Frustration grows inside the White House after DOJ's Epstein review comes up empty
A recently released Justice Department memo finding no evidence that the late disgraced financier and convicted sex offender was murdered has become a target of deepening scrutiny from the MAGA-aligned right, leaving many in Trump's orbit unconvinced that the matter has been adequately addressed, according to multiple people briefed on the situation.
Much of the scrutiny has fallen on Bondi, who was among many in Trump's orbit who publicly suggested there was more to reveal about Epstein's death, though a senior administration official said Trump was not acutely focused on her.
The official said that Trump has been annoyed but not necessarily with Bondi: 'He's annoyed that people still care about Jeffrey Epstein.'
Trump on Tuesday attempted to dismiss the controversy, bristling at a question during a televised Cabinet meeting and calling renewed interest in Epstein 'a desecration' compared to what he said were more pressing concerns like the flooding in Texas.
But behind the scenes, annoyance among Trump officials and allies with how the investigation was handled has mounted.
'That was him trying to tell his base that it was time to move on,' one prominent Trump ally said of the president's comments. 'We aren't ready to move on.'
One Trump administration official argued Bondi 'bungled the case from the start' by overpromising potential bombshell findings. Bondi's own claim, made during a Fox News interview in February, that she had a so-called Epstein client list on her desk and intended to release it exacerbated the perception that she underdelivered.
No such list exists, the Justice Department concluded in the memo released Monday.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt defended Bondi on Tuesday. 'President Trump is proud of Attorney General Bondi's efforts to execute his Make America Safe Again agenda, restore the integrity of the Department of Justice, and bring justice to victims of crime. The continued fixation on sowing division in President Trump's Cabinet is baseless and unfounded in reality,' she said in a statement to CNN.
Part of the frustration with Bondi stems from how Monday's report, which was first leaked on Sunday during a holiday weekend, was rolled out.
'It wasn't the roll out we would have liked,' one senior administration official told CNN.
The DOJ memo contradicted many of the conspiracy theories pulsating on the right surrounding Epstein – including that he was murdered and that authorities were keeping secret a list of high-profile clients possibly involved in wrongdoing.
Those findings weren't a surprise to Trump on Monday. FBI Director Kash Patel and Bondi briefed him last Wednesday on the lack of evidence to support those theories, according to two sources familiar with the meeting.
During Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, Bondi attempted to clarify her February remarks:
'I did an interview on Fox, and it's been getting a lot of attention because I said I was asked a question about the client list, and my response was, it's sitting on my desk to be reviewed – meaning the file along with the JFK, MLK files as well. That's what I meant by that,' she told reporters.
Her explanation, though, did little to appease many MAGA voices who have long been fixated on unearthing potential accomplices to Epstein's many sex crimes against minors. Influential far-right activist Laura Loomer – who met separately in recent months with both Trump and Vice President JD Vance — continued to call for Bondi's dismissal over the episode.
Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon dedicated much of his Monday 'War Room' show to the memo, questioning the administration's dedication to transparency. Bannon later argued to CNN the federal investigation appears to have been mismanaged.
A Trump adviser called the memo's release a 'political nightmare' and suggested it could've been published before the holiday weekend when fewer people might see it – or perhaps even after the 2026 midterm elections.
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson argued Bondi is 'covering up crimes, very serious crimes by their own description,' on his podcast.
Roseanne Barr took aim at Trump himself.
'Mr. President- Yes, we still care about Epstein. Is there a time to not care about child sex trafficking? Read the damn room,' she posted on X.
The search for explosive deep-state secrets hidden inside the federal Epstein investigation began coming apart weeks into the second Trump administration.
By mid-March, as hundreds of FBI agents were ordered to work overnights and weekends to review thousands of pages and hours of video from the investigation, there were no bombshells in the files. It became clear that officials had no reason to change the conclusion reached under Attorney General William Barr, who had himself reviewed some of the materials, that the sex offender had died by suicide, according to people familiar with the matter.
The Epstein case has long been the focus of conspiracy theories, fueled by his death inside a federal prison in 2019 while he awaited trial. The financier's association with prominent and powerful figures, ranging from former President Bill Clinton to Trump, fed suspicions that other high-profile people were involved in his crimes and someone might be covering up their identities.
It was amid that swirl of intrigue that officials embarked on their quest to once and for all release documents to answer many of the questions that have grown into a cottage industry on the internet.
But a major problem soon emerged: Most of the material still being held by investigators could not be released under federal law, which protects the privacy of Epstein victims and people not charged with crimes. FBI and Justice officials realized that releasing thousands of pages blacked out by redactions wouldn't help resolve the issue on right-wing social media, where Trump allies have fanned conspiracy theories about Epstein.
The overall goal – transparency promised by the president – has been accomplished, a Justice official said. But the slow-rolling fiasco could have been avoided, some officials acknowledge.
The first public signs of trouble came in late February when Bondi helped orchestrate a scoop for MAGA social media influencers called to the White House, presenting them with binders of documents.
But those binders contained hundreds of pages that mostly had been public for years.
The episode landed with a thud among many longtime followers of conspiracy theories surrounding Epstein, and some who had once championed the effort turned on Bondi, accusing her online of withholding damaging information.
Loomer told CNN that a White House adviser urged her and other prominent Trump supporters earlier this year to soften their criticism. She did not identify the adviser. 'We were told to leave her alone,' Loomer said. 'But it's gotten to a point where it's unsustainable.'
The lack of substantive revelations in the binders wasn't only a surprise to the MAGA faithful who lashed out immediately, but also to the attorney general and other Justice and White House officials.
Bondi's embarrassment showed in a sharply worded memo to Patel, who had recently been confirmed and who had played only a minimal role in the White House Epstein file debacle, according to people familiar with the matter.
'I repeatedly questioned whether this was the full set of documents,' Bondi wrote, adding that she was surprised to later learn that there were thousands of documents held by the FBI's New York office, which had led the Epstein investigation. She ordered the additional documents produced to her office by 8 a.m. the next day, saying, 'I am directing you to conduct an immediate investigation into why my order to the FBI was not followed.'
But Bondi, Patel and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino found themselves under attack online from so-called Epstein truthers. And every time they posted on social media, they were barraged by erstwhile supporters demanding the Epstein files.
Bongino and Patel are aware of the disappointment from the right-wing media stars among whom they were formerly major players, a person familiar with the matter said. 'There's the world of social media and then there's the real world,' a person familiar with their thinking said. 'Ultimately, some people aren't going to like how it is.'
By May, Bongino and Patel had begun trying to manage expectations. In Fox News interviews, they said plainly that Epstein had committed suicide.
'The evidence we have in our files clearly indicates it was in fact a suicide,' Bongino said in an interview on Fox's 'Hannity,' promising again that they were preparing to release more investigative materials.
On Monday, Justice and FBI officials conceded there would be no more releases of information from the Epstein files, attempting to squelch the flames they had fanned for months.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
21 minutes ago
- Washington Post
A surprise IRS move on political endorsements leaves faith leaders and experts divided
WASHINGTON — A surprise move by the IRS that would allow pastors to back political candidates from the pulpit without losing their organization's tax-exempt status is drawing praise from conservatives and even some progressive religious groups but concern from other leaders of faith, along with tax and legal experts. A 1954 provision in the tax code called the Johnson Amendment says churches and other nonprofits could lose their tax-exempt status if they participate or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. The rule was rarely enforced.
New York Times
24 minutes ago
- New York Times
Boy, 13, Started California Wildfire With Illegal Fireworks, Police Say
A 13-year-old boy was arrested this week, accused of setting off illegal fireworks that sparked a wildfire in Laguna Beach, Calif., that burned nearly five acres and led to evacuations and power outages, the authorities said. The blaze, called the Rancho fire, started just after 2 p.m. Monday, as flames burned along a hillside, the Laguna Beach Police Department said in a statement. As the fire spread to 4.6 acres, an evacuation order was issued for homes on four streets, and community centers were opened as shelters for displaced residents, officials said. By 5 p.m. Monday, the mayor had told residents in a video posted on Facebook that officials already suspected that the fire had been started by fireworks. The police said on Tuesday that witnesses had reported seeing a juvenile who was 'possibly involved in setting off fireworks.' Two juveniles were detained for questioning, but were released after they were found to have been witnesses, the police said. Investigators later obtained video evidence that they said showed another juvenile 'lighting a firework and fleeing the scene.' They identified the suspect as a 13-year-old boy and obtained a warrant for his arrest, the police said. The teenager was arrested on suspicion of felony reckless burning of forest land, the police said. Because of 'the absence of any injuries or immediate threat to structures,' he was processed at police headquarters before being released to his parents. The case will be submitted to the Orange County district attorney's office for review and the possible filing of criminal charges, the police said. A spokeswoman for the district attorney's office said California welfare law prevented her from discussing the case. Niko King, the Laguna Beach fire chief, said that around 200 firefighters, two planes, five helicopters and drones were deployed to battle the blaze, as officials used infrared scans to monitor its progress and containment efforts. The evacuation order was lifted just after 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, city officials. said. The fire was fully contained by 8 a.m. Wednesday and the roads that had been closed reopened to traffic.
Associated Press
25 minutes ago
- Associated Press
A surprise IRS move on political endorsements leaves faith leaders and experts divided
WASHINGTON (AP) — A surprise move by the IRS that would allow pastors to back political candidates from the pulpit without losing their organization's tax-exempt status is drawing praise from conservatives and even some progressive religious groups but concern from other leaders of faith, along with tax and legal experts. A 1954 provision in the tax code called the Johnson Amendment says churches and other nonprofits could lose their tax-exempt status if they participate or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. The rule was rarely enforced. While the IRS did not go as far as calling for the repeal of the Johnson Amendment, it said in court documents Monday that communications in good faith by a church to its flock does not amount to 'intervening' or affecting the outcome of a political campaign. 'Communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted,' the IRS said. The new IRS interpretation came after decades of debate and, most recently, lawsuits from the National Religious Broadcasters association and other conservative churches complaining that the amendment violates their First Amendment rights, among other legal protections. Speaking to reporters Wednesday, President Donald Trump called the IRS' assessment 'terrific.' 'I love the fact that churches can endorse a political candidate,' he said. 'We have a lot of respect for the people that lead the church.' While some congregations see a new freedom to speak openly about preferred candidates, others see openings for campaign finance corruption, new pressures on religious leaders and an overall entanglement between church and state. Praises to the IRS Robert Jeffress, pastor of a Baptist megachurch in Dallas and a Trump ally, called it 'the right decision.' He said his church's tax-exempt status was threatened because of an IRS investigation into their political endorsements, costing the megachurch hundreds of thousands in legal fees. 'The IRS has no business dictating what can be said from the pulpit,' he said. 'They need to stay the heck out of our churches.' Calvary Church Chino Hills, a Southern California megachurch led by Jack Hibbs, has been endorsing candidates for years, particularly in local elections. Gina Gleason, director of the church's political engagement team, said she hopes the move will encourage smaller churches previously hesitant for fear of triggering an IRS response. 'I'd have thought if the IRS had targeted any church it would've been us,' she said. 'But we got sound legal advice from lawyers and religious liberty organizations that explained we were within our constitutional rights.' For Democrats trying to connect with people of faith, this decision is timely, said Doug Pagitt, pastor and executive director of Vote Common Good, a progressive and evangelical Christian organization. 'Conservative pastors who have been blatantly endorsing candidates regardless of the Johnson Amendment over the years created a disadvantage causing Democrats to step away from faith voters,' he said. 'There was a true imbalance between how many more opportunities there were for Republican voters.' The IRS statement, Pagitt says, also puts an end to the delicate dance pastors and congregations were forced to do. 'You could talk about politics in the church gymnasium, but not in the sanctuary or from the pulpit,' he said. 'Pastors could express political opinions on their personal Facebook page, but not on the church's website. It's just silly.' Church politicking concerns Tax and constitutional law experts, meanwhile, are wary of what entanglements could arise from the IRS' new position. Philip Hackney, a University of Pittsburgh School of Law professor who studies the relationship between churches and tax authority, said the decree could allow churches to push new boundaries. 'It's essentially creating a political intervention tax shelter for churches,' Hackney said. 'It has the potential to corrupt their mission, more towards politics and away from their true beliefs.' Other religious groups, particularly in faith communities of color, are viewing it with skepticism. The Rev. Mark Whitlock, senior pastor at Reid Temple African Methodist Episcopal Church in Glenn Dale, Maryland, said it raises more questions than answers. 'From those of us in the Black church, this decision is being viewed with caution, apprehension and skepticism,' he said. 'The question we're asking is: 'Why now?'' Whitlock said he will continue to do what the Black church has always done — educating and civically engaging parishioners. His congregants' political views vary, too. 'If I do say something in church, it needs to be God-centered, God-focused and a revelation that God gave you,' Whitlock said. 'You can't go to the pulpit as a campaign manager.' Raymond Chang, president of the Asian American Christian Collaborative, warned that a repeal of the Johnson Amendment could help tether some congregations to certain parties or candidates. 'This can lead to a partisan identity becoming the primary marker of a church or congregation, over a commitment to the Gospel, which cuts against both existing major parties,' he said. 'Church leaders may also face pressure to make political endorsements.' What comes next Nearly 80% of U.S. adults believe churches and other houses of worship should not come out in favor of one political candidate over another during elections, a Pew Research Center survey conducted in 2022 found. White evangelicals and Black Protestants were a little more divided on the matter, with about one-third in each group favoring political endorsements. But in every other religious group surveyed, there was a strong consensus against political involvement by houses of worship. Others are more optimistic that the IRS statement puts to bed unfounded criticisms against the agency for a rarely enforced rule. Terry Lemons, a former IRS official who began at the agency under Democratic President Bill Clinton, called it a 'common sense approach through a narrowly written filing.' Roger Colinvaux, a Catholic University of America law professor, said he would caution churches against 'overinterpreting' the IRS statement. He points out that the word 'endorse' does not appear anywhere in it and said his biggest concern is religion being used as a partisan tool in campaigns. Pagitt at Common Good said not all pastors will seize the opportunity because they might be ministering to a divided congregation or might not be comfortable mixing politics and religion. Chieko Noguchi, spokesperson for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said Tuesday that the IRS statement doesn't 'change how the Catholic Church engages in public debate.' 'The Church seeks to help Catholics form their conscience in the Gospel so they might discern which candidates and policies would advance the common good,' Noguchi said. 'The Catholic Church maintains its stance of not endorsing or opposing political candidates.' ___ Bharath reported from Los Angeles. ___ AP's religion coverage receives support through the AP's collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.
