December 2, 2025 • 40 mins
The new Epstein Files Transparency Act requires the government to release a trove of documents from its Jeffrey Epstein investigations – minus whatever documents the Justice Department determines need to be withheld from the public. Jason and Matt dig into the FBI’s massive review of the Epstein files earlier this year, unearth an inventory of the government’s Epstein records and explore an alternate way the files could go public -- via a long-running, under-the-radar court battle.
For early and ad-free access to this episode on Apple, subscribe at www.bloomberg.com/subscriptions/podcasts.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I want to say in the record here that the
subject line of the calendar invite for this recording session
is feya callen Epstein slash Santa. It makes me wonder like,
wouldn't that just be the ultimate kick in the face
of twenty twenty five that Santa Claus is on the
Epstein list.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Well, for the record, we're not talking about Santa right
this second. That's a different episode. I want to talk
about how the FBI turned over dozens of emails to
me that revealed details about how hundreds of the Bureau's
special agents and personnel from the Freedom of Information Act
Office reviewed and processed the Epstein files earlier this year.
Plus the best chance forgetting the Epstein files released. Let's go.
(00:41):
I'm investigative journalist Jason Leopold. I spend most of my
days getting documents from the government.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
I'm attorney Matt Tapik, and I fight them in court
to open their files when they don't want to.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
From Bloomberg and no smiling, this is Disclosure, a podcast
about buying loose government secrets, the Freedom of Information Act,
and the the unexpected places that takes us. Now, before
we get into the documents, I recently pried loose and
the rest of it. Let's just recap what happened in
(01:11):
Epstein Land these last few weeks, so, Matt. Congress has
now passed a bill which is called the Epstein Files
Transparency Act, that compels the Department of Justice to release
their files on Jeffrey Epstein within thirty days, and President
Trump has already signed that into law.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Yeah, I thought that the speculation about would Trump sign
it or out. What's kind of funny is like he
has the power himself to order get doj to release this.
He doesn't need Congress in order to do that. It
seems like it's taking an act of Congress to make
them do it. But it always felt a little weird
to me, like he's signing a bill that's saying do
(01:48):
what you ought to be doing.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, he could have released this at any time by
just calling for the Justice Department to release it, which
is exactly what he has done on other high profile
political matters earlier this year.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Donald Trump has just said that he is going to
release the files around the death of President JFK tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
The Trump administration has gone public with more than two
hundred and thirty thousand pages of records related to doctor
Martin Luther King Junior's assassination. But what's interesting about this
the Cepstein Transparency Act is what it allows the Justice
Department to do, and it allows them to withhold certain information,
(02:30):
particularly information within these files that could interfere with an
ongoing law enforcement investigation, which in foyle Land Matt we
like to refer to as the B seven A, well.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
B seven A, but the investigations that would be the
predicate for that or what like. The President had requested
that Attorney General Pambindi opened some investigations into Bill Clinton
and some other Democrats or democratsretically inclined people, people that
I believe the truth Social Post or whatever it was
he posted it in like specifically referred to Democrats. So
(03:08):
just openly saying I want you to investigate some Democrats
about this, and.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Not surprisingly they they're going to do that, it seemed.
But that directive by Trump came one week prior to
the passage of this bill, and what we don't know
is what does an investigation like that look like? What
are they going to investigate? So Trump delivering this directive
(03:33):
via truth Social to Pambondi, so that means that you know,
whatever Epstein files they may have that relate to these
folks could arguably be withheld.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
Yeah, I mean I think that if they pull that,
like I mean, there's a lot of angry people already
about all this. If they now are pull the rug
out again and say, oh, you know, hardly release anything
because of these ongoing investigations, I don't know what's going
to happen. I think there's going to be a lot
of people that are going to be very upset about that.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
So, Matt, this kind of gets at a fundamental question
when we talk about the release of the Epstein files.
When we say Epstein files, what are we actually talking about.
This is a guy who is investigated by federal authorities
starting around the mid two thousands. He signed a controversial
plea deal and did some light prison time, and then
he was arrested again in twenty nineteen and accused of
(04:23):
sex trafficking miners. And the idea is that those investigations
threw up a lot of paperwork, presumably about interviews with victims, evidence,
names of associates and co conspirators. So now with the
Epstein Files Transparency Act, there's going to be a lot
of discussion of what gets released and what may get withheld.
So the point of this, Matt, is that over the
(04:44):
past year, I've been doing some document requests and following
some other FOYA actions related to Epstein, and it all
helps us get a handle on what's in the Epstein
files and how the government has been handling them. And
as you know, Matt, this has been building since Trump
took office again in January. A lot of Trump's supporters
want this information out in the public, and Trump seemed
(05:07):
to say during the campaign that he'd do that, but
by the summer that was looking less likely. So in July,
the Justice Department and FBI released a joint statement that said,
it is the determination of the Department of Justice and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation that no further disclosure would
be appropriate or warranted. Q. The outrage, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Right, I mean, there are a lot of people for
whom this is the most important issue in American politics
right now. Well, and you're just telling them, yeah, we
changed our mind, there's nothing to see here, move on.
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Yeah, And this is the biggest political story of the year.
So earlier this year I found a wide ranging Foyer
request for everything related to the processing of the Epstein files.
I was really interested in how the records were processed,
and I was even more interested did within the context
of how everything went down with the rollout of the
Epstein files earlier this year. What I was hoping was
(06:07):
to get a look at what was going on behind
closed doors with the Epstein records going back to the
beginning of the new administration. And remember, Matt just a
few weeks after Trump was inaugurated back in February, his
brand new Attorney General, Pam Bondi, calls a group of
right wing influencers to the White House for an event
because she has something to give them. They walked out
(06:27):
of the White House holding binders and hands them binders.
Look at what we got today, Let's say Epstein Files
Phase one. See that right there, that's the Epstein files.
Bondy has this kind of grand rollout, and so shortly thereafter,
I mean, I want to say more like I'm almost
immediately thereafter, the MAGA crowd goes nuts. We frankly assumed
(06:52):
this had at least some smoking guns. And now it's
a backlash. That's not what's in this binder at all.
It's a backlash against Bondi. It's a backlash against the FBI.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
It is the biggest disappointment I think that you'll.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
Find, because it turns out that these documents that were
in the binder had been previously released in court cases
and previously released by the FBI. So it ignited a firestorm.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
This is kind of their own folks, right, they invite
all these people that are kind of from the MAGA world,
and they do they think they're so stupid that they're
not going to realize that these documents have already be
outed and out there. I mean, of course folks are
going to pick over every document. And like, I was
this just incompetence or was it? Did they were they
(07:41):
trying to pull a fast one? Or well I don't
think they actually pulled a fast one.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
I don't. I just don't think they actually even looked
at any of the files they were going to release.
And so what happened after that is Bondi, who had
been really embarrassed by this, fires off a letter a
letter to FBI Director Cash Paatel the AG demanding the
release of the bureau's full and complete Epstein files.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
So she's throwing Cash Patel kind of under the bus here, like, hey,
what are you guys doing.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
This stuff has already been released exactly, and she kind
of blamed him for this. She says, I repeatedly questioned
whether this was the full set of documents responsive to
my request, and as she later explains on Fox.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
News, you're looking at these documents, going, these aren't all
the Epstein files.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Bondi's letter to Patel goes on to say that she
knows there are more Epstein documents. She writes she has
a source in the FBI field office in New York
who told her so, and.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
So a source said, ohoh, all this evidence is sitting
in the Southern District of New York's shock.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
So she then tells Cash Ptel that he has until
February twenty eighth to have the FBI deliver the full
and complete Epstein files to her office.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
And we got hopefully all of them Friday at eight am,
thousands of pages of documents.
Speaker 2 (09:02):
And she goes on to say that she wants a
full investigation as to why her order to the FBI
originally wasn't followed.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
Cash is going to get me and himself really a
detailed report as to why all these documents and evidence
had been withheld, and you know, we're going to go
through it, go through it as fast as we can.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
So, Matt, as you know, I actually asked for that
detailed report, but they withheld it under a FOYA exemption.
But as I reported earlier this year for Bloomberg, after
all this happens, cash Ptel directs FBI agents from the
New York Field Office, the Washington d C. Field Office,
and personnel from the Records Information Dissemination Section or RIZ.
(09:45):
Those are the folks that process FOYER requests. And they
were all holed up in a facility in Virginia which
is called the Central Records Complex. So what do I
mean by processing. Well, when reviewing doc documents for a
ventral release, FOYA officers have to determine what can be
released and what needs to be withheld using nine exemptions
(10:10):
under the FOYA. For example, they would withhold information based
on someone's personal privacy or an ongoing investigation. And they
begin processing these EPSTEIN files right they're they're they're pulling
all nighters, they're you know, working twenty hour shifts just
to process the Epstein files. So I was really interested
(10:32):
in what was taking place. Behind the scenes, you know,
how these requests were processed, how much money they spent
on FBI personnel.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
So this is like a this is like a meta request,
right like you're you're trying to get it's a foya
about a foya. Yes, So most agencies, as they're processing requests,
they have some kind of a database that they keep
track of all the steps received, request forwarded to analyst,
analyst rans search forty two thousand, search results narrowed with
(11:03):
search terms sent, extension, letter to request, or like all
those little details from a lot of agencies get tracked
in some kind of a centralized database, and we usually
refer to those as processing.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Those And that's informative because you sort of learn how
these requests are processed and maybe even you know, learn
about a record keeping system. So I find that to
be good information to get insight into how the agency
is handling a foyer request.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
It kind of reminds me of like the updates or
texts I get from United Airlines about what's going on
with my checked bag. Like it'll say like it's like
through the screening, you've been loaded onto the plane. It's
like it's on the cart, you know. Yeah, but about
way more detail than that.
Speaker 2 (11:53):
So I filed multiple Foyer requests over the summer, and
then Bloomberg sued to compel the really piece of these records,
and recently the FBI released about sixty pages of emails
and other documents I asked for related to the processing
in the Epstein files. So what do you get. We
(12:14):
have a bunch of emails and they're kind of heavily redacted,
but there is still a lot of info in here,
and there's some real interesting takeaways here.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
So let's go through the timeline here. So where does
the story of the emails begin.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
It begins in March, early March twenty twenty five this year.
There's an email here from the assistant director of the
Information Management Division stated March tenth, and it says that
we are prepared to receive boxes tomorrow as New York
(12:53):
agents are traveling to the Washington Field office in the
morning and will arrive to Winchester, that's the location of
the Central Records Complex, where they will start photographing and
we will start scanning and processing the physical files. Why
do you think that they were photographing the files?
Speaker 1 (13:15):
Well, that's interesting because like regular paper documents, you would
think they would just scan them, you wouldn't need to
photograph them. It suggests that potentially there's some things that
aren't like documents, Like there could be physical evidence, right,
there could be a.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Right, it could be anything. It could be a beer bottle,
it could be a hair brush, you know whatever.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Yeah, they might be taking photos of those physical items
that you can't scan, but we're just kind of guessing
at that at least for now.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Yeah. The email goes on to say, once I see
the volume, I'll have a better estimate of processing times.
Although I suggest we do a rolling delivery to further
demonstrate the FBI's commitment to delivery and transparency. Yeah. Interesting,
I mean, I think that's just funny because the FBI
(14:09):
wants to demonstrate to the DOJ that its commitment to transparency.
It also says, by the way, in this email, and
again this very early is March tenth, so it says
that you know, in a meeting with the Criminal Division
in New York and Washington Field offices, there were questions
on the types of reactions the FBI should apply to
(14:31):
these files, and then there's like just a really long
redaction box.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
So do we know anything from these emails about like
what kinds of records the FBI was reviewing.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Oh yeah, yeah, I mean we do. And it's kind
of fascinating. So on one page, they're discussing FBI search
warrant execution photos, FBI interview videos, Julaine Maxwell's prison security footage,
time lapsed video footage from an office, and in parentheses
(15:04):
it says no persons identified and no crimes observed, street
surveillance footage, aerial footage from FBI search warrant execution, police
interview videos.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
And you're just salivating. See you're like, oh man, oh yeah,
I gotta get this stuff.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
And marketing videos, marketing videos, marketing videos. I mean, this
is what's this is what's identifying? Do we not know?
I don't know marketing videos, Yeah, it's it's that like,
is that.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Mister Epstein's like, come visit my island kind of marketing videos?
Speaker 2 (15:38):
I don't know. I mean, I'm trying to figure out
what marketing videos. Yeah. Oh. Actually, the other thing that's
here is they're discussing the prison video of Epstein before
he was found dead and after he was found dead,
and they discussed this video and eight terabytes of data
related to Epstein, so that is some thing that they
(16:00):
were looking at as well.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
So do these documents tell us anything about sort of
the interactions between FBI and DJ, because, like you know,
this is a little bit of a tense This is
after the binders that really weren't anything new, right, So
like you got a little bit of an awkward relationship
between the FBI and the DJ. Are they communicating with
each other at all? Here?
Speaker 2 (16:23):
Great question? I mean, in these records, it does not
appear that they're communicating. And in fact, there's one email
that asked the question of did you happen to send
the results of the below review to DJ at any point?
And the response is we definitely did not provide anything
(16:44):
to DJ, just to HQ headquarters. So it doesn't appear.
And this just may be the fact that it's early
at least in these documents that the FBI released, that
there's no communication with DJ. But I also want to
know that the FBI did withhold one hundred and sixty
pages in its entirety.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Okay, so not a ton about the DOJ FBI relationship.
So do we learn anything about like did they do
this in phases? Like, how did they structure the processing? Yeah,
I see reference to like phase one in phase two.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Yeah, and so another document here. You know, again this
is all in March, and I think what's noteworthy is
the bulk of the work was taking place in March.
You know, almost one thousand FBI agents in personnel working
during the month of March. Just plowing through these records.
(17:41):
You know, there's an email on Sunday, March twenty third,
twenty twenty five, six forty three pm, so you can
already see that they're working on the weekends. Right stand by,
we have identified more files requiring phase one review. Please
continue to refresh as files will be populated momentarily.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
So do we know anything about what those phases mean?
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Now? Unfortunately the documents don't describe what those phases refer
to what it actually means.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
And it looks like so then upon completion of Phase two,
the FBI is going to provide what they call see
through redaction files for DOJ review, which to me reads
like FBI is doing the work of identifying what to redect,
but they're giving it to DOJ so DJ can see
what the plan.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Is is that how you read that? That's how exactly
how I read that?
Speaker 1 (18:32):
So Jason, in March, they're doing all this processing, So
what's the next kind of big thing that happens.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
Well, the next big thing, at least according to these emails,
is April fifteenth, the tax day. An email goes out
to FBI personnel that says cash Patel quote asked for
status of all remaining Epstein related reviews. Makes sense, Yeah,
it makes sense. But there's no response to that email.
(19:00):
But Ptel is weighing in, right, The director of the
FBI wants an update. Where are we at, you know,
with the Epstein files? So when do they finish the review?
So it appears around May second is when they kind
of wrap things up. An FBI employee from the New
York Field office sends an email and attached a document
titled Epstein Overview Final that summarize their work. Well do
(19:26):
we what does? What does it say? Unfortunately, you know,
the FBI withheld the attachment. No, so they withheld those
attachments citing a number of different FOYA exemptions such as
attorney client privilege, the deliberative process, and others.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
So they're taunting you. They're taunting you by telling you
what's there, but that you can't have it?
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Can I tell you that? As I'm reading these files
and the subject lines refer to a PowerPoint or a document,
I'm like clicking. I'm clicking to see if there's any
chance that like it will magically open up. Did not.
It did not, Bummer, But importantly to me, like this
(20:10):
is the biggest standout on these records. So I asked
how much money they spent on overtime, for example, for
agents who are tasked with processing these records. So go
to page fourteen of the release.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Okay, so I'm looking at it. It's a chart and
then the division name column says Business Strategy and Analytics Section,
Counterintelligence Division, counter Terrorism Division, Criminal Investigative Division, Cyberdivision, Directorate
of Intelligence EAD, Information and Technology Branch, Finance and Facilities Division,
Human Resources Division, and then everything else is withheld for
(20:49):
secret investigative techniques that if released would harm some future investigations.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
So these are all the divisions that were involved in
the review of the STEAM files. And how do we
know that because the government released an index of what
I requested and the FBI document types is how they
refer to it. And this is a resource planning office.
(21:16):
That's an office within the FBI report that documents the
premium pay hours and premium pay is overtime, nighttime, differential hours,
but more or less, you could think of it as overtime,
and it's the number of hours they recorded on this project, right,
That's how they refer to it. The Epstein files. They
(21:38):
refer to as as a special redaction project. And it's
during the period of March seventeen through March twenty second,
so five or six days, right.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
So they're withholding from you the total amount of pay
across each of those, but they are giving you the
grand total of employees worked premium pay hours total in
premium expenses. So they just did not want to give
you the breakdown. I guess on the theory that somehow
you could interfere with an investigation if they knew the
(22:09):
specifics of how they staffed.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
This up, but you at least know the totals. Yeah,
and those totals are kind of stunning. There were nine
hundred and thirty four employees that were involved in the
processing and review of the Epstein files, fourteen thousand and
two hundred and seventy eight premium pay hours worked for
(22:34):
a total of eight hundred and fifty one thousand, three
hundred and forty four dollars that the FBI spent on
premium pay during the March seventeenth and March twenty second
review of these files. I mean, that's a lot of money.
That seems like a ton of money to me for
the FBI to spend all this. I mean it wasn't
(22:54):
a national emergency. Well, it depends who you ask, Yeah, true.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
I mean I think there's a sizeable number of people,
and I think they probably are skewing towards Trump supporters,
for whom like this is like right, So I'm looking
at these numbers. I'm seeing eight hundred and fifty thousand,
and that's just the overtime. So you know, it's possible
that the overtime might only be like maybe half of
(23:19):
the total cost, So you could easily be looking at
like a couple million dollars total. The people are just working,
which means they're not in the field investigating crimes. They're
not in the office processing Jason's other Foyer requests. Like
it's sort of they drop everything. This is what they're doing,
and all this work gets done and then Pam Bondi
(23:41):
says there's nothing to see here, so nothing more is
going to get released, right, So it sounds like by
May second they've pretty much wrapped up. And then in
May DOJ tells Trump that his name appears in the documents.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
Yeah, that's the timing of it. And shortly thereafter, you know,
we have this unsigned memo saying that they collected three
hundred gigabytes of data, which is video, photographs, actual documents,
and none of that, not a single document from that
(24:17):
trove can be released.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
All right, Well, the clock is ticking on the thirty
day Epstein Transparency Act deadline. So I guess that work
wasn't a waste because it's gonna probably come in pretty handy,
pretty quickly. It's a good thing that they already did
all this back in the summer. Hopefully we're gonna start
seeing some more stuff.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
I want to segue into what may be in the
Epstein files. So earlier this year, I wrote about the
under the Radar Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that was
filed back in I think it was twenty seventeen. It's
nearly nine year old lawsuit that an attorney named Dan
(25:06):
Novak filed on behalf of a reporter for what was
Radar magazine at the time this foil lawsuit that he filed.
They were trying to get at that time all of
the FBI's Epstein files. And in this lawsuit that had
been going on now for nearly nine years, the FBI
released about twelve hundred pages of documents. And these are
(25:30):
the twelve hundred pages more or less that have been
screenshotted and shared on social media. And is this the
same stuff that was in the famous binders? Yeah, exactly
where people who've been following this are like, what is
this trash? We've already seen this, right, that's exactly right.
So here's what happened. I dig into this case and
the FBI and the Justice Department essentially withheld the vast
(25:53):
majority of records, at least ten thousand plus pages, because
of an ongoing investigation. I should go back and say
they denied the request before they moved to a lawsuit.
They said to the reporter that you need to have
a privacy waiver. You need to get Epstein to sign
a privacy waiver before returning over right, And he's.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
Still alive then in twenty seven, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
He's still alive. So they're going down the road of
privacy waiver and a privacy excemption. They sue, right, and
so you know how it is. I mean, we both
know how it is. This is dragging out for a while,
but this is really long. This is really it's really long.
The next thing, you know, what happens is fast forwarding here.
But Epstein gets arrested and so now everything is being
(26:37):
withheld under B seven eight and ongoing law enforced. Right,
So they're not getting anything. They're still arguing, going back
and forth. So these folks just continuously hit roadblocks and
roadblocks and roadblocks and they're just unable to pry anything loose.
But they're fighting. They're continuing to fight, right. I respect that.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
It's nice to hear you not be med at other
PEO people making Foyer requests and filing lawsuits.
Speaker 2 (27:02):
Yeah, I mean, I like when other people file Foy
requests and lawsuits, as long as it's not for the
same records. I want fair. So I go into the
docket of this Foyle lawsuit that Radar filed trying to
make these Epstein documents public, and on the docket is
what's called a Vaughn index. This specific document is very
important as far as the Epstein files are concerned. But
(27:23):
before we get into that, Matt, can you explain what
a Vaughn index is and the old Foyle lawsuit that
gave rise to it.
Speaker 1 (27:30):
Yes, Jason, it comes from a case called Vaughn versus Rosen,
and I think kind of like the nineteen seventies, and
what used to happen is agencies would withhold a bunch
of stuff and then they would just dump all the
documents on the court in the lawsuit and be like,
here you go, court, you tell us it's called in
camera review, like where the court in chambers, not in
public reviews these documents. So agencies were just kind of
(27:51):
like dumping all this stuff, and eventually the courts you're like, yeah,
we're not cool with that. You've got to make an
index of what all these documents are, just describe them,
at least in some level of generality, and identify the
specific exemptions that you're claiming for each one of those.
So that has become known as a Vaughn index. So
it's what it sounds like. It's a listing of all
(28:12):
the documents. And sometimes the Vaughn index can have a
whole lot of interesting information even if you can't get
the documents right.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
And we've received many Vaughan indices in our l lawsuits. Yeah, routinely. Yeah,
and they're extremely to me, it's extremely valuable just to
even have a general overview of what the documents are
that they're worth holding.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
So I was talking to who and when they're talking, like,
even if you don't know what they're saying, it can
be really interesting like oh, this person was involved or huh,
that timing is really interesting as to when things were happening.
And you can usually get those kinds of details.
Speaker 2 (28:47):
Yeah, and I feel like their news were then you
could write a story out of it. You have written
stories out of it. Oh yeah, I thought this one
was really important. And it doesn't seem like anyone you know,
even knew it was out there. It had some pretty
i'm good detail of what the documents are that the
FBI had as it relates to Jeffrey Epstein, And obviously
it's a sliver, but what would be in the Epstein
(29:09):
files that are now supposed to be released. And the
index says that the FBI processed but withheld information it
obtained from confidential sources, letters addressed to then US Attorney
for the Southern District to Florida, alex Acosta. He was
the one that ultimately authorized that non prosecution agreement with
(29:32):
Jeffrey Epstein. Subpoenas to MySpace, remember my space? Oh yeah,
that's specifically in this Vaughn index. The handwritten notes of
FBI agents, photographs, grand jury subpoenas is all listed out
in the index. Yeah, and bank records communications with foreign
government agencies. I thought that was really really interesting. Of course,
(29:56):
there are three O two's tell everyone of FBI three
O two.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
Is FBI three H two is a summary of an
FBI interview with someone.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
So in this Vaughn index, so I counted, right, because
it describes the three H twos here. And mind you,
this index relates to the investigation that the Justice Department
and FBI took on between two thousand and six, and
you know when fsc and pleaded guilty in two thousand
and eight. So I counted, and it reveals that the
(30:25):
FBI conducted at lease according to this Vond index, fifty
five interviews with witnesses, victims, potential investigative targets, and importantly,
bank records so you know, I'm hoping we get a
chance to see those. But here's what I like really
zeroed in on is that it shows that some of
the documents that were processed and withheld from Radar Magazine
(30:52):
are from twenty eleven and include dozens of photographs and agents,
interview summaries of third parties, and documents provided to the
FBI by confidential sources.
Speaker 1 (31:05):
That's twenty eleven, twenty eleven, you get charged in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2 (31:10):
No, so we're only talking about the first investigation right
two thousand and six through two thousand and eight. But
it looks like the FBI never really closed it is
that it remained active because there's documents from twenty eleven.
So I just wanted to get your take on this,
because we've dealt with the FBI a lot. Do you
think that people may have just been coming in and
(31:30):
just collecting evidence and submitting it to the investigative file
or could this be kind of evidence that the FBI
still had an active investigation in twenty eleven, three years
after Epstein had pled guilty and at that point was
already out of jail.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
I mean, that's pretty hard to tell. I mean wouldn't
surprise me if victims and others continued to come to
the FBI for good reason dissatisfied with the minimal punishment
that he had gotten to that point. In whether the
FBI did anything with that, we really don't know unless
the Vaughan Index shows like more activity at the time.
(32:06):
But if all you have is like a listing of
a bunch of three h twos of witness interviews, that
it's hard to really say if they were actively investigating
or just sort of passively receiving information.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Right. Yeah, And based on my reporting, the FBI doesn't
typically close investigations. They're sort of keeping it open. That's
just my experience, right.
Speaker 1 (32:24):
For in these circumstances, that would make perfect sense.
Speaker 2 (32:28):
Yeah, and I didn't see anything in the Vaughn Index
that indicated there was like a case closing memorandum, an
actual document there. So I dug into this over the summer.
This was during that time where everyone was just kind
of clamoring these Epstein files because this was immediately after
the Justice Department FBI said we're not going to release anything.
(32:50):
So now Radar Magazine is eight years into its lawsuit
to get the Epstein records. At this point, they know
the FBI has reviewed the records, and the FBI and
the DOJ say they're not going to release more records.
So the Radar lawsuit has some new urgency. It looks
like they have a pretty clear path to say you
have to release the records. But then Julaine Maxwell appeals
(33:14):
her case Dlayne Maxwell. We now see that her attorney
renewing his requests for the Supreme Court to overturn her conviction.
So there's Radar Magazine again with like ah Man. This
is still an ongoing law enforcement proceeding, so they still
can't get anything. And now that the Supreme Court has
rejected Maxwell's petition, Dan Novak and Radar Magazine has now
(33:37):
appealed to the Second Circuit and so there's an oral
argument set for January twenty eighth. So I still think, Matt,
I just want to see what you think this Foyer
case is the best actually the best chance of getting
anything from the Epstein Files versus Congress's Epstein Files Transparency Act. Yeah.
I think for a couple reasons.
Speaker 1 (33:58):
I mean, first, I think that the Vaughn Index is
going to be a check on whatever gets released, like
if you see that there's things on the Vaughn Index
that don't get released, then there's some splaining to do. Right,
but the lawsuit also has teeth. The Epstein Act has
no teeth. If DOJ decides to violate it, there's no
private cause of action. You and I can't file a
(34:20):
lawsuit over that. You need to have a Foyer case.
And so so that case could end up being the
legal vehicle by which the Epstein Act release actually gets challenged.
I mean, there's so many twists and turns to this,
and like people get charged, and people die, and it
impacts what can be with helld or not, and it's
(34:41):
up and down on appeal and all this stuff going on.
And so that's got to be frustrating to go after
that long. But now it's it's it almost turns out
it does turn out that, like it's great, rightly there
is a live, active Foya case right now that can
be the vehicle by which if the DOJ is trying
to get away with withholding things.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
That's how they can be held accountable for that.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
In how we can courts can guarantee in the public
can guarantee that they're actually releasing everything that they're supposed
to release because the track record ain't that great so far.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
That's kind of how I felt as well. It's like,
this is really the best course of action for the
public to kind of see what's going on. It will
be interesting if the government argues that, well, Donald Trump
is now called for an investigation into Democrats, so we're
going to keep withholding is because of an ongoing investigation.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
Yeah, and that's you know, I mean, it depends on
how bold they are on trying to make those with holding.
And I think they're given the memo from July. I
was representing you right now in a case on this,
and they said, oh, well, there's these investigations, I think
you can make dogument that's a sham. They already said
that there isn't any predicate to investigate anybody else.
Speaker 2 (35:58):
That's right, and doj and FBI, I said in their
joint statement from July quote, there was also no credible
evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of
his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate
an investigation against uncharged third party.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
So the fact that they're now claiming they're going to
do investigation it's not a real investigation, so it doesn't
count for foya purposes. That's how I would argue that,
I don't know some you know, I think there's a fair.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
Chance of succeeding on that, but no guarantees. I mean,
the timing couldn't be better for Radar magazine, right, they
file this back in twenty seventeen, so they're coming up
on nine years. That's a really long time. But man,
the fact that they're still fighting at this very moment,
where the Epstein files have become the biggest political story
(36:53):
of the year, that's wild. So, as I mentioned, there's
a hearing in the Second Circuit, an oral argument that's
scheduled for January twenty eighth. And let me just let me,
let me just explain.
Speaker 1 (37:04):
So that's the Court of Appeals that covers the trial
courts that are in New York and some other adjacent states.
The country is divided into a series of different regional
courts of appeals, so it's above the trial court and
it's before the Supreme Court.
Speaker 2 (37:20):
An oral argument.
Speaker 1 (37:21):
Explain it, man, oral argument is the parties have filed
their briefs and then they come in and they answer
the judges questions and they make their arguments and those
are open to the public. I got a feeling that
it's going to be a packed court room with overflow rooms.
Speaker 2 (37:35):
Yeah, and it's interesting because it's coming, you know, it's
happening right after kind of the deadline for when the
Justice Department is supposed to turn over everything in the
Epstein files. So I just want to ask you this question, Matt.
So let's say the Justice Department does turn over everything
in the Epstein files to Congress, as they are required
(37:57):
to do under the law. Would those same records be
responsive to this FOIL lawsuit.
Speaker 1 (38:05):
Well, the scope of that request was, like all records
from the FBI's investigation, right, all documents relating to the
FBI's investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. Now they made
their request in twenty seventeen. Yeah, there could be a
dispute about whether documents after that date get included or not.
I mean, it certainly would be cut off. At whatever
(38:27):
point the FBI searched then that would typically be the cutoff.
Sometimes it's the date of the request. Sometimes it's whenever
they do the search. So there could be some later stuff,
like you know, because he When did he When did
he die? Twenty nineteen, twenty nineteen. Yeah, so there's a
couple of years there, two thousand nine, a.
Speaker 2 (38:45):
Little bit of there, maybe a little bit of indulgent. Well,
I guess we'll see what happens whether or not the
Justice Department releases the Epstein files to Congress, And I
guess we'll see what happens in late January in the
Radar Foil lawsuit for the FBI files. An upstick from
(39:05):
Bloomberg and No Smiling. This is Disclosure. The show is
hosted by Matt Topic and me Jason Leopold. It's produced
by Heather Schroing and Sean Cannon for No Smiling. Our
editor for Bloomberg is Jeff Grocott. Our executive producers for
Bloomberg are Sage Bauman and me Jason Leopold, and our
executive producers for No Smiling are Sean Cannon, Heather Schrowing,
(39:29):
and Matt Topic. The Disclosure theme song is by Nick,
with additional music by Nick An Epidemic Sound. Sound design
and mixing is by Sean Cannon. For more transparency news
and important document thumps, you can subscribe to my WEEKLYFOYA
Files newsletter at bloomberg dot com slash Foya files that's
(39:49):
Foia files. To get every episode early on Apple podcasts,
become a Bloomberg dot com subscriber today. Check out our
special intro offer right now now at bloomberg dot com
Slash podcast offer, or click the link in the show notes.
You'll also unlock deep reporting data and analysis from reporters
around the world. We'll see you again next Tuesday. Okay,
(40:15):
opening the link. Do do Do Do Do Do Do
Do
I want to say in the record here that the
subject line of the calendar invite for this recording session
is feya callen Epstein slash Santa. It makes me wonder like,
wouldn't that just be the ultimate kick in the face
of twenty twenty five that Santa Claus is on the
Epstein list.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Well, for the record, we're not talking about Santa right
this second. That's a different episode. I want to talk
about how the FBI turned over dozens of emails to
me that revealed details about how hundreds of the Bureau's
special agents and personnel from the Freedom of Information Act
Office reviewed and processed the Epstein files earlier this year.
Plus the best chance forgetting the Epstein files released. Let's go.
(00:41):
I'm investigative journalist Jason Leopold. I spend most of my
days getting documents from the government.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
I'm attorney Matt Tapik, and I fight them in court
to open their files when they don't want to.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
From Bloomberg and no smiling, this is Disclosure, a podcast
about buying loose government secrets, the Freedom of Information Act,
and the the unexpected places that takes us. Now, before
we get into the documents, I recently pried loose and
the rest of it. Let's just recap what happened in
(01:11):
Epstein Land these last few weeks, so, Matt. Congress has
now passed a bill which is called the Epstein Files
Transparency Act, that compels the Department of Justice to release
their files on Jeffrey Epstein within thirty days, and President
Trump has already signed that into law.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Yeah, I thought that the speculation about would Trump sign
it or out. What's kind of funny is like he
has the power himself to order get doj to release this.
He doesn't need Congress in order to do that. It
seems like it's taking an act of Congress to make
them do it. But it always felt a little weird
to me, like he's signing a bill that's saying do
(01:48):
what you ought to be doing.
Speaker 2 (01:49):
Yeah, he could have released this at any time by
just calling for the Justice Department to release it, which
is exactly what he has done on other high profile
political matters earlier this year.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Donald Trump has just said that he is going to
release the files around the death of President JFK tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
The Trump administration has gone public with more than two
hundred and thirty thousand pages of records related to doctor
Martin Luther King Junior's assassination. But what's interesting about this
the Cepstein Transparency Act is what it allows the Justice
Department to do, and it allows them to withhold certain information,
(02:30):
particularly information within these files that could interfere with an
ongoing law enforcement investigation, which in foyle Land Matt we
like to refer to as the B seven A, well.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
B seven A, but the investigations that would be the
predicate for that or what like. The President had requested
that Attorney General Pambindi opened some investigations into Bill Clinton
and some other Democrats or democratsretically inclined people, people that
I believe the truth Social Post or whatever it was
he posted it in like specifically referred to Democrats. So
(03:08):
just openly saying I want you to investigate some Democrats
about this, and.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Not surprisingly they they're going to do that, it seemed.
But that directive by Trump came one week prior to
the passage of this bill, and what we don't know
is what does an investigation like that look like? What
are they going to investigate? So Trump delivering this directive
(03:33):
via truth Social to Pambondi, so that means that you know,
whatever Epstein files they may have that relate to these
folks could arguably be withheld.
Speaker 1 (03:44):
Yeah, I mean I think that if they pull that,
like I mean, there's a lot of angry people already
about all this. If they now are pull the rug
out again and say, oh, you know, hardly release anything
because of these ongoing investigations, I don't know what's going
to happen. I think there's going to be a lot
of people that are going to be very upset about that.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
So, Matt, this kind of gets at a fundamental question
when we talk about the release of the Epstein files.
When we say Epstein files, what are we actually talking about.
This is a guy who is investigated by federal authorities
starting around the mid two thousands. He signed a controversial
plea deal and did some light prison time, and then
he was arrested again in twenty nineteen and accused of
(04:23):
sex trafficking miners. And the idea is that those investigations
threw up a lot of paperwork, presumably about interviews with victims, evidence,
names of associates and co conspirators. So now with the
Epstein Files Transparency Act, there's going to be a lot
of discussion of what gets released and what may get withheld.
So the point of this, Matt, is that over the
(04:44):
past year, I've been doing some document requests and following
some other FOYA actions related to Epstein, and it all
helps us get a handle on what's in the Epstein
files and how the government has been handling them. And
as you know, Matt, this has been building since Trump
took office again in January. A lot of Trump's supporters
want this information out in the public, and Trump seemed
(05:07):
to say during the campaign that he'd do that, but
by the summer that was looking less likely. So in July,
the Justice Department and FBI released a joint statement that said,
it is the determination of the Department of Justice and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation that no further disclosure would
be appropriate or warranted. Q. The outrage, Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Right, I mean, there are a lot of people for
whom this is the most important issue in American politics
right now. Well, and you're just telling them, yeah, we
changed our mind, there's nothing to see here, move on.
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Yeah, And this is the biggest political story of the year.
So earlier this year I found a wide ranging Foyer
request for everything related to the processing of the Epstein files.
I was really interested in how the records were processed,
and I was even more interested did within the context
of how everything went down with the rollout of the
Epstein files earlier this year. What I was hoping was
(06:07):
to get a look at what was going on behind
closed doors with the Epstein records going back to the
beginning of the new administration. And remember, Matt just a
few weeks after Trump was inaugurated back in February, his
brand new Attorney General, Pam Bondi, calls a group of
right wing influencers to the White House for an event
because she has something to give them. They walked out
(06:27):
of the White House holding binders and hands them binders.
Look at what we got today, Let's say Epstein Files
Phase one. See that right there, that's the Epstein files.
Bondy has this kind of grand rollout, and so shortly thereafter,
I mean, I want to say more like I'm almost
immediately thereafter, the MAGA crowd goes nuts. We frankly assumed
(06:52):
this had at least some smoking guns. And now it's
a backlash. That's not what's in this binder at all.
It's a backlash against Bondi. It's a backlash against the FBI.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
It is the biggest disappointment I think that you'll.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
Find, because it turns out that these documents that were
in the binder had been previously released in court cases
and previously released by the FBI. So it ignited a firestorm.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
This is kind of their own folks, right, they invite
all these people that are kind of from the MAGA world,
and they do they think they're so stupid that they're
not going to realize that these documents have already be
outed and out there. I mean, of course folks are
going to pick over every document. And like, I was
this just incompetence or was it? Did they were they
(07:41):
trying to pull a fast one? Or well I don't
think they actually pulled a fast one.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
I don't. I just don't think they actually even looked
at any of the files they were going to release.
And so what happened after that is Bondi, who had
been really embarrassed by this, fires off a letter a
letter to FBI Director Cash Paatel the AG demanding the
release of the bureau's full and complete Epstein files.
Speaker 1 (08:07):
So she's throwing Cash Patel kind of under the bus here, like, hey,
what are you guys doing.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
This stuff has already been released exactly, and she kind
of blamed him for this. She says, I repeatedly questioned
whether this was the full set of documents responsive to
my request, and as she later explains on Fox.
Speaker 3 (08:25):
News, you're looking at these documents, going, these aren't all
the Epstein files.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Bondi's letter to Patel goes on to say that she
knows there are more Epstein documents. She writes she has
a source in the FBI field office in New York
who told her so, and.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
So a source said, ohoh, all this evidence is sitting
in the Southern District of New York's shock.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
So she then tells Cash Ptel that he has until
February twenty eighth to have the FBI deliver the full
and complete Epstein files to her office.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
And we got hopefully all of them Friday at eight am,
thousands of pages of documents.
Speaker 2 (09:02):
And she goes on to say that she wants a
full investigation as to why her order to the FBI
originally wasn't followed.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
Cash is going to get me and himself really a
detailed report as to why all these documents and evidence
had been withheld, and you know, we're going to go
through it, go through it as fast as we can.
Speaker 2 (09:24):
So, Matt, as you know, I actually asked for that
detailed report, but they withheld it under a FOYA exemption.
But as I reported earlier this year for Bloomberg, after
all this happens, cash Ptel directs FBI agents from the
New York Field Office, the Washington d C. Field Office,
and personnel from the Records Information Dissemination Section or RIZ.
(09:45):
Those are the folks that process FOYER requests. And they
were all holed up in a facility in Virginia which
is called the Central Records Complex. So what do I
mean by processing. Well, when reviewing doc documents for a
ventral release, FOYA officers have to determine what can be
released and what needs to be withheld using nine exemptions
(10:10):
under the FOYA. For example, they would withhold information based
on someone's personal privacy or an ongoing investigation. And they
begin processing these EPSTEIN files right they're they're they're pulling
all nighters, they're you know, working twenty hour shifts just
to process the Epstein files. So I was really interested
(10:32):
in what was taking place. Behind the scenes, you know,
how these requests were processed, how much money they spent
on FBI personnel.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
So this is like a this is like a meta request,
right like you're you're trying to get it's a foya
about a foya. Yes, So most agencies, as they're processing requests,
they have some kind of a database that they keep
track of all the steps received, request forwarded to analyst,
analyst rans search forty two thousand, search results narrowed with
(11:03):
search terms sent, extension, letter to request, or like all
those little details from a lot of agencies get tracked
in some kind of a centralized database, and we usually
refer to those as processing.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Those And that's informative because you sort of learn how
these requests are processed and maybe even you know, learn
about a record keeping system. So I find that to
be good information to get insight into how the agency
is handling a foyer request.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
It kind of reminds me of like the updates or
texts I get from United Airlines about what's going on
with my checked bag. Like it'll say like it's like
through the screening, you've been loaded onto the plane. It's
like it's on the cart, you know. Yeah, but about
way more detail than that.
Speaker 2 (11:53):
So I filed multiple Foyer requests over the summer, and
then Bloomberg sued to compel the really piece of these records,
and recently the FBI released about sixty pages of emails
and other documents I asked for related to the processing
in the Epstein files. So what do you get. We
(12:14):
have a bunch of emails and they're kind of heavily redacted,
but there is still a lot of info in here,
and there's some real interesting takeaways here.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
So let's go through the timeline here. So where does
the story of the emails begin.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
It begins in March, early March twenty twenty five this year.
There's an email here from the assistant director of the
Information Management Division stated March tenth, and it says that
we are prepared to receive boxes tomorrow as New York
(12:53):
agents are traveling to the Washington Field office in the
morning and will arrive to Winchester, that's the location of
the Central Records Complex, where they will start photographing and
we will start scanning and processing the physical files. Why
do you think that they were photographing the files?
Speaker 1 (13:15):
Well, that's interesting because like regular paper documents, you would
think they would just scan them, you wouldn't need to
photograph them. It suggests that potentially there's some things that
aren't like documents, Like there could be physical evidence, right,
there could be a.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
Right, it could be anything. It could be a beer bottle,
it could be a hair brush, you know whatever.
Speaker 1 (13:38):
Yeah, they might be taking photos of those physical items
that you can't scan, but we're just kind of guessing
at that at least for now.
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Yeah. The email goes on to say, once I see
the volume, I'll have a better estimate of processing times.
Although I suggest we do a rolling delivery to further
demonstrate the FBI's commitment to delivery and transparency. Yeah. Interesting,
I mean, I think that's just funny because the FBI
(14:09):
wants to demonstrate to the DOJ that its commitment to transparency.
It also says, by the way, in this email, and
again this very early is March tenth, so it says
that you know, in a meeting with the Criminal Division
in New York and Washington Field offices, there were questions
on the types of reactions the FBI should apply to
(14:31):
these files, and then there's like just a really long
redaction box.
Speaker 1 (14:35):
So do we know anything from these emails about like
what kinds of records the FBI was reviewing.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Oh yeah, yeah, I mean we do. And it's kind
of fascinating. So on one page, they're discussing FBI search
warrant execution photos, FBI interview videos, Julaine Maxwell's prison security footage,
time lapsed video footage from an office, and in parentheses
(15:04):
it says no persons identified and no crimes observed, street
surveillance footage, aerial footage from FBI search warrant execution, police
interview videos.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
And you're just salivating. See you're like, oh man, oh yeah,
I gotta get this stuff.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
And marketing videos, marketing videos, marketing videos. I mean, this
is what's this is what's identifying? Do we not know?
I don't know marketing videos, Yeah, it's it's that like,
is that.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Mister Epstein's like, come visit my island kind of marketing videos?
Speaker 2 (15:38):
I don't know. I mean, I'm trying to figure out
what marketing videos. Yeah. Oh. Actually, the other thing that's
here is they're discussing the prison video of Epstein before
he was found dead and after he was found dead,
and they discussed this video and eight terabytes of data
related to Epstein, so that is some thing that they
(16:00):
were looking at as well.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
So do these documents tell us anything about sort of
the interactions between FBI and DJ, because, like you know,
this is a little bit of a tense This is
after the binders that really weren't anything new, right, So
like you got a little bit of an awkward relationship
between the FBI and the DJ. Are they communicating with
each other at all? Here?
Speaker 2 (16:23):
Great question? I mean, in these records, it does not
appear that they're communicating. And in fact, there's one email
that asked the question of did you happen to send
the results of the below review to DJ at any point?
And the response is we definitely did not provide anything
(16:44):
to DJ, just to HQ headquarters. So it doesn't appear.
And this just may be the fact that it's early
at least in these documents that the FBI released, that
there's no communication with DJ. But I also want to
know that the FBI did withhold one hundred and sixty
pages in its entirety.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Okay, so not a ton about the DOJ FBI relationship.
So do we learn anything about like did they do
this in phases? Like, how did they structure the processing? Yeah,
I see reference to like phase one in phase two.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Yeah, and so another document here. You know, again this
is all in March, and I think what's noteworthy is
the bulk of the work was taking place in March.
You know, almost one thousand FBI agents in personnel working
during the month of March. Just plowing through these records.
(17:41):
You know, there's an email on Sunday, March twenty third,
twenty twenty five, six forty three pm, so you can
already see that they're working on the weekends. Right stand by,
we have identified more files requiring phase one review. Please
continue to refresh as files will be populated momentarily.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
So do we know anything about what those phases mean?
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Now? Unfortunately the documents don't describe what those phases refer
to what it actually means.
Speaker 1 (18:11):
And it looks like so then upon completion of Phase two,
the FBI is going to provide what they call see
through redaction files for DOJ review, which to me reads
like FBI is doing the work of identifying what to redect,
but they're giving it to DOJ so DJ can see
what the plan.
Speaker 2 (18:29):
Is is that how you read that? That's how exactly
how I read that?
Speaker 1 (18:32):
So Jason, in March, they're doing all this processing, So
what's the next kind of big thing that happens.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
Well, the next big thing, at least according to these emails,
is April fifteenth, the tax day. An email goes out
to FBI personnel that says cash Patel quote asked for
status of all remaining Epstein related reviews. Makes sense, Yeah,
it makes sense. But there's no response to that email.
(19:00):
But Ptel is weighing in, right, The director of the
FBI wants an update. Where are we at, you know,
with the Epstein files? So when do they finish the review?
So it appears around May second is when they kind
of wrap things up. An FBI employee from the New
York Field office sends an email and attached a document
titled Epstein Overview Final that summarize their work. Well do
(19:26):
we what does? What does it say? Unfortunately, you know,
the FBI withheld the attachment. No, so they withheld those
attachments citing a number of different FOYA exemptions such as
attorney client privilege, the deliberative process, and others.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
So they're taunting you. They're taunting you by telling you
what's there, but that you can't have it?
Speaker 2 (19:49):
Can I tell you that? As I'm reading these files
and the subject lines refer to a PowerPoint or a document,
I'm like clicking. I'm clicking to see if there's any
chance that like it will magically open up. Did not.
It did not, Bummer, But importantly to me, like this
(20:10):
is the biggest standout on these records. So I asked
how much money they spent on overtime, for example, for
agents who are tasked with processing these records. So go
to page fourteen of the release.
Speaker 1 (20:24):
Okay, so I'm looking at it. It's a chart and
then the division name column says Business Strategy and Analytics Section,
Counterintelligence Division, counter Terrorism Division, Criminal Investigative Division, Cyberdivision, Directorate
of Intelligence EAD, Information and Technology Branch, Finance and Facilities Division,
Human Resources Division, and then everything else is withheld for
(20:49):
secret investigative techniques that if released would harm some future investigations.
Speaker 2 (20:56):
So these are all the divisions that were involved in
the review of the STEAM files. And how do we
know that because the government released an index of what
I requested and the FBI document types is how they
refer to it. And this is a resource planning office.
(21:16):
That's an office within the FBI report that documents the
premium pay hours and premium pay is overtime, nighttime, differential hours,
but more or less, you could think of it as overtime,
and it's the number of hours they recorded on this project, right,
That's how they refer to it. The Epstein files. They
(21:38):
refer to as as a special redaction project. And it's
during the period of March seventeen through March twenty second,
so five or six days, right.
Speaker 1 (21:48):
So they're withholding from you the total amount of pay
across each of those, but they are giving you the
grand total of employees worked premium pay hours total in
premium expenses. So they just did not want to give
you the breakdown. I guess on the theory that somehow
you could interfere with an investigation if they knew the
(22:09):
specifics of how they staffed.
Speaker 2 (22:10):
This up, but you at least know the totals. Yeah,
and those totals are kind of stunning. There were nine
hundred and thirty four employees that were involved in the
processing and review of the Epstein files, fourteen thousand and
two hundred and seventy eight premium pay hours worked for
(22:34):
a total of eight hundred and fifty one thousand, three
hundred and forty four dollars that the FBI spent on
premium pay during the March seventeenth and March twenty second
review of these files. I mean, that's a lot of money.
That seems like a ton of money to me for
the FBI to spend all this. I mean it wasn't
(22:54):
a national emergency. Well, it depends who you ask, Yeah, true.
Speaker 1 (22:58):
I mean I think there's a sizeable number of people,
and I think they probably are skewing towards Trump supporters,
for whom like this is like right, So I'm looking
at these numbers. I'm seeing eight hundred and fifty thousand,
and that's just the overtime. So you know, it's possible
that the overtime might only be like maybe half of
(23:19):
the total cost, So you could easily be looking at
like a couple million dollars total. The people are just working,
which means they're not in the field investigating crimes. They're
not in the office processing Jason's other Foyer requests. Like
it's sort of they drop everything. This is what they're doing,
and all this work gets done and then Pam Bondi
(23:41):
says there's nothing to see here, so nothing more is
going to get released, right, So it sounds like by
May second they've pretty much wrapped up. And then in
May DOJ tells Trump that his name appears in the documents.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
Yeah, that's the timing of it. And shortly thereafter, you know,
we have this unsigned memo saying that they collected three
hundred gigabytes of data, which is video, photographs, actual documents,
and none of that, not a single document from that
(24:17):
trove can be released.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
All right, Well, the clock is ticking on the thirty
day Epstein Transparency Act deadline. So I guess that work
wasn't a waste because it's gonna probably come in pretty handy,
pretty quickly. It's a good thing that they already did
all this back in the summer. Hopefully we're gonna start
seeing some more stuff.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
I want to segue into what may be in the
Epstein files. So earlier this year, I wrote about the
under the Radar Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that was
filed back in I think it was twenty seventeen. It's
nearly nine year old lawsuit that an attorney named Dan
(25:06):
Novak filed on behalf of a reporter for what was
Radar magazine at the time this foil lawsuit that he filed.
They were trying to get at that time all of
the FBI's Epstein files. And in this lawsuit that had
been going on now for nearly nine years, the FBI
released about twelve hundred pages of documents. And these are
(25:30):
the twelve hundred pages more or less that have been
screenshotted and shared on social media. And is this the
same stuff that was in the famous binders? Yeah, exactly
where people who've been following this are like, what is
this trash? We've already seen this, right, that's exactly right.
So here's what happened. I dig into this case and
the FBI and the Justice Department essentially withheld the vast
(25:53):
majority of records, at least ten thousand plus pages, because
of an ongoing investigation. I should go back and say
they denied the request before they moved to a lawsuit.
They said to the reporter that you need to have
a privacy waiver. You need to get Epstein to sign
a privacy waiver before returning over right, And he's.
Speaker 1 (26:13):
Still alive then in twenty seven, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (26:15):
He's still alive. So they're going down the road of
privacy waiver and a privacy excemption. They sue, right, and
so you know how it is. I mean, we both
know how it is. This is dragging out for a while,
but this is really long. This is really it's really long.
The next thing, you know, what happens is fast forwarding here.
But Epstein gets arrested and so now everything is being
(26:37):
withheld under B seven eight and ongoing law enforced. Right,
So they're not getting anything. They're still arguing, going back
and forth. So these folks just continuously hit roadblocks and
roadblocks and roadblocks and they're just unable to pry anything loose.
But they're fighting. They're continuing to fight, right. I respect that.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
It's nice to hear you not be med at other
PEO people making Foyer requests and filing lawsuits.
Speaker 2 (27:02):
Yeah, I mean, I like when other people file Foy
requests and lawsuits, as long as it's not for the
same records. I want fair. So I go into the
docket of this Foyle lawsuit that Radar filed trying to
make these Epstein documents public, and on the docket is
what's called a Vaughn index. This specific document is very
important as far as the Epstein files are concerned. But
(27:23):
before we get into that, Matt, can you explain what
a Vaughn index is and the old Foyle lawsuit that
gave rise to it.
Speaker 1 (27:30):
Yes, Jason, it comes from a case called Vaughn versus Rosen,
and I think kind of like the nineteen seventies, and
what used to happen is agencies would withhold a bunch
of stuff and then they would just dump all the
documents on the court in the lawsuit and be like,
here you go, court, you tell us it's called in
camera review, like where the court in chambers, not in
public reviews these documents. So agencies were just kind of
(27:51):
like dumping all this stuff, and eventually the courts you're like, yeah,
we're not cool with that. You've got to make an
index of what all these documents are, just describe them,
at least in some level of generality, and identify the
specific exemptions that you're claiming for each one of those.
So that has become known as a Vaughn index. So
it's what it sounds like. It's a listing of all
(28:12):
the documents. And sometimes the Vaughn index can have a
whole lot of interesting information even if you can't get
the documents right.
Speaker 2 (28:19):
And we've received many Vaughan indices in our l lawsuits. Yeah, routinely. Yeah,
and they're extremely to me, it's extremely valuable just to
even have a general overview of what the documents are
that they're worth holding.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
So I was talking to who and when they're talking, like,
even if you don't know what they're saying, it can
be really interesting like oh, this person was involved or huh,
that timing is really interesting as to when things were happening.
And you can usually get those kinds of details.
Speaker 2 (28:47):
Yeah, and I feel like their news were then you
could write a story out of it. You have written
stories out of it. Oh yeah, I thought this one
was really important. And it doesn't seem like anyone you know,
even knew it was out there. It had some pretty
i'm good detail of what the documents are that the
FBI had as it relates to Jeffrey Epstein, And obviously
it's a sliver, but what would be in the Epstein
(29:09):
files that are now supposed to be released. And the
index says that the FBI processed but withheld information it
obtained from confidential sources, letters addressed to then US Attorney
for the Southern District to Florida, alex Acosta. He was
the one that ultimately authorized that non prosecution agreement with
(29:32):
Jeffrey Epstein. Subpoenas to MySpace, remember my space? Oh yeah,
that's specifically in this Vaughn index. The handwritten notes of
FBI agents, photographs, grand jury subpoenas is all listed out
in the index. Yeah, and bank records communications with foreign
government agencies. I thought that was really really interesting. Of course,
(29:56):
there are three O two's tell everyone of FBI three
O two.
Speaker 1 (29:59):
Is FBI three H two is a summary of an
FBI interview with someone.
Speaker 2 (30:04):
So in this Vaughn index, so I counted, right, because
it describes the three H twos here. And mind you,
this index relates to the investigation that the Justice Department
and FBI took on between two thousand and six, and
you know when fsc and pleaded guilty in two thousand
and eight. So I counted, and it reveals that the
(30:25):
FBI conducted at lease according to this Vond index, fifty
five interviews with witnesses, victims, potential investigative targets, and importantly,
bank records so you know, I'm hoping we get a
chance to see those. But here's what I like really
zeroed in on is that it shows that some of
the documents that were processed and withheld from Radar Magazine
(30:52):
are from twenty eleven and include dozens of photographs and agents,
interview summaries of third parties, and documents provided to the
FBI by confidential sources.
Speaker 1 (31:05):
That's twenty eleven, twenty eleven, you get charged in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2 (31:10):
No, so we're only talking about the first investigation right
two thousand and six through two thousand and eight. But
it looks like the FBI never really closed it is
that it remained active because there's documents from twenty eleven.
So I just wanted to get your take on this,
because we've dealt with the FBI a lot. Do you
think that people may have just been coming in and
(31:30):
just collecting evidence and submitting it to the investigative file
or could this be kind of evidence that the FBI
still had an active investigation in twenty eleven, three years
after Epstein had pled guilty and at that point was
already out of jail.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
I mean, that's pretty hard to tell. I mean wouldn't
surprise me if victims and others continued to come to
the FBI for good reason dissatisfied with the minimal punishment
that he had gotten to that point. In whether the
FBI did anything with that, we really don't know unless
the Vaughan Index shows like more activity at the time.
(32:06):
But if all you have is like a listing of
a bunch of three h twos of witness interviews, that
it's hard to really say if they were actively investigating
or just sort of passively receiving information.
Speaker 2 (32:16):
Right. Yeah, And based on my reporting, the FBI doesn't
typically close investigations. They're sort of keeping it open. That's
just my experience, right.
Speaker 1 (32:24):
For in these circumstances, that would make perfect sense.
Speaker 2 (32:28):
Yeah, and I didn't see anything in the Vaughn Index
that indicated there was like a case closing memorandum, an
actual document there. So I dug into this over the summer.
This was during that time where everyone was just kind
of clamoring these Epstein files because this was immediately after
the Justice Department FBI said we're not going to release anything.
(32:50):
So now Radar Magazine is eight years into its lawsuit
to get the Epstein records. At this point, they know
the FBI has reviewed the records, and the FBI and
the DOJ say they're not going to release more records.
So the Radar lawsuit has some new urgency. It looks
like they have a pretty clear path to say you
have to release the records. But then Julaine Maxwell appeals
(33:14):
her case Dlayne Maxwell. We now see that her attorney
renewing his requests for the Supreme Court to overturn her conviction.
So there's Radar Magazine again with like ah Man. This
is still an ongoing law enforcement proceeding, so they still
can't get anything. And now that the Supreme Court has
rejected Maxwell's petition, Dan Novak and Radar Magazine has now
(33:37):
appealed to the Second Circuit and so there's an oral
argument set for January twenty eighth. So I still think, Matt,
I just want to see what you think this Foyer
case is the best actually the best chance of getting
anything from the Epstein Files versus Congress's Epstein Files Transparency Act. Yeah.
I think for a couple reasons.
Speaker 1 (33:58):
I mean, first, I think that the Vaughn Index is
going to be a check on whatever gets released, like
if you see that there's things on the Vaughn Index
that don't get released, then there's some splaining to do. Right,
but the lawsuit also has teeth. The Epstein Act has
no teeth. If DOJ decides to violate it, there's no
private cause of action. You and I can't file a
(34:20):
lawsuit over that. You need to have a Foyer case.
And so so that case could end up being the
legal vehicle by which the Epstein Act release actually gets challenged.
I mean, there's so many twists and turns to this,
and like people get charged, and people die, and it
impacts what can be with helld or not, and it's
(34:41):
up and down on appeal and all this stuff going on.
And so that's got to be frustrating to go after
that long. But now it's it's it almost turns out
it does turn out that, like it's great, rightly there
is a live, active Foya case right now that can
be the vehicle by which if the DOJ is trying
to get away with withholding things.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
That's how they can be held accountable for that.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
In how we can courts can guarantee in the public
can guarantee that they're actually releasing everything that they're supposed
to release because the track record ain't that great so far.
Speaker 2 (35:13):
That's kind of how I felt as well. It's like,
this is really the best course of action for the
public to kind of see what's going on. It will
be interesting if the government argues that, well, Donald Trump
is now called for an investigation into Democrats, so we're
going to keep withholding is because of an ongoing investigation.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
Yeah, and that's you know, I mean, it depends on
how bold they are on trying to make those with holding.
And I think they're given the memo from July. I
was representing you right now in a case on this,
and they said, oh, well, there's these investigations, I think
you can make dogument that's a sham. They already said
that there isn't any predicate to investigate anybody else.
Speaker 2 (35:58):
That's right, and doj and FBI, I said in their
joint statement from July quote, there was also no credible
evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of
his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate
an investigation against uncharged third party.
Speaker 1 (36:19):
So the fact that they're now claiming they're going to
do investigation it's not a real investigation, so it doesn't
count for foya purposes. That's how I would argue that,
I don't know some you know, I think there's a fair.
Speaker 2 (36:30):
Chance of succeeding on that, but no guarantees. I mean,
the timing couldn't be better for Radar magazine, right, they
file this back in twenty seventeen, so they're coming up
on nine years. That's a really long time. But man,
the fact that they're still fighting at this very moment,
where the Epstein files have become the biggest political story
(36:53):
of the year, that's wild. So, as I mentioned, there's
a hearing in the Second Circuit, an oral argument that's
scheduled for January twenty eighth. And let me just let me,
let me just explain.
Speaker 1 (37:04):
So that's the Court of Appeals that covers the trial
courts that are in New York and some other adjacent states.
The country is divided into a series of different regional
courts of appeals, so it's above the trial court and
it's before the Supreme Court.
Speaker 2 (37:20):
An oral argument.
Speaker 1 (37:21):
Explain it, man, oral argument is the parties have filed
their briefs and then they come in and they answer
the judges questions and they make their arguments and those
are open to the public. I got a feeling that
it's going to be a packed court room with overflow rooms.
Speaker 2 (37:35):
Yeah, and it's interesting because it's coming, you know, it's
happening right after kind of the deadline for when the
Justice Department is supposed to turn over everything in the
Epstein files. So I just want to ask you this question, Matt.
So let's say the Justice Department does turn over everything
in the Epstein files to Congress, as they are required
(37:57):
to do under the law. Would those same records be
responsive to this FOIL lawsuit.
Speaker 1 (38:05):
Well, the scope of that request was, like all records
from the FBI's investigation, right, all documents relating to the
FBI's investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. Now they made
their request in twenty seventeen. Yeah, there could be a
dispute about whether documents after that date get included or not.
I mean, it certainly would be cut off. At whatever
(38:27):
point the FBI searched then that would typically be the cutoff.
Sometimes it's the date of the request. Sometimes it's whenever
they do the search. So there could be some later stuff,
like you know, because he When did he When did
he die? Twenty nineteen, twenty nineteen. Yeah, so there's a
couple of years there, two thousand nine, a.
Speaker 2 (38:45):
Little bit of there, maybe a little bit of indulgent. Well,
I guess we'll see what happens whether or not the
Justice Department releases the Epstein files to Congress, And I
guess we'll see what happens in late January in the
Radar Foil lawsuit for the FBI files. An upstick from
(39:05):
Bloomberg and No Smiling. This is Disclosure. The show is
hosted by Matt Topic and me Jason Leopold. It's produced
by Heather Schroing and Sean Cannon for No Smiling. Our
editor for Bloomberg is Jeff Grocott. Our executive producers for
Bloomberg are Sage Bauman and me Jason Leopold, and our
executive producers for No Smiling are Sean Cannon, Heather Schrowing,
(39:29):
and Matt Topic. The Disclosure theme song is by Nick,
with additional music by Nick An Epidemic Sound. Sound design
and mixing is by Sean Cannon. For more transparency news
and important document thumps, you can subscribe to my WEEKLYFOYA
Files newsletter at bloomberg dot com slash Foya files that's
(39:49):
Foia files. To get every episode early on Apple podcasts,
become a Bloomberg dot com subscriber today. Check out our
special intro offer right now now at bloomberg dot com
Slash podcast offer, or click the link in the show notes.
You'll also unlock deep reporting data and analysis from reporters
around the world. We'll see you again next Tuesday. Okay,
(40:15):
opening the link. Do do Do Do Do Do Do
Do
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com