“The DOJ may be releasing the list of Jeffrey Epstein’s clients? Will that really happen?” a Fox News host asked US Attorney General Pam Bondi on February 21, 2025. “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review,” Bondi replied.

On July 8, Bondi’s department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation released an unsigned memo claiming that a “systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.'”

Something of a bombshell, but the shell carried two bigger payloads inside.

First: “We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

Second: “[N]o further disclosure would be appropriate or warranted.”

Bondi defended the “no further disclosures” decision (while also trying to explain missing time from video covering Epstein’s cell at the time he allegedly killed himself)  at a cabinet meeting because most or all of the unreleased evidence supposedly consists of child pornography. Not child pornography of Epstein or his “clients” sexually abusing minors, just stuff he downloaded.

Move along, folks, nothing to see here.

And yet the UK’s Prince Andrew settled a lawsuit (reputedly for $16.9 million) with one of Epstein’s victims, who claims that Epstein delivered her into Andrew’s clutches for sex while she was a minor.

And Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell sits in prison, sentenced to 20 years in prison for sex trafficking and conspiracy.

And records HAVE been released including the names of many prominent individuals — including one Donald J. Trump — who flew on Epstein’s private plane (“The Lolita Express”), in some cases to and from his private island where lavish “sex parties” were allegedly held.

There may or may not be a piece of paper somewhere labeled “my client list, signed, Jeffrey Epstein,” but no “evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties?” If that’s a joke, it’s not funny. But it isn’t a joke. It’s a lie. Period.

Who were Epstein’s accomplices in crime? We may never know.

But the US Department of Justice knows, and would rather keep that information to itself than tell the rest of us about it.

Now, I’m not saying Donald Trump’s name would appear on a list of those who provably had sex with minors courtesy of Epstein’s trafficking operation. Given his known history and predilections, and his long public friendship with Epstein, it wouldn’t surprise me, but hey, maybe not.

Trump’s own name wouldn’t have to be on that list to make him want to quash the matter, though. A number of prominent, wealthy, and powerful people have already been shown, beyond doubt, to have associated with Epstein.

Some of those prominent, wealthy, and powerful people have already been publicly accused of taking part in, and advantage of, his depredations.

Any or all of those prominent, wealthy, and powerful people are well-positioned to bludgeon Trump with threats, buy his favors with inducements, or become useful targets for extortion by a president who regularly, even openly, engages in that practice.

We may not know the reasons for this blatant cover-up, but we all know that’s exactly what’s going on here.

Thomas L. Knapp (X: @thomaslknapp | Bluesky: @knappster.bsky.social | Mastodon: @knappster) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

PUBLICATION/CITATION HISTORY