🔥 BREAKING: Trump GOES NUTS After “Epstein Files” BOMBSHELL Sparks Explosive Live TV Meltdown ⚡

WASHINGTON — A long-simmering fight over the government’s handling of records connected to Jeffrey Epstein escalated sharply this week, as House Democrats moved to force a vote on releasing Justice Department files and newly disclosed materials from Epstein’s estate renewed scrutiny of former President Donald J. Trump’s past associations.

The turning point came after Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat from Arizona who won a special election to fill the seat once held by her late father, was sworn into Congress. Within hours, Ms. Grijalva signed a discharge petition compelling House leadership to bring legislation to the floor that would require the release of all remaining federal files related to Epstein. Her signature was the 218th — the number needed to force a vote without the speaker’s approval.

Speaker Mike Johnson confirmed that the House would take up the matter when lawmakers return, signaling that efforts to delay or quietly sideline the issue had reached their limits. “We’re going to put it on the floor and let the people decide,” Mr. Johnson said, while adding that the issue involved “a delicate balance” given ongoing concerns about victims’ privacy and potential legal exposure.

The move immediately intensified pressure on the White House, where officials scrambled to manage the political fallout. According to several people briefed on the matter, senior administration figures convened an emergency meeting that included Attorney General Pam Bondi and F.B.I. Director Kash Patel. Representative Lauren Boebert, the Colorado Republican and outspoken Trump ally, was also present — an unusual inclusion that underscored the internal strains surrounding the issue.

Ms. Boebert is among a small group of Republicans who signed the discharge petition, aligning with Democrats in demanding transparency. White House officials sought to frame the meeting as a good-faith effort to engage Congress. “Doesn’t that show the level of transparency?” the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told reporters, describing outreach to lawmakers as routine. But several participants characterized the session as an effort to persuade Ms. Boebert to withdraw her support — a move she did not make.

The political stakes rose further when Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released a batch of emails obtained from Epstein’s estate. The messages, dating from 2011 to 2019, include references to Mr. Trump and discussions that suggest Epstein believed the former president had knowledge of, or proximity to, women who were later identified as victims of Epstein’s trafficking network.

In one email, Epstein wrote to his longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell that “the dog that hasn’t barked is Trump,” a phrase he appeared to use to suggest that Mr. Trump had remained silent despite spending time at Epstein’s residence. In another, Epstein claimed that Mr. Trump had asked him to leave Mar-a-Lago and had urged Ms. Maxwell to stop recruiting young women there — assertions that have not been independently verified.

A third exchange, involving the author Michael Wolff, appeared to discuss how Trump’s public denials about Epstein could be used against him. The authenticity of the emails has not been challenged by Epstein’s estate, but the claims within them remain contested.

Mr. Trump responded angrily when asked about the disclosures during a brief appearance in the Oval Office, saying he knew “nothing about it” and dismissing the release as a partisan stunt. His aides echoed that line, accusing Democrats of exploiting a painful chapter in American life for political gain.

Still, the convergence of congressional action and document releases has unsettled Republicans, including some of Mr. Trump’s supporters, who have long demanded full disclosure of the Epstein files. For years, calls to “release the list” of Epstein’s alleged clients have circulated across the political spectrum, fueled by distrust of institutions and suspicion that powerful figures were being shielded.

Legal experts say the coming vote could set up a complex clash between Congress and the executive branch. While lawmakers can mandate disclosure, the Justice Department retains authority to redact materials to protect victims’ identities and ongoing investigations. Disagreements over what must be released could end up in court.

Democrats argue that sunlight is essential. “No more delays, no more selective transparency,” one Oversight Committee member said. “The public deserves to know how these cases were handled and who was involved.”

Republicans, meanwhile, are split between those urging caution and those wary of appearing to protect elites. Mr. Johnson’s decision to allow a vote reflects that tension — an acknowledgment that continued obstruction could carry political costs of its own.

As the House prepares to act, the episode underscores how Epstein’s legacy continues to reverberate through American politics, entangling questions of accountability, institutional trust and partisan warfare. Whatever the outcome of the vote, the debate has already exposed deep fractures — not only between the parties, but within them — over how much transparency is owed, and to whom.