How to Read the Epstein Files Like an Expert
In the upcoming weeks, the Justice Department is poised to release a substantial collection of documents related to the late Jeffrey Epstein, a notorious figure whose criminal activities have sparked widespread outrage and speculation. This release is mandated by a law passed by Congress last month and has generated significant anticipation, albeit with a lack of clarity regarding the contents of the files. To gain insight into what these documents may reveal, investigative reporter Julie K. Brown from the *Miami Herald*—who has extensively covered the Epstein case—provides critical guidance on how to approach these files.
Brown emphasizes the importance of tempering expectations, noting that the files may not contain the explosive revelations that many hope for. The inadequacy of law enforcement’s initial investigations into Epstein’s crimes may limit the depth of the information available. While the forthcoming files are expected to include tens of thousands of pages, much of this content could be repetitive or previously disclosed through other channels, such as House investigations or earlier reporting. However, Brown points out that even familiar information might still be enlightening to many readers who are unfamiliar with the case’s complexities. She highlights the need to pay particular attention to the initial investigation from the 2000s, which culminated in a controversial plea deal in 2008, as well as the more recent 2019 investigation, which remains shrouded in mystery.
Another critical aspect of the upcoming release is the potential for redactions. Brown warns that the Justice Department may withhold certain information under the guise of protecting ongoing investigations, which could lead to frustration among those seeking transparency. She also cautions against jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information, noting that Epstein’s past communications may lack context and could have been misleading. The skepticism surrounding the release is further amplified by the Trump administration’s history of opacity regarding sensitive matters, including Epstein’s connections. As the public awaits the unveiling of these files, the overarching concern remains whether the Justice Department will provide a complete and unaltered account of Epstein’s extensive network and the failures of the legal system to hold him accountable. This release could potentially shed light on the broader implications of Epstein’s actions and the systems that allowed them to persist, making it a critical moment in the ongoing quest for justice and accountability.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EUipTsO7i0
This is an edition of The
Atlantic
Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture.
Sign up for it here.
Sometime in the next 15 days, the Justice Department is set to release a huge cache of files related to the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The release, mandated under a law passed by Congress last month, has been the subject of a great deal of anticipation—but not a lot of clarity.
To try to understand what the files might include and what they might not, I turned to
Julie K. Brown
, the
Miami Herald
investigative reporter who has covered Epstein’s case for years and likely knows more about it than anyone else. (My colleague Adrienne LaFrance interviewed her about Epstein
for
Radio Atlantic
in July
.) Here are five tips for reading the Epstein files like an expert.
1. Curb Your Expectations
The reason that the Epstein story has been such a huge scandal is the same reason the files may not contain any bombshells: Law enforcement’s pursuit of Epstein was long insufficient. “I honestly think these files may not be as explosive as what people hope, because the FBI just didn’t dig hard enough into this case,” Brown told me. Although the files
reportedly
include tens of thousands of pages, some may be repetitive, and others have already been made public, whether by House investigators or through prior reporting; the
Herald
has sued to obtain many documents related to Epstein. But Brown pointed out that even information that was previously public may not be well known, and so it could still come as a revelation to many observers. “What might not be new for me might be new for three-quarters of America,” she said.
2. Pay Attention to the Original Investigation
Brown said she’ll be looking closely for materials related to the initial 2000s federal prosecution of Epstein, which ended in a sweetheart plea deal in 2008. Prosecutors drew up an indictment but never used or released it, and that draft could be part of the files. So might relevant evidence.
Computers,
which possibly stored videos, were removed from Epstein’s Palm Beach property prior to a 2005 police search. “It’ll be curious to see how hard [the FBI] fought to get those computers,” Brown said. The files might also shed light on whether any unusual communications occurred between Epstein and figures in the Justice Department, including
Matthew Menchel
, who took the lead on the original prosecution. Another name to look for is
Bruce Reinhart
, a lawyer who went directly from working in the U.S. Attorney’s Office—though he’s maintained that he did not work on the Epstein case—to representing Epstein employees. (Both Menchel and Reinhart have denied having acted improperly.)
3. Pay Attention to the 2019 Case Files
Another place to search for new information is in documents related to the 2019 investigation into Epstein. (He died in a New York jail cell that year; his ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of child sex trafficking in 2021.) “We don’t really know what the Justice Department did during that time period” the way we do about “what happened in 2008 in Florida,” Brown said. “It’s a hard case to do because we’re talking about victims whose memories fade after 15 years, 20 years,” she told me. “But that doesn’t mean there’s not statements in there from victims where they said they were raped by so-and-so.”
4. Scrutinize the Redactions
Whenever the government releases sensitive documents, some parts are blacked out—occasionally just individual names, but sometimes entire pages.
The law requiring the Epstein files’ release
specifically allows DOJ to withhold information pertaining to ongoing investigations. One likely outcome, Brown told me, is that things that are already public or shouldn’t be redacted will be hidden, while information that should be redacted isn’t. Already,
Epstein victims
have complained that their names were improperly exposed in House releases. “I’ve seen it many, many times where they just have the victim’s name out there, and yet there’s full pages full of redactions that don’t make any sense,” Brown said.
5. Beware of Missing Context
Though the files already released provide a peek into Epstein’s private interactions, they are also necessarily incomplete and fragmented. That’s allowed speculation and insinuation that may not hold up to scrutiny. (What’s up with that “
Bubba
” email, anyway?) “I keep hearing,
Why isn’t the mainstream media reporting this?
,” Brown told me, referring to some theories circulating online and in alternative media. “Mainstream media isn’t reporting it because we’re very skeptical of the context of some of his emails. Because, let’s face it: He was a liar. He didn’t really tell the truth all the time,” Brown said. “I don’t know if him saying ‘
I have all the dirt on Trump
’ really means he has any dirt on Trump.”
One fundamental question in this release is whether the public can believe that the DOJ will release the files fully and without interference. The Trump administration has done little to earn the benefit of the doubt on this, and the Epstein story has been rife with officials failing to hold appalling behavior to account. “I think the American public is correct to be skeptical about what they’re going to show us and not show us,” Brown told me. Naturally, that skepticism is particularly pronounced when it comes to the role of the president of the United States. Trump has repeatedly denied any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein’s criminal schemes, and Brown said she has long doubted that Trump was directly involved in them, but she’s been surprised by his recent handling of the matter. “I think the most telling thing is the fact that Trump has fought so hard” to keep the files sealed, she said. “I just don’t know what that means, you know?” Perhaps the Epstein files will provide an answer—or at least some hints.
Related:
Jonathan Chait: Trump’s toddler response to the Epstein saga
Epstein returns at the worst time for Trump.
Here are three new stories from
The Atlantic
:
The strange disappearance of an anti-AI activist
Chatbots are surprisingly effective at swaying voters
Adam Serwer: Why doesn’t Trump pay a political price for his racism?
Today’s News
President Donald Trump
hosted the leaders of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda
for meetings at the White House. After the meetings, Trump joined them for a signing ceremony to advance a peace agreement aimed at ending decades of conflict in eastern Congo at the newly renamed “Donald J. Trump United States Institute of Peace.”
The FBI
arrested a suspect for planting pipe bombs
outside the headquarters of the Democratic and Republican national committees on January 5, 2021, the day before the Capitol riot.
Admiral Frank Bradley is expected to tell lawmakers today that two survivors of a September 2 U.S. strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat
were still attempting to continue their drug-smuggling mission
, making them legitimate targets for a second, fatal attack. The closed-door briefing comes as Congress questions whether the follow-up strike violated the laws of war.
Dispatches
Time-Travel Thursdays
:
Idrees Kahloon explores the
long line of pessimists
about America’s schools.
Explore all of our newsletters here.
Evening Read
Charles Hewitt / Getty
The One Line Americans (Weirdly) Choose to Wait In
By Valerie Trapp
A recent grocery run in Brooklyn left me properly confused. When I approached the registers, little coconut waters in hand, two options presented themselves: I could get in the self-checkout line, in which dozens of headphone-wearing customers thumbed through their phones. Or I could go through the staffed checkout lane, which had no wait at all.
What a bunch of schmucks!
I thought. I breezed through the cashier’s lane and was soon out the door, while many of my fellow shoppers remained in self-checkout, languishing.
Read the full article.
More From
The Atlantic
Republicans are in trouble, but Democrats could blow it.
Arthur C. Brooks: James Patterson’s maxims for a happy life
Radio Atlantic
: Is this the end of kids on social media?
The chatbot-delusion crisis
The David Frum Show
: Why American health care is still a mess
Culture Break
Illustration by Shawna X
Read.
Here are the 10 books
that made
The Atlantic
’s writers and editors think the most this year.
Watch.
The missing-child drama
All Her Fault
(streaming on Peacock) reveals the
slow death of the prestige thriller
, Sophie Gilbert argues.
Play our daily crossword.
Rafaela Jinich contributed to this newsletter.
When you buy a book using a link in this newsletter, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting
The Atlantic
.
