Things That Don't Make Sense About The Epstein Files' Stalled Release

We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.

Some news stories come and go, and some dominate headlines for years. That's been the case with Jeffrey Epstein, who has been at the center of a seemingly ever-unfolding story that first broke back in 2006. He may have died in prison in 2019, but that hasn't stopped the speculation — or the anger.

There is no shortage of conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein, and in 2025, it seemed as though the world might be getting at least some of the answers it had been waiting for. In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi handed out what were supposed to be the first batch of declassified files in the case, only to have influencers immediately point out that most of the information was already common knowledge. Promises about the release of additional documents kept coming, until suddenly, news broke that there was nothing to be released after all.

Epstein was dominating headlines again, with officials facing widespread backlash over the handling of the case. Questions were raised about President Donald Trump's relationship to Epstein, and that was just the start. Let's break down some more of those questions and explain in a nutshell exactly what still doesn't make sense, what many people wanted, and what's still unanswered.

At the center of the controversy is Attorney General Pam Bondi. Back in February of 2025, Bondi was the driving force behind a document release that ultimately ended up being wildly controversial for a few reasons. In addition to the fact that nothing really new was contained in the documents, the House Oversight Committee's Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets stepped up and said they actually hadn't even reviewed the documents. 

As for the scale of the release, the copies were contained in a single three-ring binder. Bondi replied to criticism with promises that it was only the tip of the iceberg, and that there was so much information being lined up for release that it was still being scrutinized. When specifically asked by Fox News if there were plans to release a list of Jeffrey Epstein's clients, Bondi responded: "It's sitting on my desk right now to review. That's been a directive by President Trump."

In March, Bondi doubled down. In an interview, she said (via AP), "[The Biden administration] sat on these documents, no one did anything with them. Sadly, these people don't believe in transparency, but I think more unfortunately, I think a lot of them don't believe in honesty." Then, in July, a memo was released by the Department of Justice, saying that there was "no incriminating 'client list,'" and in fact, no more documents to be released.

In the months prior to the stalled document dump, Attorney General Pam Bondi described a "truckload" of evidence files that needed examining before they were released. Regarding the most widely anticipated release — the so-called client list — Bondi backtracked by saying she never meant there was a client list, and had been talking about that general case file. Meanwhile, it was also claimed that evidence included tens of thousands of illicit media files, which the Department of Justice memo explained would not be released out of respect for victims. 

While protecting the identity and personal information of victims was an understandable explanation, countless critics were quick to point out that there seemed to be a massive disconnect between oft-repeated references to scores of evidence, promises that evidence would be released, and the DOJ's official statement that "no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted."

Conspiracy theorists and government officials alike began demanding answers. No details were given on what the reported evidence was, where it had come from, and whether it was the same evidence used in cases against Epstein and associate Ghislaine Maxwell, or if it was newly-discovered. When the AP asked those who had been involved in the court cases of Epstein and Maxwell if the videos and photos Bondi spoke of had been a part of those cases, it was seemingly confirmed that there had been no such evidence.

At the center of the backlash over the government's failure to follow up on promises of document releases, accountability, and dedication to seeing justice done was a two-page memo. Many were quick to point out the fact that as far as official documents go, it was a little strange. 

Although the memo began by stating it was "part of our commitment to transparency," there was some very basic information missing. The memo bore the seals of the two agencies listed at the top of the document — the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation — but there was no name or signature of the person or people ultimately taking responsibility for the memo and its contents. The memo was also criticized for being undated, and the lack of that basic information made Attorney General Pam Bondi's role in the release unclear. Who, exactly, was responsible for the memo, and who was contradicting the claims made by the AG?

The joint memo from the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation clearly stated: "This systematic review revealed no incriminating 'client list.' There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions."

Some major players in the saga have seemingly confirmed the existence of still-secret documents, and one of those is Alan Dershowitz. Back in 2008, Dershowitz was one of the attorneys behind orchestrating Jeffrey Epstein's plea deal, so it makes sense that he would have access to any and all relevant documents. On March 19, 2025, Dershowitz was interviewed by Sean Spicer and confirmed the existence of a list of names associated with Epstein. In the clip reposted on X, Dershowitz said, "This is not an opinion, this is a fact. I have seen ... I know for a fact documents are being suppressed. And they're being suppressed to protect individuals. I know the names of the individuals. I know why they're being suppressed. I know who's suppressing them. But I'm bound by confidentiality."

In July, however, Dershowitz told both CUOMO and NewsNation, "There is no client list and never has been a client list. A client list suggests that Jeffrey Epstein made a list of people to whom he trafficked women. What there is, is a redacted FBI affidavit from accusers." He continued, saying names were being kept secret not by the Trump administration, but by the court system.

It's long been reported that Jeffrey Epstein's client list simply doesn't exist. That's been said since the earliest days of the case by those involved directly in the investigation, but it's no secret that the conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein just haven't gone away. That's not entirely surprising, considering the sheer amount of evidence — and names — described not only by Attorney General Pam Bondi, but also by other officials.

Presidential counselor Alina Habba spoke with Piers Morgan in February of 2025, and according to her, there was a lot that was still going to come out about the Epstein case. She was fairly specific, too, saying (via X), "We have flight logs, information, names, that will come out. ... I don't see how it's not shocking, that there were so many individuals that were hidden and kept secret and not been held accountable. ... I believe in accountability, so you have to now go through your process. ... Now it's time for accountability."

Morgan called Habba out on her comments after the drop of the Department of Justice memo made it clear that none of the promised information was going to be forthcoming, posting the clip on X with the caption, "hmm.. what happened?" At the time of this writing, the clip of Habba's interview has been viewed more than 4.6 million times, with no official explanation regarding her comments.

One of the most unexpected reversals has come from President Donald Trump himself. When campaigning for his second presidency, Trump was very vocal about reinforcing ideas about a group of powerful people working from behind the scenes to cover up illegal activities. Trump positioned himself as a champion who would put an end to all of these reported shady dealings, and part of his promises involved releasing details about Jeffrey Epstein and those he dealt with. 

Details about Epstein's infamous little black book have long fueled speculation of just how far his crimes reached, and Epstein's arrest added fuel to the QAnon fire. It's kind of a case of playing a strange game of connect-the-dots: Trump promoted ideas about secret and all-powerful puppetmasters, Epstein was arrested in connection to a sprawling sex trafficking ring, and that seemingly supported Trump's claims. In the words of George Washington University research fellow Jon Lewis (via The Guardian), "QAnon and MAGA have become increasingly intertwined in recent years, we have seen the embrace of increasingly fringe conspiracies and extremist narratives ... by mainstream political figures."

That makes Trump's complete reversal even more glaring, with the president even heading to Truth Social to condemn "what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax." Trump has repeatedly reprimanded journalists and members of his own party for continuing to ask questions, while even former Trump loyalists have started to demand answers regarding what is really going on behind the scenes.

The Department of Justice memo included what would appear to be the final work on Jeffrey Epstein's death, and noted that, as had been previously stated, the official ruling was that Epstein had died by suicide. Security videos showing no one entering or exiting his cell around the time of his death were released, but it didn't take long for people to notice that there's a skip in the timestamp.

The timestamp jumps from 11:58:58 p.m. to 12:00:00 a.m., Attorney General Pam Bondi said (via NBC News) that it was a time skip that happened every night. She said that it was simply a consequence of a nightly video reset, and the same exact minute is missing from all security videos at that time.

However, when Wired looked at the video's metadata, their analysts found that the single clip had actually been edited and repeatedly saved. In addition, the clip was actually two separate files that had been pieced together, and experts they consulted said that it was also possible the modifications were something innocent — like a change in file format — so if it was to be presented in court as evidence, it wouldn't hold up. Further analysis discovered that there wasn't a single minute missing, either: two minutes and 53 seconds were missing. The DOJ, meanwhile, claimed the footage was full, raw, and unedited.

Jeffrey Epstein's longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell was arrested, tried, convicted, and handed a prison sentence in her own high-profile trial. Maxwell was sentenced in 2022, but the Department of Justice's memo brought up some major questions. While the memo stated, "We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties," experts — including Nigel Cawthorne, author of "Prince Andrew: Epstein, Maxwell, and the Palace" — suggest that it might be used for her benefit.

Cawthorne told Newsweek, "That may be an argument she can use with a parole board: 'Why is she the only one who has been prosecuted?' I think her lawyers will certainly be working on it." There were plenty of posts asking that if there are no names, how can Maxwell be in jail for trafficking? Cawthorne's comments ran in a piece dated July 7, and on July 15, Newsweek confirmed Maxwell's lawyers were apparently asking President Donald Trump to get involved in her case.

In addition to a statement that there would be no more information released and no more arrests made, Maxwell's camp was arguing that she never should have been prosecuted in the first place. Part of Epstein's 2008 deal involved a guarantee that no one else could be charged in connection with his activities, but the deal was made in Florida, and Maxwell was arrested in New York. However, the DOJ has recommended Maxwell's sentence not be overturned.

One of the biggest questions that many seem to be asking is why so many powerful people who had once been demanding answers as to exactly who Jeffrey Epstein was working for — and with — have suddenly started demanding that there's nothing to see here, we're done, and everyone needs to stop talking about it. Even media outlets like CNN point out that even if there is no super-secret shadiness going on, the abrupt about-face certainly makes it feel like there is.

In addition to Donald Trump's sudden refusal to have anything to say about Epstein, figures like JD Vance, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino are among those who previously insisted this was a huge deal that needed full exposure and transparency. Now? Not so much.

The apparently sudden shut-down of the investigation and a very clear statement that after months of promising scores of documents would be released, names would be named, and others would be prosecuted, the immediate and no-more-questions-please ending made a lot of people not only angry, but suspicious. It's no wonder that the memo that was clearly designed to put an end to questions did the opposite.

Nothing that happens in the political world happens without impacting scores of other things, and along with the non-release of long-touted documents relating to Jeffrey Epstein, Attorney General Pam Bondi fired Department of Justice senior ethics attorney Joseph Tirrell. Tirrell posted the letter — which was signed by Bondi and misspelled his first name — to LinkedIn, thanking those who had reached out and promising that he would continue to serve in the public sector.

No reason was given, but it didn't go unnoticed that the move happened as the administration was dealing with the fallout over the Epstein case. It was also very quickly pointed out that Tirrell was also connected to Jack Smith, who led the move to charge Donald Trump for keeping classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Tirrell approved Smith's acceptance of pro bono legal fees, and that — coupled with the timing of the Epstein fiasco — had a lot of people questioning the motive for his firing.

To recap: The White House's Alina Habba claimed there was a ton of information that was going to be released. Attorney General Pam Bondi described it as a "truckload" of evidence, and also reportedly included in that evidence were — depending on the source — more than 10,000 videos and images, or in another instance (via the BBC), Bondi referred to "tens of thousands of videos." However, the Department of Justice memo referred to "a significant amount of material, including more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence."

That's worth taking a closer look at, because 300 gigabytes isn't that much — at all. It isn't at all uncommon for even home computers to have solid-state drives that are one, two, four, or more terabytes, and each terabyte is the equivalent of 1,000 gigabytes. A single Blu-ray can hold either 25 or 50 gigabytes, meaning that the "truckload" of evidence cited by the DOJ could theoretically fit on six Blu-rays.

There are even video games that are much bigger than that 300 gigabyte. "Ark: Survival Evolved" came out in 2017, and it takes up 400 gigabytes of space. In 2019, it was reported that the FBI seized three computers from Epstein's Little St. James island, and given the number of people who have spoken about the extensive surveillance at his homes, shouldn't there be more than 300 gigabytes?