Rep. Garcia Calls Out Trump & Bondi: “Release the Epstein Files NOW” — And His Warning Suggests the Cover-Up Is Bigger Than Anyone Realized

WASHINGTON — A simmering political and legal battle over long-sealed Jeffrey Epstein records intensified dramatically this week, after Representative Robert Garcia accused former President Donald Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and senior Justice Department officials of obstructing the release of crucial documents — including grand jury transcripts and thousands of pages of financial records that investigators say could reshape public understanding of the Epstein network.

Garcia, a California Democrat who serves on the House Oversight Committee, issued his warning during a late-night press briefing on Capitol Hill, framing the coming release as a pivotal test of the nation’s capacity for transparency. With a federal judge now permitting the rare unsealing of grand jury testimony related to Epstein’s early cases, and congressional investigators tracing previously undisclosed financial flows between Epstein and several well-connected individuals, speculation around the December 19 deadline has escalated into what lawmakers describe as a “full-scale pressure campaign.”

The Justice Department insists it is preparing responsive documents, but Garcia says the committee has received “nothing, not a single page,” despite months of formal requests. He further alleges that Trump and Bondi — who oversaw prosecutorial decisions in Florida during a crucial period of Epstein’s dealings with state authorities — have taken steps behind the scenes to slow the disclosures.

“Every delay tells its own story,” Garcia said. “And none of those stories make the Department of Justice, the prior administration, or anyone connected to Epstein look good.”

Bondi has rejected such claims as “baseless” and politically motivated, saying all decisions made during her tenure were “appropriate and guided by the evidence available.” Trump has not commented directly, but advisers have dismissed Garcia’s assertions as “manufactured drama.”

Yet the facts on the ground suggest an unusually high level of sensitivity around the files. According to two congressional aides familiar with the subpoenas, the committee has identified large volumes of documents — bank ledgers, wire histories, early investigative notes, draft plea agreements, and correspondence between prosecutors and Epstein’s lawyers — that were never reviewed by Congress during the 2019 investigations. Several relate to Epstein’s decade-long financial entanglements with high-profile figures in business, academia, and foreign governments.

What remains unclear is whether the documents contain new information about how Epstein secured his unusually lenient 2008 plea deal, or whether they reveal financial relationships that federal prosecutors previously declined to pursue. One Oversight Democrat said the committee has been warned the materials may be “far more extensive than the public has been led to believe.”

The White House, attempting to distance itself from the dispute, said it supports “lawful transparency processes,” but officials declined to comment on the committee’s allegations of stonewalling. Privately, aides admit concern that the issue could expand beyond a document fight into a broader credibility test for federal law enforcement.

Legal experts say Garcia’s most explosive claim — that the records point to warnings from prosecutors themselves — touches on a longstanding mystery: why early federal efforts to pursue Epstein were halted, redirected, or quietly narrowed. Several internal DOJ memos from that period remain classified or redacted, and portions of the 2008 negotiations have never been publicly disclosed.

Garcia argues that the lack of clarity itself has become part of the problem. “When the public doesn’t know who objected, who intervened, who benefited, or who looked the other way, that vacuum breeds mistrust,” he said. “These files fill in those blanks.”

Republicans on the committee have expressed frustration as well, though most have stopped short of accusing Trump or Bondi of interference. Still, several GOP staffers say the DOJ’s slow pace has become untenable. “You can’t promise transparency and then deliver silence,” one said. “The public deserves answers.”

The stakes rose further after Judge Miriam Kline’s decision last week authorizing the release of select grand jury transcripts — an exceedingly rare move, granted only after the court determined that the public interest outweighed the usual secrecy laws governing such material. Lawyers familiar with the case say the transcripts could reveal who testified, what they were asked, and whether any prosecutorial discretion was influenced by political or financial pressure.

For now, the December 19 deadline looms with growing intensity. Lawmakers from both parties say they expect the files to be released in some form, even if heavily redacted. Transparency groups have prepared litigation in case the DOJ seeks further delays. And victims’ advocates say they worry that another missed deadline would signal that even now, decades after Epstein first escaped meaningful scrutiny, powerful interests still hold sway.

But it is Garcia’s closing question — delivered more as a warning than an accusation — that has captured Washington’s attention.

“If these files are truly routine, if there is no wrongdoing, no influence, no misconduct,” he asked, “then why are the most powerful figures in this story trying so hard to make sure the public never sees them?”

For the moment, no one in authority appears willing to give an answer.