Epstein files live: Critics accuse Trump of breaking law over heavily redacted release – UK Times

Reacting to the Department of Justice only releasing some of the files, Democrat Suhas Subramanyam from the US House Oversight Committee told CNN: “They are absolutely in violation of the law, they just admitted they were in violation of the law.

“The law said they needed to release everything by today. Not starting today, not part of it today, all of it by today.”

He added: “There’s no excuse for this. They are in violation of the law and we will pursue every possible legal avenue.”

New York senator Chuck Schumer said the “heavily redacted” documents released on Friday were “just a fraction of the whole body of evidence” – adding that pages of blacked out text “violates the spirit of transparency and the letter of the law”.

President Donald Trump did not acknowledge the release of the long-awaited Jeffrey Epstein files in a rally speech Friday night, as his administration was blasted for failing to publish the complete documents despite the deadline being set by law.

The president ignored reporter’s questions about the Epstein files while heading to North Carolina, where he gave a 90-minute speech Friday night.

The document dump by the Department of Justice consists of thousands of photographs and redacted files in the Jeffrey Epstein case, but no context.

In the enormous data sets, which are split into four batches, the files include photos from various trips Epstein took with associates, images inside his properties, and copies of largely redacted documents from inquiries.

Bill Clinton is featured prominently in the files, though the records included no explanation of how the photographs of the former president related to any investigation or the context surrounding them.

Senior Trump White House aides took to X to promote the Clinton photos.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote “Oh my!” and added a shocked face emoji in response to a photo of Clinton in the hot tub.

“They can release as many grainy 20-plus-year-old photos as they want, but this isn’t about Bill Clinton,” Clinton spokesman Angel Ureña said in a statement.

“There are two types of people here,” he said. “The first group knew nothing and cut Epstein off before his crimes came to light. The second group continued relationships after that. We’re in the first. No amount of stalling by people in the second group will change that.”

Mick Jagger and Richard Branson among high-profile figures featured in latest Epstein files release

Mick Jagger and Richard Branson are among the high-profile figures who have featured in the latest release of thousands of documents in the Jeffrey Epstein case. Lord Peter Mandelson, the former UK ambassador to the U.S., is also pictured in the tranche of material.

Being photographed with Epstein or in the files does not implicate a person in the late convicted pedophile’s crimes.

There is also a photo of Ghislaine Maxwell – who is currently serving 20 years in prison for her role in a decade-long scheme to sexually exploit and abuse minor girls with Epstein – posing on the steps of 10 Downing Street.

The partially redacted shot of Branson shows the British businessman with his arm around Epstein as they smile for the camera, with what appears to be two unknown women standing in the background.

There are multiple photos of Mick Jagger sat next to Maxwell and former U.S. president Bill Clinton.

Haley Robson, an Epstein survivor who voted for Trump but has come to regret it, told The Independent, “I knew going into this and just how Trump likes to play his little tactics. I knew with all the obstacles we’ve already rendered and the administration’s flip flop, I already knew that we were not going to see the files as we should be getting them.”

US Senator Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., said that by disregarding the deadline, the Trump administration was denying justice to Epstein’s victims.

He added he was “exploring all avenues and legal tools to get justice for the victims and transparency for the American people.”

If Democratic lawmakers so choose, they could go to court to force the Justice Department to comply with the law, but that would be a lengthy process that plays out while the department releases more files.

Separately, the House Oversight Committee has issued a subpoena for the Epstein files. That could give Congress another avenue to force the release of more information to the committee, but it would require Republicans to join them in contempt-of-Congress proceedings against a Republican administration.

The US Department of Justice published thousands of files related to Jeffrey Epstein, a release long anticipated for its potential to reveal new details about the late sex offender and his connections to powerful people.

However, the release fell short of such expectations due to heavily redacted documents, undated photos and no context.

The partial release angered Democrats who accused the Trump administration of trying to hide information.

Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie had introduced what is known as a discharge petition, which eventually led to the congressional vote that forced the release of the Epstein files.

On Friday, both took to social media to criticise the partial release.

Mr Massie wrote that it “grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law.”

Mr Khanna called the release so far “disappointing.”

“We’re going to push for the actual documents,” he said.