Epstein Filed Away: Redacted Files Remain, Lawbreaking Obstruction Continues, and Shrugging Lawmakers Surrender
One month after the congressionally mandated deadline to release all investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein passed, the controversy has entered a new and dangerous phase — not because the Justice Department is finally complying, but because the political will to hold it to account appears to be evaporating. The bipartisan Epstein Files Transparency Act — enacted to force the Department of Justice to publish more than two million pages of material — has been met with partial disclosure and heavy redactions, leaving the vast majority of documents still withheld. Victims’ advocates, lawmakers, and public watchdogs are outraged that Justice has not complied with the law and that the government’s explanations for the delay and redactions raise more questions than answers.
Veteran investigative journalist and 20-year Epstein Expert Nick Bryant is available for interviews on this latest turn of events.
Visit Epstein Justice Home – Epstein Justice
Crucially, what once appeared to be a small but principled band of Republicans willing to defy leadership pressure to demand transparency — including Rep. Lauren Boebert, Rep. Thomas Massie, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Rep. Nancy Mace — now seems to be collapsing under political fatigue and shifting priorities. According to reports, Boebert, once a firebrand champion of forcing a House vote via a discharge petition, now says the matter is “no longer in my hands” and there’s “so many other things we need to be working on.” This sudden retreat — from activist dissenter to disengaged observer — reads less like strategic recalibration and more like waving a white flag on accountability.
So while the Justice Department dithers and redacts, political operatives in the media are openly turning away from the seriousness of the case. On CNN, pundit Scott Jennings dismissed public outrage over the stalled release with the now-viral remark that people shouldn’t “get our knickers in a twist” about Epstein’s crimes — a phrase that drew a blistering retort from author Leigh McGowan, who scoffed, “Yeah, let’s not get our knickers in a twist over child rape…” and emphasized that what’s at stake is a “multi-national, multi-generational … trafficking ring” and the rule of law.
That exchange encapsulates a broader problem: when partisans and pundits treat the slow roll-out of legally mandated sex-trafficking files like mere kabuki, not only do victims lose — the public loses — and with Boebert’s sudden disengagement, but the GOP’s appetite for accountability also appears to have evaporated just when pressure should be mounting.
Relevant Article(s):
Click here to see Kurt Metzger encourage Joe Rogan to have Nick Bryant on his show: https://youtu.be/LIhkYiYLON0?si=UokiQyqW5IQ32lic&t=5477
Optional Q&A:
- Why do you think Lauren Boebert — once one of the loudest Republican voices demanding full Epstein accountability — appears to have abruptly lost interest just as pressure on the Justice Department should be peaking?
- Does Boebert’s retreat signal personal political calculation, or does it reflect a broader GOP decision to quietly stand down on the Epstein files altogether?
- From your perspective, what mechanisms of pressure typically cause lawmakers who initially “stand strong” on cases like Epstein to suddenly wave a white flag?
- How significant is it that the Epstein Files Transparency Act is now being undermined not just by DOJ delays and redactions, but by fading congressional will to enforce it?
- What did Scott Jennings’ dismissive “knickers in a twist” comment reveal about how parts of the political-media class want the public to emotionally disengage from Epstein’s crimes?
- Why do you think Leigh McGowan’s response resonated so strongly, and what does it say about the growing divide between elite commentary and public outrage on child trafficking and elite impunity?
- Do you see a coordinated effort — intentional or not — to normalize inaction on Epstein by framing accountability as partisan noise or obsessive fixation?
- If elected officials and media figures alike lose the appetite to pursue this case, what does that mean for victims, and for the public’s faith that some crimes are simply too powerful to prosecute?
ABOUT NICK BRYANT…
Nick Bryant is an investigative journalist and director of www.EpsteinJustice.com He spent seven years investigating a child sex trafficking network that was covered up by state and federal authorities, culminating in The Franklin Scandal: A Story of Powerbrokers, Child Abuse, and Betrayal. The trafficking network I wrote about in The Franklin Scandal has been the focal point of considerable misinformation and/or disinformation on the Internet. Individuals who, perhaps, suffer from psychiatric disorders have woven the Illuminati and shape shifting reptilian ETs into the narrative.
But the book’s foremost transgressor has been Wikipedia. The “Franklin child prostitution ring allegations” Wikipedia page has been under siege by unscrupulous Wikipedia “editors,” and they’ve intentionally made it nonsensical.
The Franklin Scandal and the Epstein scandal are quite similar in the sense that both child trafficking networks were covered up by state and federal authorities and the mainstream media has been complicit, because it never demanded justice for the children whose lives had been disfigured. I started investigating the Epstein network in 2012, when I acquired his “Little Black Book”—seven years before the case broke nationally. I pitched an article on the Little Black Book for three years to mainstream media outlets, but, like The Franklin Scandal, my pitches were met with unbridled skepticism and incredulity.
In 2015, finally, Gawker published the Little Black Book and accompanying articles. I found it ironic that Gawker, considered to be the mean kids in the media, had the fortitude to publish a story about children whose lives have been disfigured with impunity, whereas media outlets ostensibly immersed in integrity had rejected the story.
His latest book, The Truth About Watergate: A Tale of Extraordinary Lies and Liars, details the false narrative that our history books have imparted about the infamous Watergate affair.
ABOUT PETER SHINN…
Lieutenant Colonel (Ret.) Pete Shinn is the Associate Director of www.EpsteinJustice.com and has an extensive background in the U.S. Air Force as a trainer, journalist, and adult educator. He also served as an executive officer for the Continental NORAD Region Air Operations Center, and as a liaison between the Secretary of the Air Force and U.S. Senate Appropriators.
Beginning in 1989, Shinn began providing interactive diversity and inclusion training to Air Force audiences. In 2008, Shinn was selected to provide leadership, communications, problem solving, and critical thinking skills training at the U.S. Air Force Officer Training School. In 2010, he deployed with the Iowa National Guard to provide agricultural training to farmers in Afghanistan’s Kunar Province.
After returning from Afghanistan, he provided interactive training on the intersection between agriculture and national defense to a variety of organizations, including the National Agri-Marketing Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Pork Board, and National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, among others. Pete retired from the Air Force in October 2020 after 36 years of service. He is currently a co-creator at Shinnfluence LLC, a family media and training business.
Pete’s major military awards include the Bronze Star, the Meritorious Service Medal with three oak leaf clusters, and the U.S. Army Combat Action Badge. His major civilian awards include the 1998 Nebraska Broadcaster’s Association Gold Service to Agriculture Award, the National Association of Farm Broadcasting President’s Award in 2004 and 2005, and an Emmy Award in 2012 for Best Military Program.
To Schedule an interview with Nick, send an email to Bookings@SpecialGuests.com or call 512-966-0983
