Fueling Conspiracy Theories

Weissmann, a former top official at the Justice Department, criticized the government’s “piece-by-piece” approach to releasing the documents. According to him, this strategy leaves critical questions unanswered and provides ammunition for skeptics.

“There’s a million unanswered questions. They have not complied with the law,” Weissmann asserted. “If you are a conspiracy theorist or if you think that they are just covering up what’s going on, you have a ton of fodder, and they’re continuing to give life to both of those, the conspiracy theory and the cover-up concern, in the way that they’re handling this.”

The “Innocent Person” Test

Furthermore, Weissmann used a hypothetical scenario to implicitly criticize President Donald Trump’s reaction to the disclosures. He argued that an innocent individual in power would aggressively push for immediate, total transparency to clear their name.

“The very first thing you would say is, ‘You know what, get everything out,’” Weissmann explained.

He continued, elaborating on what a truly innocent leader would demand: “‘I want every single document and every single image involving me to be put out as soon as possible.’”

However, Weissmann noted that this demand for transparency has not occurred. Consequently, he believes the public can draw only one conclusion from the administration’s silence and the DOJ’s delays.

“And none of that’s happened. And so, what’re you supposed to think at that point? I mean, there’s only one logical thing you can think, which is that they’re hiding something.”

Context of the Criticism

Weissmann’s comments come amidst a broader backlash against the DOJ’s handling of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. Although the law required a full release by December 19, the department missed the deadline and has since released files in batches, often with heavy redactions. Critics argue that these delays violate the statute and protect powerful figures, a sentiment that Weissmann’s legal analysis now reinforces.

Related

The post Trump’s DOJ is “Clearly Hiding Something” in Epstein File Release appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

In a comprehensive 7,600-word profile published by the New York Times this week, the retiring congresswoman opened up about her decision to leave Congress after two terms. She detailed how her once-unwavering loyalty to the MAGA leader crumbled after she decided to champion the cause of Epstein’s victims—a move that allegedly enraged the President.+1

Overlooking the Red Flags

Greene admitted to the Times that she initially ignored glaring clues about Trump’s long-standing friendship with Epstein, who died in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial. For years, she accepted the narrative that Trump had distanced himself from the financier.

“The story to me was that I’d seen pictures of Epstein with all these people, and Trump is just one of several,” Greene told the newspaper. “And then, for me, I’d seen that Bill Clinton is on the flight logs for his plane like 20-something times. So, for people like me, it wasn’t suspicious… Why would I think he’s done anything wrong, right?”

However, her perspective shifted dramatically in September 2025, after she met with several Epstein survivors during a closed-door House Oversight Committee meeting. Greene found their testimony credible and “inspiring,” later telling the Times that while she never experienced sexual abuse herself, “she could understand what it was like for a woman to stand up to a powerful man.”

The Phone Call That Ended It All

The turning point came shortly after that hearing. Greene held a news conference where she threatened to identify men who had abused the women, stating she could obtain the names from the victims. This public threat reportedly triggered an immediate and hostile response from the White House.

According to the profile, Trump called Greene at her Capitol Hill office. The conversation was so loud that a staff member reported everyone in the suite could hear the President yelling through the speakerphone.

When Greene expressed confusion over Trump’s “intransigence” and refusal to support the release of names, Trump allegedly delivered a stark warning.

“My friends will get hurt,” Trump replied, according to Greene.

“Nothing to Merit the Honor”

The conversation reportedly deteriorated further when Greene urged the President to invite some of Epstein’s female victims to the Oval Office to hear their stories. Trump angrily rejected the suggestion.

“He angrily informed her that they had done nothing to merit the honor,” the Times reported.

This confrontation proved to be the final straw. It was the last conversation Greene and Trump would ever have. Following the fallout, Greene announced she would resign from Congress on January 5, 2026, citing her refusal to remain in a “toxic” political culture where loyalty was a “one-way street.”

The post ‘My Friends Will Get Hurt’: Trump Explodes at Greene Over Epstein Threats appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

The “Crucial” Connection

In an article published on January 2, The Nation’s Jeet Heer examines the depth of the relationship before the infamous fallout. Heer points to a “damning report” published by the Wall Street Journal on December 30, which asserts that the private club was not just a social hangout, but a hunting ground.

“Trump’s claim to have dropped Epstein is partly true but obscures a crucial fact: that he and Epstein were close friends from the 1980s until their break at some point in 2003,” Heer explains.

Furthermore, the report notes that Mar-a-Lago was crucial to Epstein because it provided access to potential victims. For instance, in 2000, Ghislaine Maxwell—Epstein’s primary accomplice—recruited Virginia Giuffre, who was working as a locker room attendant at Mar-a-Lago at the time. Giuffre later testified that Epstein raped and trafficked her to his powerful friends.

Warnings Ignored?

According to the WSJ reporting, members of Trump’s inner circle suspected something was wrong long before any criminal charges surfaced. Notably, Trump’s second wife, Marla Maples, reportedly warned in the mid-1990s that there was something “off” about Epstein.

Despite these warnings, the friendship persisted for nearly two decades. “The question becomes: What did Donald Trump know about Jeffrey Epstein’s predations and when did he know it?” Heer asks. While Trump barred Epstein from the club in 2003/2004—citing a dispute over real estate or an employee—Heer argues this does not erase the prior years of access.

“Trump had every reason to know before 2003 that Epstein was sexually mistreating Mar-a-Lago employees,” Heer writes. “In judging politicians, criminal guilt is not the only standard to use.”

The Michael Cohen Defense

Conversely, Trump’s defenders argue that the President had no contact with Epstein during his later business years. Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal attorney turned critic, stated in a July appearance on MS NOW (formerly MSNBC) that he never saw the two interact.

“From the time that I started to the time that I finished in 2018, I actually never heard him mention Jeffrey Epstein at all,” Cohen recalled. “I never saw Jeffrey Epstein in the office… There was no relationship, from the time I started at the org to the time that I left.”

However, Cohen did not join the Trump Organization until 2007, years after the alleged “crucial” period at Mar-a-Lago had ended.

Related

The post Report Reveals Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Was ‘Crucial’ to Epstein’s Operation appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

While some pundits claim the administration is finally pivoting toward transparency, critics argue otherwise. Instead of a reversal, observers see a calculated effort to delay, distract, and withhold information through seven distinct attempts.

Attempt #1: The Initial Stonewall

Back in July, Bondi’s Justice Department, together with FBI Director Kash Patel, declared the investigation into Epstein’s sex trafficking effectively closed. Specifically, they stated they “did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.” Consequently, the department asserted that “no further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.”

Attempt #2: Attacking the Base

When Trump’s MAGA base erupted over this refusal, the President lashed out. He called supporters who clamored for greater transparency “stupid” and “foolish,” labeling them victims of a “Democrat hoax.” However, this rhetoric failed to quell the demand for answers.

Attempt #3: The Grand Jury Ruse

As anger grew, Trump directed Bondi to ask the courts to release the grand jury transcripts. Critics called this a ruse, noting that Trump’s legal team likely knew the courts would refuse to release the material. Predictably, judges denied the request, with several writing blistering opinions that criticized Bondi for the effort.

Attempt #4: The Illusion of Transparency

Subsequently, Bondi produced documents in response to a House Oversight Committee subpoena. Yet, it turned out that only 3% of the 20,000 documents were new, despite court confirmations that the full file contains over 100,000 documents.

Attempt #5: The Political Blockade

Later, a Democrat won a special election in Arizona, providing the 218th signature needed for a discharge petition to force a House vote on the files. In response, Speaker Mike Johnson refused to swear in the newly-elected member, claiming the recess prevented it—a maneuver that bought Trump time to whip votes.

Attempt #6: Strongarming Defectors

Meanwhile, the administration targeted Republican defectors. Bondi and Patel met with Reps. Lauren Boebert and Nancy Mace, while Trump publicly attacked Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, calling her a “traitor.” Nevertheless, the Republicans refused to budge.

Attempt #7: The “New Investigation” Loophole

Finally, faced with an inevitable House vote, Trump announced a new directive. He declared he would ask Bondi to investigate Epstein’s relationships with Bill Clinton and others. Bondi immediately assigned SDNY U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton to lead the probe.

The Catch: The Justice Department generally refuses to release materials related to an active investigation. Therefore, by ordering a new probe, the administration effectively created a justification to withhold the files indefinitely. Moreover, this contradicts Bondi’s July statement that the DOJ found “no evidence” to warrant further investigations.

Ultimately, critics argue this proves Trump has not reversed his resistance but has simply engineered a new “escape hatch” to keep the files sealed.

Related

The post Trump’s Latest Strategy to Keep the Epstein Files a Secret appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

Consequently, this logistical hurdle will likely extend the final release of the documents to much later than expected, pushing the timeline well past the December 19 deadline originally set by Congress.

The Scale of the Review

To handle the workload, department leaders are mobilizing a massive legal workforce. Collectively, the Criminal Division, the National Security Division, the FBI, and the US Attorney’s office in Manhattan are providing 400 attorneys to assist with the review. This figure is significantly more precise—and potentially much larger—than the department’s previous estimates.

Specifically, the review period will run from January 5 to January 23. The document outlines strict expectations for the volunteers: lawyers who assist must devote three to five hours a day to the task, with a target of reviewing about 1,000 documents daily. In exchange, department leaders are offering telework options and time-off awards as incentives for the grueling work.

Missed Deadlines and New Discoveries

The delay follows a revelation from the DOJ last week that it had uncovered more than a million additional documents potentially linked to Jeffrey Epstein. So far, the disclosures have been heavily redacted, a fact that has frustrated some Republicans and done little to quell a scandal that threatens the party ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

The Trump administration officially ordered the Justice Department to release the files in compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a law passed by Congress last month with broad bipartisan support. However, the statute required all documents to be released by December 19, with redactions limited only to protecting victims.+1

Political Tensions and History

Despite the current order to comply, the source text notes a conflict: the law mandates transparency “despite Trump’s months-long effort to keep them sealed.” Trump, who knew Epstein socially in the 1990s and early 2000s, has stated that their association ended in the mid-2000s and that he was unaware of the financier’s sexual abuse.

Nevertheless, the sheer volume of 5.2 million pages suggests the saga is far from over. In a message shared on X last week, the Justice Department pleaded for patience: “We have lawyers working around the clock to review and make the legally required redactions to protect victims… Due to the mass volume of material, this process may take a few more weeks.”

Related Posts

The post DOJ Mobilizes Lawyers to Review 5.2 Million Remaining Epstein Pages appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

The segment provided the first public look at images from inside Epstein’s cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) and close-up views of his injuries. While the New York City Medical Examiner officially ruled Epstein’s August 2019 death a suicide by hanging, Dr. Baden, who observed the autopsy on behalf of the Epstein family, argued that the physical evidence points closer to homicide.

Dispute Over Ligature Marks and Broken Bones

Dr. Baden focused heavily on a photograph of Epstein’s neck, which showed a thin, bloody ligature mark running across the middle of his throat. According to Baden, this injury does not align with a hanging.

“This noose doesn’t match the ligature furrow mark. It’s wider than this,” Dr. Baden stated during the broadcast. “Most hangings, especially free hangings, the ligature slides up to beneath the jawbone, the mandible. Here it’s in the middle of the neck.”

The investigation also highlighted a fracture in Epstein’s hyoid bone, a small U-shaped bone in the neck. Baden noted that Epstein suffered fractures to his left and right thyroid cartilage as well as the left hyoid bone. He asserted that seeing three such fractures is “extremely unusual” in suicidal hangings and is more typically associated with manual strangulation.

“I have never seen three fractures like this in a suicidal hanging,” Baden said. “Going over a thousand jail hangings, suicides, in the New York state prisons over the past 40, 50 years, no one had three fractures.”

Inconsistencies in the Cell

The 60 Minutes report also scrutinized the condition of Epstein’s jail cell. Photos revealed a chaotic scene with bed linens allegedly fashioned into nooses. However, Dr. Baden pointed out a lack of DNA transfer or blood on the cloth noose supposedly used in the act. He also questioned why Epstein would choose to tear bedsheets when electrical extension cords—a stronger and more efficient ligature—were readily available in the cell.

Security failures at the facility have further fueled skepticism. At the time of Epstein’s death, two cameras outside his cell malfunctioned, and prosecutors later charged the assigned guards with falsifying records to hide that they slept during their shifts.

Official Rebuttals and Counterarguments

Despite Dr. Baden’s claims, the New York City Medical Examiner’s Office stands by its determination. Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Barbara Sampson has previously stated that the autopsy findings align with hanging and rule out foul play.

Cameron Lindsay, a former federal prison warden interviewed for the segment, vehemently rejected the idea of an inside job or murder. When asked if there was any possibility Epstein was killed, Lindsay responded, “Absolutely, unequivocally not.”

Critics of the murder theory argue that the chaotic nature of the jail and the incompetence of the guards created a “perfect storm” for suicide, rather than a conspiracy. However, the release of these graphic images fuels the theory that someone silenced Epstein—who held connections to powerful figures like Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, and Prince Andrew—to prevent him from testifying.

The FBI and the Department of Justice Inspector General have conducted investigations into the circumstances of his death, but for many, the images aired Sunday night suggest the case is far from closed.

This video is relevant because it is the official “60 Minutes” segment discussed in the article, featuring the autopsy photos and Dr. Michael Baden’s analysis.

Related Posts

The post Jeffrey Epstein Autopsy Photos on “60 Minutes” Spark Renewed Debate Over Suicide Ruling appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

The “Flagrant” Redaction Controversy

In a video released Sunday, Cohen zeroed in on a specific document that has become a lightning rod for critics: an email referencing data obtained from former Trump advisor Steve Bannon’s cellphone. According to reports, the email discusses an image of Donald Trump and Ghislaine Maxwell found on the device. However, the government redacted the photo itself from the public release.

Cohen argues that this redaction is legally indefensible. Under the Epstein Transparency Act, which Trump himself signed into law, the Department of Justice is permitted to redact information only to protect the identities of victims, minors, or to safeguard sensitive national defense information. Therefore, Cohen asserts, shielding a photo involving Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and Ghislaine Maxwell fits none of these categories.

“The law allows redactions only to protect victims or minors—not politicians,” Cohen stated. Consequently, he argued that the only plausible explanation for redacting material related to Bannon and Trump is “political protection,” characterizing the move as active participation in a cover-up.

A Pattern of Delay and Obstruction

Beyond this specific redaction, the broader handling of the Epstein files has drawn widespread condemnation. Despite statutory deadlines, the Department of Justice failed to release the full archive by the December 19 mandate, opting instead for a “rolling release” strategy that has left millions of pages under review.

Furthermore, critics point to the specific language of the Transparency Act, which explicitly forbids withholding files on the basis of “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official.” Yet, the continued redaction of names and images of high-profile associates—who are clearly not victims—suggests to many that the administration is prioritizing reputation management over legal compliance.

Rising Political Pressure

The controversy has handed political ammunition to Trump’s opponents, who argue that the “law and order” President is selectively applying the law to benefit his inner circle. Moreover, the accusation that the DOJ is weaponizing redactions to hide embarrassing connections to a convicted sex trafficker undermines Trump’s previous campaign promises of total transparency.

As lawmakers and legal experts continue to sift through the released “tranche” of documents, the pressure is mounting for the DOJ to justify its redaction choices. Unless the administration can prove that these specific redactions protect a verified victim, they risk facing not just political backlash, but potential legal challenges for violating the very transparency statute they claimed to champion.

This video is relevant because it features legal experts analyzing the specific legal stakes and criticisms surrounding the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein photo releases and redactions.

Realted Posts

The post Trump Accused of ‘Flagrant’ Law Violation as Epstein Redactions Spark Cover-Up Claims appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

The “Untrue” Claims

According to the newly released material, an FBI intake report dated October 27, 2020, details a tip from a former limousine driver. The driver reportedly described a “disturbing phone conversation” involving Trump and Epstein that he claimed to have overheard in 1995. Furthermore, the driver’s account alleges that a woman involved in the incident later died by suicide in January 2000 after contacting the police.

However, in a rare move accompanying the release, the DOJ issued a statement on X (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday to address these specific files. The department clarified that the batch includes “untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that individuals submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election.”

The DOJ was blunt in its assessment, stating that the allegations lack any credible basis.

“To be clear: the claims are unfounded and false, and if they had a shred of credibility, opponents certainly would have weaponized them against President Trump already,” the department stated. Despite the falsity of the claims, the DOJ noted it released the records to comply with legal transparency requirements, while still maintaining protections for Epstein’s verified victims.

Documented Ties vs. New Allegations

Significantly, the files distinguish between verified historical records and unverified tips. For instance, prosecutors included emails pointing out the flights Trump took on Epstein’s private jet during the 1990s. While records clearly document Trump’s association with Epstein during that era, his inclusion in flight logs or social records does not constitute an accusation of illegal behavior.

Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. In public statements this week, the President dismissed the renewed focus on the case as a distraction orchestrated by Democrats. He asserted that he “cut ties” with Epstein long before the financier’s arrest in 2019.

The Push for Transparency

Meanwhile, the Justice Department faces continued pressure from Democrats to release the full bulk of the Epstein archive. Supporters of the Transparency Act argue that the public holds a right to see government records, even if those records contain unverified or salacious claims.

This latest release follows criticism regarding an earlier batch of records, some of which authorities temporarily removed from the online portal to protect victims’ identities. Subsequently, officials restored those files after determining that the disputed photos did not depict victims.

The post DOJ Releases 30,000 New Epstein Pages, Calls Sensational Claims Against Trump ‘Untrue’ appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

Specifically, Trump took to Truth Social on Saturday, December 27, to frame the document release not as a transparency effort, but as a partisan tool. Despite signing the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law himself on November 19, the President now characterizes the investigation as a “Democrat inspired Hoax” designed to distract from his administration’s successes.

The “Embarrass Them” Mandate

In his fiery post, Trump rejected the idea that Republicans shared any culpability in the Epstein scandal. Instead, he insisted that the illicit activities were exclusive to his political rivals.

“The Dems are the ones who worked with Epstein, not the Republicans. Release all of their names, embarrass them, and get back to helping our Country!” Trump wrote.

Furthermore, he argued that the focus on Epstein serves as a smokescreen. “The Radical Left doesn’t want people talking about TRUMP & REPUBLICAN SUCCESS, only a long ago dead Jeffrey Epstein — Just another Witch Hunt!!!”

This rhetoric mirrors a Christmas message he posted just days earlier, where he targeted the “sleazebags” who associated with Epstein. In that instance, he predicted that once officials reveal the names, they will turn out to be “Democrats all,” and warned of a reckoning for those who “dropped him like a dog” as public scrutiny intensified.

The One Million Page Delay

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice is grappling with a logistical nightmare. Although the agency began releasing records on December 19 to meet the statutory 30-day deadline, officials announced a major hurdle on Christmas Eve.

On December 24, federal prosecutors and the FBI identified more than one million additional pages of Epstein-related documents. As a result, the DOJ warned that processing and redacting these files for public release would take weeks. Currently, the slow pace has prompted accusations from some lawmakers that the administration is violating the disclosure law.

Trump seized on this delay to fuel his narrative. He complained that investigators have found 1,000,000 more pages on Epstein and that this “Democrat inspired Hoax” is forcing the DOJ to spend all its time on it.

A Bipartisan Reality

Contrary to Trump’s claim that the scandal involves only Democrats, the released files paint a picture of Epstein’s vast, bipartisan social network. Indeed, Epstein, a wealthy financier who died by suicide in jail in 2019, cultivated relationships with powerful figures across politics, business, and entertainment.

Notably, the newly released documents contain references to President Trump himself. Specifically, they include mentions of flights Trump took on Epstein’s private plane during their long-standing friendship in the 1990s—a relationship that soured years before Epstein’s initial arrest. similarly, the files include photographs of former Democratic President Bill Clinton and other prominent individuals.

However, it is crucial to note that authorities have not accused either Trump or Clinton of any criminal wrongdoing in connection with Epstein based on these files. Currently, many of the documents remain heavily redacted, leaving the full scope of Epstein’s network partially obscured.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the President’s demand to “embarrass” Democrats highlights the politicized nature of the disclosure. While the DOJ continues its review of the remaining millions of pages, the public awaits the unredacted truth. Whether the files will serve as the partisan weapon Trump desires, or simply reveal a cross-party web of influence, remains the central question of the coming weeks.

The post Trump Urges DOJ to “Embarrass” Democrats as 1 Million New Epstein Documents Surface appeared first on Coffee n Blog.

The Specific Allegation According to a raw FBI tip sheet labeled File EFTA00025010, an anonymous individual submitted a formal complaint to the National Threat Operations Center on August 3, 2020. The accuser, who identified themselves as a victim sex-trafficked by Epstein and their own uncle, detailed a horrific scenario allegedly occurring in 1984.

The tipster wrote to the FBI that Trump “participated regularly in paying money to force me to [redacted] with him and he was present when my uncle murdered my newborn child and disposed of the body in Lake Michigan”. The individual claimed to be 13 years old at the time of the alleged events.

Unverified Raw Data It is critical to note that this document is a raw FBI tip, meaning it records an allegation submitted by a member of the public but does not constitute verified evidence or a finding of fact by federal investigators. The tip appears to be a follow-up to a phone conversation the accuser claimed to have had with an NYPD/FBI task force detective weeks earlier. The files do not immediately indicate whether agents corroborated the claim or dismissed it, though Trump has consistently denied all wrongdoing regarding Epstein and has never been criminally charged in connection with the case.

Broader Context of the Release This revelation comes as part of a massive disclosure mandated by the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which ordered the DOJ to release all unclassified records related to the investigation. The dump includes emails, surveillance logs, and thousands of tips that investigators received over the years. While many documents reiterate known associations—such as flight logs confirming Trump flew on Epstein’s jet—this specific accusation regarding infanticide stands out for its extreme nature and lack of prior public visibility.

As the public sifts through the “tens of thousands” of newly released pages, observers expect further scrutiny of how the FBI handled such explosive, albeit unverified, tips during their original investigation.

The post Unverified Tip Claims Trump Witnessed Newborn’s Murder appeared first on Coffee n Blog.