Dems Threaten Lawsuit After DOJ Says It Won’t Meet Epstein Deadline

Top Democrats in Congress are threatening to sue after the Justice Department announced that it would not meet the Friday deadline to release all Epstein files.

Representatives Robert Garcia and Jamie Raskin, the ranking members of the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees, respectively, said in a statement, “We are now examining all legal options in the face of this violation of federal law.”

“The survivors of this nightmare deserve justice, the co-conspirators must be held accountable, and the American people deserve complete transparency from DOJ,” their statement read.

The government is required to release the files in full Friday, but Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Fox News in the morning that there would only be a partial release, with more coming in the following weeks.

“So today is the 30 days, when I expect that we’re going to release several hundred thousand documents today. And those documents will come in all different forms, photographs and other materials associated with all of the investigations into Mr. Epstein,” Blanche said, adding, “So I expect that we’re going to release more documents over the next couple of weeks. So today several hundred thousand and then over the next couple weeks, I expect several hundred thousand more.

“The most important thing that the attorney general has talked about, that [FBI] Director [Kash] Patel has talked about, is that we protect victims. So what we’re doing is we are looking at every single piece of paper that we are going to produce, making sure that every victim, their name, their identity, their story—to the extent it needs to be protected, is completely protected,” Blanche continued.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said that “there will be serious legal and political consequences” to the DOJ’s decision. Democratic Senator Ron Wyden said, “Anything short of a full release today is a violation of the law and a continuation of this administration’s coverup on behalf of a bunch of pedophiles and sex traffickers.”

It’s not surprising that the Trump administration would drag its feet on the release, considering that what has already been made public has been so damaging to President Trump. But the government has supposedly spent more than $1 million supposedly redacting national security and victim-related information from the files over the last several months, undercutting the excuses officials are making.

FBI Director Kash Patel continues to come under fire as it appears that a Reddit user did a better job of getting leads on the Brown University shooter than the entire FBI. 

After being unable to find the shooter who killed two students and injured nine at Brown University, as well as the suspect in the killing of an MIT professor in his home on Monday, local police were directed to a post in the r/Providence subreddit, an embarrassing indictment of their own investigative skills. 

The poster, known just as “John,” used his encounter with the suspect—48-year-old Claudio Manuel Neves-Valente—to “blow the case wide open,” according to Rhode Island Attorney General Peter F. Neronha. 

“I’m being dead serious. The police need to look into a grey Nissan with Florida plates, possibly a rental. That was the car he was driving. It was parked in front of the little shack behind the Rhode Island Historical Society on the Cooke St side. I know because he used his key fob to open the car, approached it and then something prompted him to back away,” John posted on Reddit Wednesday night. “When he backed away he relocked the car. I found that odd so when he circled the block I approached the car and that is when I saw the Florida plates. He was parked in the section between the gate of the RIHS and the corner of Cooke and George St.”

John later told police that he ran into Neves-Valente in the bathroom about two hours before the first shots were heard. He said that he and Neves-Valente made eye contact, and that the suspect wasn’t wearing the right clothing for the Rhode Island cold. He asked him why he had been circling the block, to which Neves-Valente replied, “Why are you harassing me?” John then left him alone. Neves-Valente was later found dead in a New Hampshire storage unit with a self-inflicted gunshot wound. 

So Kash Patel’s mighty FBI couldn’t find someone who walked onto one of the country’s most prestigious universities in the middle of the day, and the primary reason local police were even able to find him was because of a witness who happened to post about it on Reddit. And they found him dead, leaving no room for further questioning or new information. This is pretty pitiful for an FBI director who talked such a big game all year. 

“It’s hilarious that a Reddit user cracked the Brown/MIT case before Kash Patel’s FBI and shows how incompetent they are,” one large X account posted. 

“While Kash Patel is making podcast appearances with his girlfriend, a campus custodian and Reddit users are doing his job,” said another, referring to one of the other witnesses. 

Patel celebrated apprehending a person of interest too soon, only to let them free, and then have the FBI wander around until local police found the suspect days later because the internet helped him—which is reminiscent of the failed manhunt for Charlie Kirk’s alleged shooter. That suspect was only apprehended because his own father turned him in. 

To continuously fail at your job while going on podcasts with your girlfriend, being generally angry and antagonistic with Congress and the media, and presenting as some warrior strongman is just par for the course for Patel and the FBI. Lots of bark, no bite. Just a few lucky breaks.  

A Trump-appointed judge was so upset with the living conditions in which ICE detained an immigrant in Long Island, New York, that he threatened to hold the government in contempt.

U.S. District Judge Gary Brown, who was appointed by Trump in 2019, issued a 24-page ruling Thursday vehemently castigating the Department of Homeland Security for refusing to provide photos of a holding room that illegally held a noncitizen for multiple nights, calling it “putrid and cramped.”

“ICE held them, day after day, without access to bunks, bedding, soap, showers, toothbrushes or clean clothes,” Brown stated in his ruling. “The space is unheated or poorly heated at night, while the outside temperature dropped to as low as 21 degrees.... To the extent they could sleep, they did so, crammed on the filthy floor, while the lights blared 24 hours a day.

“After nearly 35 years of experience with federal law enforcement in this judicial district, encompassing service as a prosecutor and a judge, I have never encountered anything like this,” Brown wrote.

Erron Anthony Clarke, the noncitizen in question, filed a habeas corpus petition with the court after being detained by ICE on December 5. Clarke had entered the U.S. legally on an H-2B work visa in 2018, but ended up overstaying the visa before marrying a U.S. citizen in 2023. He applied for permanent residency this year, but was detained earlier this month and thrown into a small cell with eight other men.

The cell, located in the federal courthouse in Central Islip, New York, had an open toilet and was only “designed to briefly detain a single individual,” Brown wrote, noting that Clarke was held in the crowded cell long beyond ICE’s own internal standards allow. Brown ruled on December 11 that Clarke’s detention violated due process and ordered him released.

Clarke’s ordeal exposed something bigger in Brown’s eyes, particularly “ICE’s horrendous detention practices.”

“This case implicates something more,” Brown said. “There is evidence that the conditions of the detention are substandard, abhorrent and likely unlawful.”

But when Brown asked ICE and DHS for a timeline of Clarke’s location during his detention, and for photos of his holding cell, the government gave “evasive and demonstrably false” information on Clarke’s whereabouts and refused to hand over photographs. The timeline Brown received, for example, claimed that the government moved Clarke between facilities in eight minutes, despite them being separated by about a 35-minute drive.

“These misstatements of fact serve to undermine the information presented and the reliability of the records maintained by ICE,” Brown wrote in his ruling, giving the government until December 30 to argue against being held in contempt.

It’s telling that the White House is going so far in its extreme, and probably unlawful, immigration enforcement that even a judge Trump chose is ruling against the administration. The story of DHS, ICE, Border Patrol, and other federal agencies in Trump’s second term is that of moral bankruptcy, violating laws and basic human rights to enact a racist immigration policy.

The political party that has historically pitched itself as a proponent of “states’ rights” is now advocating for a mass federal seizure of state land.

Speaking with Newsmax on Friday, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum suggested that the next course of action to curb immigration across the southern U.S. border should involve transferring “strips” of California to the federal government.

“We have an opportunity to take a strip of land right along the border, transfer it to the military for a three-year period. Which then, if someone crosses into our country and steps on that, they’re stepping on a military installation,” Burgum said. “That gives our troops that are down there working to secure that border more authorities about detaining people. If they step on that land, it helps to improve the security.”

It’s an escalation of a plan that the White House enacted earlier this year, when it took a  60-foot-wide strip of federal land across three states and turned the entire region into a “military installation.” Doing so effectively allowed Donald Trump to sidestep the Posse Comitatus Act, circumventing Congress to wield the military for border control.

The military base designation was supposed to expand the troops’ authority, granting them the ability to “temporarily detain trespassers” and to “conduct cursory searches of trespassers … to ensure the safety of U.S. service members and Department of Defense (DoD) property.”

But even that effort was unsuccessful. In May, a federal judge dismissed charges against nearly 100 immigrants that the administration claimed had entered the “national defense” zone, determining that the government had failed to prove the immigrants were aware they were entering a restricted military area.

Seizing land in California could prove to be an even bigger catastrophe. In the same interview, Burgum—the former governor of North Dakota—suggested that the best location to usurp state land would be “near the Pacific,” on the basis that the region is “an area of high traffic.”

Not even Fox Business can pretend like President Donald Trump isn’t wrecking the economy.

Fox Business anchors Lauren Simonetti and Stuart Varney reported Friday that a University of Michigan survey found that an index of consumer sentiment had sunk even further since mid-December.

There had been a “surprise drop” in consumer sentiment to 52.9 percent confidence in the economy, Simonetti said. That’s down from 53.3 percent just slightly earlier this month, CNBC reported separately.

“Consumers are just worried about the price of things and long-run inflation expectations as well,” Simonetti added.

“But with rather these dull numbers, the market seems to like it. Perhaps implying that we’ll get more Fed rate cuts,” Varney noted.

“The weakness, I think, is attractive. Bad news is actually good news for the market, maybe.”

While it may be good for the market in the short term, consumer confidence is an accurate means of understanding the current economic situation and consumers’ willingness to spend, borrow, or invest. It can take several months before low consumer confidence is fully realized.

In December 2024, before Trump ever imposed his slate of disastrous economic policies, such as tariff wars and mass deportations, Michigan’s consumer sentiment index had been 74 percent, indicating a nearly 30 percent plummet year over year.

And it gets worse.

The survey’s rating of the “current economic conditions” was only 50.4 percent, down from 51.1 in November. CNBC reported that this was “a new all-time low” for the study going all the way back to the 1970s. In December, the rating had been 75.1, showing a nearly 33 percent drop year over year.

A livestream of a bearded man who goes by “Real Matt Money” inexplicably took over the White House home page on Thursday night, leading the public to ask if the page had been hacked or if the Trump administration was getting financial advice from a self-described “shepherd for individual investors.”

As Bloomberg reported, the livestream appeared and disappeared on the White House website in about an hour.

Real Money Matt seemed to be just as surprised as the rest of us.

“If I had known I would be live for the WORLD to see, I likely would have had a different message than personal finance,” he wrote Friday on X. “Let me meet the @POTUS.”

While Matt took it in stride, the randomness of his live appearance on the White House website does lend itself to questions regarding just how serious the Trump administration is about security, especially since it brought us the Signalgate scandal just one month in.

The White House has yet to publicly comment.

The more details that emerge about Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump, the clearer it is that the two shared a wildly unconventional—and creepy—relationship.

Hours after The New York Times reported Thursday that Epstein and Trump bonded over “trophy hunting,” investigative reporter Nicholas Confessore told MS NOW that Epstein frequently allowed his friends and associates to listen in on private phone calls where he and Trump shared details of their “sexual conquests.”

“So we spoke to several former assistants and employees of Jeffrey Epstein’s,” Confessore said. “And he had a habit of putting Donald Trump and other famous friends on the phone. It was partly a power play and partly a way that he groomed people. ‘See how powerful I am. I can put this person on the phone. I can get them on the phone, I can put them on speaker. We’re friends. That’s how powerful I am.’

“It was a way that he groomed people and he would put Donald Trump on the phone. They would talk about sex,” he added.

Trump has vehemently denied this year that he had any sort of meaningful connection to the deceased child sex trafficker, but that wasn’t always the case. Over the last couple of decades, Trump has switched his tune on Epstein several times. In 2002, Trump told New York magazine that Epstein was a “terrific guy.” He wrote a repugnant and allusory letter to Epstein for the sex trafficker’s 50th birthday. They were spotted socializing together, with young women many times, and even ended up living in the same Florida neighborhood.

But since ascending to the forefront of American power, Trump has claimed that he had “no relationship” with Epstein, pitching—despite troves of evidence to the contrary—that he was “not a fan of his.”

People around the pair of socialites, however, were under the impression that Epstein and Trump were each other’s closest friends, and Epstein reportedly believed it too.

“I think that Jeffrey Epstein thought he was Donald Trump’s closest friend for a period,” Confessore said. “They spent a lot of time talking on the phone about women and sexual conquests. They spent time at Trump Tower or over at Jeffrey Epstein’s offices nearby on Madison Avenue. They flew on each other’s planes, and they partied together a lot. And a lot of parties with women, people who are younger than they are.”

The phone calls were an instance of Epstein using Trump, wielding the real estate magnate’s name to advance his own social standing and access, according to Confessore.

Trump has not been charged with any crimes related to Epstein or his longtime associate and sex-trafficking partner, Ghislaine Maxwell.

But the country is on the precipice of knowing just about everything there is to know about the pair’s scandalous relationship. The administration is preparing to release the totality of the Epstein files Friday, as required by a law passed by Congress last month.

So far, the administration has already attempted to waylay public expectations that the files will be exposed to the full breadth of the document load, with FBI Director Kash Patel claiming that his agency is doing everything it can to release the portions of the files that are “lawful,” despite the fact that Congress mandated their entire release.

A Wisconsin judge has been convicted of obstructing federal government proceedings by allowing an immigrant man to exit her courtroom through a side door.

Judge Hannah Dugan was acquitted Thursday night of a lesser charge of obstructing an arrest, but she still faces up to five years in prison. Having now been convicted of a felony, she is likely ineligible to continue serving from the bench. The judge’s lawyers have vowed to appeal the ruling.  

Witnesses testified that Dugan sent away several plainclothes Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents who came to the Milwaukee County Courthouse to detain Eduardo Flores-Ruiz. She then told Flores-Ruiz’s lawyer that she would reschedule his hearing and directed them to exit her courtroom through a door typically used by the jury. 

In an audio recording played in court, Dugan could be heard conferring with the court reporter. “I’ll do it,” she said. “I’ll get the heat.”

Flores-Ruiz then used a public courthouse hallway, walked past a couple of DEA agents, got into an elevator, and exited the building before ICE officers could stop him.

Dugan’s lawyers had cited Trump v. United States in arguing that their client had judicial immunity for official acts and broad authority over her own courtroom. 

The ruling is a victory for President Donald Trump’s Justice Department, which seeks to paint judges who don’t greenlight his immigration crackdown as “deranged” rogue actors.

Protests and event messages about ICE could now be grounds for domestic terrorism investigations by the FBI.

The Guardian reports that the bureau has launched cases in 23 regions across the U.S. related to “threats against immigration enforcement activity.” The investigations fit into the new NSPM-7 national security strategy targeting supposed anti-American activity on the left. That document referred to protests against ICE in Los Angeles and Portland as examples of “political violence.”

The investigations were laid out in an internal report drafted by the FBI in November and shared with other law enforcement agencies. The report mentions that using encrypted messaging apps to discuss ICE was considered an indicator of whether a person would engage in terrorism, as well as “stockpiling or distributing firearms” but also “conducting online research” about agents.

The document has alarmed privacy advocates and civil rights groups, who said that it confirmed their fears that the NSPM-7 document would be used to crack down on dissent. In over 30 states, the FBI has opened cases related to anti-ICE activity or NSPM-7, a map in the document shows.

“[The FBI document] is infused with vague and overbroad language, which was exactly our concern about NSPM-7 in the first place. It invites law enforcement suspicion and investigation based on purely first amendment-protected beliefs and activities,” Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU National Security Project, told The Guardian. “People who are entirely innocent of any wrongdoing can be subjected to surveillance or investigation. That imposes stigma. It can wrongly [enmesh] people in the criminal legal system.”

Coupled with its declaration that antifa, or anti-fascism, is a terrorist organization, these actions by the Trump administration seek to clamp down on any protests or dissent against its policies. It’s not far-fetched to imagine federal law enforcement cracking down on President Trump’s political opposition, using these documents to justify its actions, all in the name of fighting terrorism.

Right-wing commentators Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson used their speeches at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest to take shots at each other, only further emphasizing the right’s growing divide on Israel, conspiracy theories, and Jeffrey Epstein.

In his speech Thursday, Shapiro called out Carlson, Candace Owens, Megyn Kelly, and Steve Bannon for being “frauds and grifters.”

“The conservative movement is in serious danger,” he said, claiming it was rife with “charlatans who claim to speak in the name of principle but actually traffic in conspiracism and dishonesty.”

“When Steve Bannon, for example, accuses his foreign policy opponents of loyalty to a foreign country, he’s not actually making an argument based in evidence,” Shapiro continued. “He’s simply maligning people that he disagrees with. Which is indeed par for the course, for a man who was once a PR flack for Jeffrey Epstein.”

The TPUSA crowd reacted with an “oooh.”

This attack on Bannon—the right-wing provocateur instrumental in getting Trump elected to his first term—elicited mixed reactions.

“Shapiro constantly defames Jews who hold liberal politics or who oppose Israel’s policies as not really Jewish,” Zaid Jilani wrote. “Good for the goose good for the gander.”

“Shapiro is slamming Bannon for his ties to Epstein, but is SILENT about Trump having ties to Epstein. The irony …” wrote another.

Shapiro moved on to attacking Tucker for his platforming of Candace Owens—who has pushed the theory that Charlie Kirk was murdered for his rejection of Israel and AIPAC—and Nick Fuentes, who is a Nazi.

“The people who refused to condemn Candace’s truly vicious attacks—and some of them are speaking here tonight—are guilty of cowardice,” Shapiro said, obviously referring to Carlson. “If you host a Hitler apologist, Nazi-loving, anti-American piece of refuse like Nick Fuentes … you ought to own it.”

Carlson was apparently laughing backstage during this.

“That guy is pompous,” he said, according to Politico. “Calls to deplatform at a Charlie Kirk event? That’s hilarious.”

Carlson addressed the crowd afterward, attacking the rampant Islamaphobia present in Shapiro’s pro-Israel wing of the movement. (Carlson has recently been accused of being anti-American for his ties to Qatar, his criticism of Israel, and his acknowledgment of its genocide in Palestine. He has also faced criticism for his platforming of neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes.)

“Most Americans have more in common with each other than they disagree on … and almost everyone is willing to tolerate a good-faith argument about how to get there,” he said. “Except a few. And they’re the ones running around calling everyone an antisemite.”

“Attacking millions of Americans because they’re Muslims? It’s disgusting. And I’m a Christian!” he continued. “I’m not a Muslim, I know there’s a lot of effort to claim I’m a secret jihadi, I’m not.… What the hell are you doing? What you’re doing is trying to divide the country. All these fake race wars that they’re always promoting?”

Regardless of where you fall on this rift, it’s clear that there is no unified MAGA front right now, at least at the punditry level. People like Carlson are tired of Trump governing as a neocon while campaigning as a populist, continuing to fund endless wars for Israel, trying to do regime change in Venezuela, and spewing racism. Those like Shapiro have a more traditional view of the situation. Only time will tell whose voice is the loudest by 2028.