” four years ago as part of the publicity tour for “Top Gun: Maverick.” But when the movie was delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the offer was put on hold. A UPS driver who showed up when Powell was celebrating the initial news about hosting “SNL” ended up in a selfie with the actor and his family. Powell said his sisters tracked down the driver and Powell invited him to come see the show. Thus, Mitch the UPS Driver appeared in the monologue and again at the end of the show for the goodnights. Glen ended the monologue saying, “The best things in life don’t happen overnight. No one knows that better than UPS.”

Best sketch of the night: AI has not advanced enough to get crotches right

A family is visiting their grandmother for Thanksgiving at an assisted-living facility and as a treat, they’ve used an app to animate some of her old black-and-white photos using artificial intelligence. But the AI can only imagine so much; it brings to life a dog with tails on both ends instead of a head, an old family friend who takes off his pants to reveal a Ken doll-like crotch (Mikey Day) and a horrifying baby that folds like an accordion as an atom bomb goes off in the background. Padilla’s reactions and the silent comedy from Day and Powell take this sketch over the top.

Also good: Of course MacGruber is in the Epstein files, how could he not be?

It’s always nice to see Will Forte back on “SNL,” and this time he brought back his most popular character for three short video segments continuing the story of MacGruber, the tech wiz who always ends up failing to disarm a ticking time bomb. This time, the clock is ticking as MacGruber’s companions (Powell and Chloe Fineman) figure out that MacGruber is in the Epstein files. Their first clue? Just after thumbing through a copy, he immediately tries to shred the entire document. Over three sketches, MacGruber stalls, deflects, then eventually decides to testify against those who actually engaged in behavior worse than his on Epstein’s island — until he finds out he could get paid lots of money to keep quiet. Cut to the sketch-ending explosion.

‘Weekend Update’ winner: No guest segment, but two very funny bits

Usually on “Weekend Update,” cast members such as Bowen Yang or guests come on to do a few minutes as a character or as themselves. This week, there apparently wasn’t time for that, so “Update” was nothing but Colin Jost and Michael Che jokes. There were two that stood out, however. One was about a salacious rumor involving Trump and former President Bill Clinton that’s very difficult to discuss in detail in this space. A video that ended up with a very obviously spliced piece of audio as a punchline went over so well Jost had to stop to collect himself from laughing so hard. The other was a great, simple joke about the U.S. Mint ending production of pennies. “Makes no cents!” Che exclaimed. Nice one, Che.

We are being ruled by the “Epstein class,” and voters deserve to know the details of that particular scandal, and to be able to expect better of their leaders in the larger sense.

That’s the message we’ll be hearing a lot in the coming weeks and months now that Democrats have successfully moved forward their effort to release the full investigation into former President Trump buddy Jeffrey Epstein.

“When you take a step back, you have a country where an elite governing class has gotten away with impunity, and shafted the working class in this country, shafted factory towns, shafted rural communities,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) told me Wednesday.

He represents parts of Silicon Valley and is one of the authors of the House push to release the full government investigation into Epstein. But in the Epstein case, he also sees an opportunity to reach voters with a larger promise of change.

“What Epstein is about is saying, ‘we reject the Epstein class governing America today,’” Khanna said.

How appropriately strange for these days would it be if Epstein, who faced sex trafficking charges at the time of his death, provided the uniting message Democrats have been searching for?

“Epstein and economics” sounds like a stretch on the surface, but it is increasingly clear that Americans of all political stripes are tired of the rich getting richer, and bolder. The Epstein files are the bipartisan embodiment of that discontent.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), left, and Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) have led Democrats’ push for release of the Epstein files.

(Sue Ogrocki and J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

Our collective frustration with what can appear only as a cover-up to benefit the wealthy and powerful is an unexpected bit of glue that binds regular Americans, because the corruption and hubris of our oligarchy is increasingly undeniable and galling.

Whether it’s our president’s obviously wrong contention that grocery prices are down; our vice president being willing to take on the pope about true Catholic doctrine; or our FBI chief flying his girlfriend around on the taxpayer dime, the arrogance is stunning.

But where each of those examples becomes buried and dismissed in partisan politics, sex trafficking girls turns out to be frowned upon by people from all walks of life.

“It’s universal,” said Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, and another Californian. “This is clearly a White House and a president that is the most corrupt person we’ve ever had in office serving as a chief executive, and this is just another piece of that corruption.”

Khanna, along with Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, built the unlikely but unstoppable effort that brought together once-loyal Trumpers including Reps. Lauren Boebert, Nancy Mace and Marjorie Taylor Greene with Democrats.

Those staunch right-wingers are tied in to their voters, and probably understood just how unpopular sex trafficking is with a base that grew into maturity on QAnon-inspired fear mongering about kidnapped children.

“It’s the only thing since Trump walked down the escalator that’s been a truly bipartisan effort to expose corruption and where there’s been a break in his coalition,” Khanna said.

And by “exposing rich and powerful people who abuse the system and calling them out clearly, we start to rebuild trust with the American people,” Khanna argues, the trust required to make folks believe Democrats aren’t so terrible.

Long before he was a linchpin in the Epstein saga, Khanna built a name as a force on the progressive left for a positive and inclusive economic platform that resembles the New Deal, which Franklin Delano Roosevelt used to rebuild democracy in another era of hardship and discontent.

It’s all about real payoffs for average Americans — trade schools and affordable child care and jobs that actually pay the bills. That’s the message that he hopes will be the top line as Democrats push forward.

On Wednesday, the buildup of resentment that might make that possible came into full focus in Washington, as Congress opened up to anything but business as usual. Democrats, led by Garcia, released emails raising questions about Trump’s knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.

Trump “spent hours at my house” and “knew about the girls,” Epstein wrote, even as Trump’s press secretary argued this was all a “fake narrative to smear” her boss.

Republicans countered the emails with a massive information dump probably meant to obscure and confuse. But House Speaker Mike Johnson, out of excuses, finally swore in Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who promptly provided the final signature on the discharge petition to call a House vote on releasing the entire Epstein files.

That happened just hours after Boebert, one of the key Republican backers of that effort, was called to the White House in a last-minute, heavy-handed bid to pressure her into dropping her name from the demand. She did not.

Enough to make your head spin, honestly. About 10 more dastardly, intriguing and unexpected things happened, but you get the gist: President Trump really, really does not want us to read the Epstein files. House Democrats are ready to fight the long fight.

Garcia said House Democrats aren’t caving, because the cover-up keeps growing.

“There’s a lot of folks now that are obsessed with hiding the truth from the public, and the American public needs to know,” he said. “The Oversight Committee is committed to fighting our way to the truth.”

But it will be a long fight, and one with only a slim chance of winning the release of the files. Any effort would have to clear the Republican-held Senate (and after the shutdown collapse, who knows if Senate Democrats have the stomach for resistance), then be signed by Trump.

Judging from his near-desperate social media posting about the whole thing being a “hoax,” it’s hard to imagine him putting his scrawl on that law.

But unlike the shutdown, the longer this goes, the more Democrats have to gain. People aren’t going to suddenly start liking pedophiles. And the more Trump pushes to hide whatever the truth is, the more Democrats have the high ground, to message on corruption, oligarchs and even a vision for a better way.

“Epstein and economics” — linking the concrete with the esoteric, the problem with the solution.

The bipartisan message Democrats didn’t know they needed, from the strangest of sources.

The City of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl Operating Co. requested a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order Monday in Los Angeles County Superior Court seeking to prevent UCLA from leaving the Rose Bowl or terminating its stadium lease until pending litigation against the school is resolved.

The filing contends that the plaintiffs would suffer “immediate and irreparable harm if the status quo is not preserved during the pendency of this lawsuit.” A hearing has tentatively been scheduled for Wednesday morning.

Last week, the plaintiffs sued to force the Bruins to honor the terms of the lease that requires them to stay at the Rose Bowl through the end of the 2043 season.

UCLA responded in a statement that it was still evaluating options for its football home, though someone familiar with the university’s thinking on the matter later confirmed to The Times that if the Bruins decided to leave for SoFi Stadium, they would want to do so for the 2026 season.

In their Monday filing, the plaintiffs contended that: “there is no way to sugarcoat it: UCLA has confirmed its imminent departure, severely destabilizing Plaintiffs’ core operations. Those operations are structured around and contingent upon UCLA. Without confirmation that UCLA intends to honor its contractual commitments — at least during the pendency of this litigation — Plaintiffs are deprived of the ability to plan and manage the stadium’s schedule and their ongoing business operations, including cultivating and securing future business partners and opportunities, retaining personnel, and maintaining confidence among the many vendors and sponsors who rely on UCLA Football.

“Equally troubling is the precedent UCLA is setting. Stadium and arena public-private partnerships, and the financing that makes them possible, turn on enforceable, long-term contracts, with terms that typically follow the public debt incurred. UCLA’s attempt to break its contract decades early critically undermines these structures.”