Judge calls Trump DOJ's request to release Epstein grand jury records a 'diversion'

3 hours ago 2

Portrait of American financier Jeffrey Epstein, left, and Donald Trump arsenic they airs unneurotic astatine the Mar-a-Lago property successful Palm Beach, Florida, successful 1997.

Davidoff Studios Photography | Archive Photos | Getty Images

A national judge connected Wednesday refused to unseal grand jury materials successful Jeffrey Epstein's transgression case, portion slamming the Trump administration's petition for those records arsenic a "diversion" from the upland of files connected the notorious enactment offender that the authorities has already compiled.

"A important and compelling crushed to reject" the petition "is that the authorities has already undertaken a broad probe into the Epstein lawsuit and, not surprisingly, has assembled a 'trove' of Epstein documents, interviews, and exhibits," Judge Richard Berman wrote successful a national tribunal ruling.

That trove of astir 100,000 pages of files "dwarf the 70 unusual pages of Epstein expansive assemblage materials," Berman wrote.

The Trump medication does not request the courts to o.k. the merchandise of its Epstein files, the justice wrote. He added that the medication had antecedently committed to publically releasing those records, earlier reversing itself successful July.

"The authorities is the logical enactment to marque broad disclosure to the nationalist of the Epstein files," Berman wrote.

"By comparison, the instant expansive assemblage question appears to beryllium a 'diversion' from the breadth and scope of the Epstein files successful the government's possession."

Berman is the 3rd justice to cull the Trump administration's requests to unseal Epstein-related expansive assemblage materials from 3 abstracted cases.

Read much CNBC authorities coverage

A national justice successful Florida — where, successful 2008, Epstein had pleaded blameworthy to a authorities complaint of soliciting prostitution from a insignificant — ruled connected July 23 that the instrumentality does not licence her tribunal to assistance the government's request.

On Aug. 11, a New York national justice besides rejected the Department of Justice's bid to unseal expansive assemblage records successful the transgression lawsuit of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's convicted procurer of young women.

That judge, Paul Engelmayer, blasted the Trump medication for pushing the "demonstrably false" premise that the expansive assemblage materials would shed caller airy connected Epstein's and Maxwell's crimes.

The DOJ successful mid-July was directed to question expansive assemblage materials by President Donald Trump, who was nether aggravated unit from supporters and critics alike implicit his handling of the Epstein files.

Trump arsenic a statesmanlike campaigner had promised to declassify those files. The DOJ successful February touted what it called its "first phase" of declassification, and portion declaring its intent to merchandise the remaining documents with due redactions.

But that archetypal merchandise contained virtually no caller information. The FBI said successful an unsigned memo connected July 6 that the authorities has determined that "no further disclosure would beryllium due oregon warranted."

NBC archive footage shows Trump partying with Jeffrey Epstein successful  1992

Trump was friends with Epstein, but the 2 had a falling retired years earlier the affluent financier killed himself successful a New York jailhouse successful 2019 portion facing national sex-trafficking charges.

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., alleged past period that FBI unit were instructed to "flag" immoderate Epstein records mentioning Trump.

The Wall Street Journal precocious reported that Attorney General Pam Bondi told Trump successful May that his sanction appeared successful the Epstein files aggregate times.

The Journal besides reported that an medium of letters compiled for Epstein's 50th day successful 2003 included a "bawdy" connection bearing Trump's signature. Trump denied that study and filed a defamation lawsuit against the paper and Rupert Murdoch.

Read Entire Article