Bill Clinton. Photo via AP

The Department of Justice violated federal law when it failed to meet the Epstein Files Transparency Act deadline requiring release of all unclassified records within thirty days of enactment. That deadline has passed and the files remain sealed, but Bill Clinton just demonstrated that Trump could force their release with a single public statement demanding the same transparency Clinton requested on December 22. Trump’s continued refusal to make that statement now functions as its own answer to questions about what those files might contain.

On December 22, 2025, through spokesman Angel Ureña, Clinton publicly called for the Department of Justice to release every federal record bearing his name related to Epstein without redaction beyond what law strictly requires for victim protection. No court ordered this transparency, and no subpoena compelled this disclosure. He chose openness over institutional protection, and that choice just created a legal and political trap every other person named in those files cannot escape.

An annual subscription is currently 20% off for a limited time. Join the small circle of readers who fund this work so it can continue.

Donald Trump flew on Epstein’s plane and the flight logs document it. Former Prince Andrew paid Virginia Giuffre a settlement exceeding twelve million pounds to avoid civil trial. Alan Dershowitz negotiated the 2008 non-prosecution agreement that let Epstein plead to state charges while avoiding federal prosecution. Every one of these men could make the exact same request Clinton just made. As of publication, no major news outlet has reported Trump, Dershowitz, or Prince Andrew making comparable statements demanding release of records bearing their names.

Here is the trap Clinton just set. The Epstein Files Transparency Act, Public Law 119-38, became federal law on November 19, 2025. The statute gave the Department of Justice thirty days to release all unclassified records relating to Jeffrey Epstein including investigations, prosecutions, flight logs, travel records, communications about criminal activities, immunity agreements, and documentation of his detention and death. That mandatory deadline was December 19, 2025, and the Justice Department violated federal law by keeping the files sealed beyond that date. No one in major media has pressed DOJ leadership on this violation, allowing the story to disappear into holiday news cycles.

Clinton just dragged it back into daylight by demonstrating that institutional delay cannot survive when the very subjects of those records seek their release. If Trump makes the same request, DOJ loses every excuse for continued delay. The Attorney General cannot claim privacy concerns when the person named in the files is demanding disclosure. The statute already prohibits redactions for embarrassment or reputational harm. If Trump, Dershowitz, and Prince Andrew all made Clinton’s demand, DOJ would be legally compelled to process and release those files immediately or face contempt charges from Congress for violating the Epstein Files Transparency Act. If Trump refuses, his refusal becomes the story and transforms inaction into active choice to suppress evidence. Clinton removed his own name as justification for keeping files sealed, which means Trump now faces a binary choice with no safe option: accept transparency and whatever those records reveal or maintain opacity and confirm he benefits from their continued suppression.

Compare what they said before to what they refuse to do now. Trump told New York Magazine in 2002 that Jeffrey Epstein was a terrific guy who enjoyed beautiful women as much as Trump did, and many of them were on the younger side. After Epstein’s July 2019 arrest on federal sex trafficking charges, Trump told reporters he had a falling out with Epstein a long time ago and was not a fan. If that falling out happened when Trump claims it did, flight logs would document exactly when their relationship ended, visitor records at Mar-a-Lago would show whether Epstein maintained access after this alleged separation, and communications would reveal whether Trump possessed knowledge of criminal activity. Clinton called for DOJ to release those records, while Trump maintains complete opacity on whether he will do the same.

Alan Dershowitz told CNN in January 2015 that he never had sex with anyone described in civil court papers filed by Virginia Giuffre. In July 2019 he told Fox News that the only massage he ever received at any Epstein property came from a fifty-year-old Russian woman named Olga, a claim so specific it invites verification through employment records, visitor logs, and witness testimony. If these statements represent factual reality, federal investigative records will corroborate every detail. Clinton called for full disclosure, while Dershowitz provides no indication, he will ask DOJ to prioritize release of documents containing his name.

Andrew, formerly Prince Andrew, Duke of York and the second son of Queen Elizabeth II, told BBC Newsnight in November 2019 that he had no recollection of ever meeting Virginia Giuffre, despite a widely circulated photograph showing them together. He claimed an alibi for the night Giuffre alleges abuse occurred, stating that he was at a Pizza Express in Woking with his daughter and remembered the visit clearly because it was unusual for him. In February 2022, Andrew agreed to a civil settlement reported to exceed twelve million pounds, resolving Giuffre’s lawsuit without a trial, without any admission of liability, and without the evidence being tested in open court. If records held by United States authorities could substantiate his alibi, their release would conclusively vindicate him, yet he has not publicly sought or supported such disclosure.

Andrew ceased to be a working royal and no longer uses the style His Royal Highness after Queen Elizabeth II removed his military titles and royal patronages in January 2022 following sustained public controversy and reputational damage linked to the allegations and settlement.

Andrew’s case demonstrates how power avoids exposure even when vindication is supposedly available. Clinton’s response, by contrast, took seventeen words: “We call on President Trump to direct Attorney General Bondi to immediately release any remaining materials.” The issue is no longer the contents of the files. It is Trump’s refusal to request their release.

The Epstein Files Transparency Act leaves little room for secrecy. It prohibits redactions based on embarrassment or reputational harm to public figures and permits exemptions only for narrowly defined categories: personally identifiable victim information, child sexual abuse material, details that would compromise active prosecutions, graphic violence, and limited classified national security information. Each exemption requires written justification published in the Federal Register. Epstein’s death in August 2019 ended his criminal case but created no legal barrier to releasing investigative files, prosecutorial correspondence, plea negotiations, visitor logs, or records documenting how he maintained access to presidents, princes, lawyers, and billionaires for decades.

Clinton’s voluntary demand for disclosure dismantles the remaining institutional defenses. The Department of Justice can no longer credibly invoke caution, resources, or procedure when a named subject publicly seeks immediate release. Once transparency is embraced by someone without apparent legal exposure, delay becomes indefensible.

If every individual named in Epstein related litigation, testimony, or investigative records made the same request Clinton has now placed on the record, the suppression framework would fail under coordinated demand, forcing accelerated processing, narrowed redactions, and public justification for any continued secrecy rather than its quiet preservation through private negotiations. Donald Trump, Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, the federal prosecutors who negotiated the September 2007 non prosecution agreement insulating Epstein from federal charges, and Alexander Acosta, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida and later Trump’s Secretary of Labor before resigning in July 2019 after reporting exposed the agreement’s extraordinary leniency, all possess the standing to demand full disclosure.

Make Silence Impossible

Tag Trump, Dershowitz, and Andrew across platforms, press conferences, and coverage with one unavoidable question: Bill Clinton has publicly demanded release of all Epstein files referencing him, so why have you not done the same when disclosure would either clear your name or explain continued silence. If the records vindicate you, demand release; if they do not, the public deserves an explanation.

Submit Freedom of Information Act requests through foia.gov for records tied to Epstein’s non prosecution agreement, visitor logs for all properties, flight logs for all aircraft, and correspondence between the Department of Justice and legal representatives for Trump, Dershowitz, Andrew, and Wexner, since coordinated requests impose statutory obligations the Department cannot evade. Press journalists with established Epstein records, including Julie K. Brown, Ken Klippenstein, Glenn Greenwald, and Matt Taibbi, to confront those figures with the same demand: whether they will follow Clinton’s example and call for full release of all Epstein related records bearing their names.

Clinton exposed the pressure point: one public directive forces release of the Epstein files in full, without redactions. Trump’s silence reflects neither caution nor process but deliberate control. He employed the same maneuver with his tax returns, promising transparency while withholding disclosure long enough to dull accountability, and he now applies it to records that could clarify his relationship to Epstein’s criminal network. The issue no longer resides in sealed archives. It resides in the refusal to demand complete, unfiltered disclosure, and that refusal warrants sustained scrutiny until it collapses.

Every investigation you read here costs me hours of research, meticulous fact-checking, and deep analysis. I publish most of this work free, hoping readers will see its value and upgrade. But free articles aren’t converting to paid subscriptions at the rate needed to sustain this level of journalism. Without subscriber support, I cannot continue producing investigations at this depth. Annual subscriptions are currently 20% off for a limited time.

Sources

Epstein Files Transparency Act, Public Law 119-38, enacted November 19, 2025 https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/3369

Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 https://www.justice.gov/oip/freedom-information-act-5-usc-552

U.S. Department of Justice Guide to the Freedom of Information Act https://www.justice.gov/oip/doj-guide-freedom-information-act

Statement by Angel Ureña calling for DOJ release of all Clinton-related Epstein records, December 22, 2025 https://twitter.com/angelurena

Donald Trump on Jeffrey Epstein, New York Magazine, October 28, 2002 http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/

Donald Trump statement on Epstein following 2019 arrest, NBC News and CNN, July 2019

Alan Dershowitz interview denying allegations, CNN, January 2015

Alan Dershowitz interview on Epstein connections, Fox News, July 2019

Prince Andrew interview with Emily Maitlis, BBC Newsnight, November 16, 2019 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-50449339

Prince Andrew settlement with Virginia Giuffre, BBC News, February 15, 2022 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-60392921

United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, Southern District of Florida Non-Prosecution Agreement, September 24, 2007

Giuffre v. Maxwell, United States District Court Southern District of New York, Case 1:15-cv-07433 https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4355308/giuffre-v-maxwell/

Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 489 U.S. 749 (1989) https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/489/749/

U.S. Department of Justice partial Epstein file release, December 19, 2025, documented in reports from The Hill, Axios, PBS News, and NPR https://www.npr.org/2025/12/19/nx-s1-5647638/epstein-files-release-law-deadline-trump

News coverage of Clinton statement, The Hill, Fox News, NBC News, Axios, PBS News, Mediaite, December 22-23, 2025 https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5660085-clinton-epstein-files-transparency/ https://www.foxnews.com/politics/clinton-camp-demands-doj-drop-remaining-epstein-files-accuses-trump-admin-protection

Julie K. Brown investigative series “Perversion of Justice,” Miami Herald, November 2018 https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html

Trump flight log documentation in Epstein files, Department of Justice release, December 2025 https://www.justice.gov/ag/media/1391276/dl

Alan Dershowitz role in Epstein plea deal, multiple sources including NPR, The Hill, CBS News, July 2019 https://www.npr.org/transcripts/741739336 https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/452361-epstein-lawyer-dershowitz-defends-plea-agreement/