The Atlantic “If the Justice Department has legitimate reasons for its delay, it hasn’t thoroughly explained what they are. In a letter yesterday, Attorney General Pam Bondi and other DOJ officials framed the problem as purely logistical, citing “inevitable glitches due to the sheer volume of materials.” They noted that the department has put “over five hundred reviewers” on the project, even as they declined to clarify when they would release more files. Frank Figliuzzi, a former high-ranking FBI official who has handled nationwide investigations involving massive amounts of raw data, told me he’s skeptical of that defense. During his tenure, he explained, the bureau became highly digitized, bringing in all sorts of new tools to speed up the process of redactions and disclosures. “If we’re led to believe that human beings have to go through all of this, I’m not buying all of that,” he said. Legal experts and legislators maintain that Bondi and her department are now in clear violation of the law. Earlier this week, 19 of Epstein’s victims requested that a Justice Department watchdog review the agency’s work, alleging that the redactions have not adequately concealed survivors’ names and identifiers. Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie, who introduced the Transparency Act as a bipartisan bill, have suggested that Bondi be held in contempt for missing the deadline. Other lawmakers have batted around the idea of impeaching her. But these moves would require real political willpower—so far, neither of them has come to pass…”

• See also the Epstein Timeline Google Doc – Entities, Events, Email, Flight Logs, Leads Facts…
• See also Aaron Parnas/The Parnas Perspective: “In a powerful letter, Epstein survivors are demanding immediate intervention from the U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, accusing the government of releasing Epstein-related records in a way that is not just flawed, but actively harmful. The survivors say the disclosures made under the Epstein Files Transparency Act have failed them—and they are now taking matters into their own hands. In a formal letter sent today to Acting Inspector General Don R. Berthiaume, survivors requested that the Office of the Inspector General review records already released and oversee all future disclosures to ensure “full compliance with U.S. law and basic standards of survivor protection.” The survivors wrote that the manner in which the materials were released reflects “serious failures in redaction practices, survivor protection, and oversight,” failures they say have caused renewed harm and undermined public trust. At the center of the complaint is what survivors describe as a “troubling pattern of selective redactions.” According to the letter, names of individuals alleged to have participated in or facilitated abuse “appear to have been redacted, while identifying details of survivors were left visible.” In some cases, survivors’ names or contextual identifiers “sufficient to identify them publicly were not adequately protected.” “Any release of records involving sexual exploitation must prioritize the safety, privacy, and dignity of survivors,” the letter states. Survivors argue that the inconsistent application of redactions shows that this principle “was not meaningfully upheld.” The letter also raises alarm over reports that some redactions were made improperly, allowing members of the public to bypass them “through basic technical means.” Redactions that can be reversed or revealed through simple document manipulation, the survivors wrote, “do not meaningfully protect sensitive information” and instead expose survivors to “additional risk of harassment, public scrutiny, and retraumatization.”