Massie Threatens to Go 'Nuclear' and Reveal Epstein Client Names If Bondi Won't Unredact Them

With 3 million Jeffrey Epstein files still being withheld from the public and the names of many possible clients and co-conspirators still blacked out, Rep. Thomas Massie is threatening to invoke what he has called a "nuclear option" to force transparency from President Donald Trump's Department of Justice.

Massie (R-Ky.), who has pushed harder than any other Republican for the release of the files pertaining to the late sex criminal and his circle of powerful friends, will join Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) to view unredacted versions of the DOJ files on Monday.

Under a law introduced by Massie and Khanna last year, which Congress passed almost unanimously, the DOJ was required to release all files to the public in December without redacting information solely to protect public figures from embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity.

But millions still remain under lock and key, while those made public, including a tranche of more than 3 million released late last month, are heavily redacted.

Those files contained many references to Trump as well as other powerful figures, including former President Bill Clinton, tech billionaires Elon Musk and Bill Gates, and former British ambassador to the US Peter Mandelson.

Meanwhile, files containing compromising mentions of Trump were uploaded to the site before being swiftly deleted—including a list of unverified FBI tips that described the president participating in the heinous abuse of children.

In a Sunday appearance on CNN‘s “Inside Politics,” Massie accused the Trump administration of violating the law by failing to meet the deadline for the public release of information and by releasing the names of victims while covering up the names of alleged perpetrators.

He said that of particular interest were the FBI’s 302 files, which contain information from official interviews with witnesses and victims of Epstein’s abuse, which he said the DOJ is still withholding.

He also said the DOJ was “overredacting” documents related to “some really sketchy emails” between Epstein and associates, on which “we can’t see who the sender was.”

Massie said that Attorney General Pam Bondi "will be in front of my committee," referring to the House Judiciary Committee, on Wednesday to answer questions about the release of the files.

He said he plans to ask her why the rest of the documents have not been released, why—even with the delays that purportedly gave officials time to ensure victims' identifying information was redacted—they still published the names of some victims, and what information has been redacted from the files.

Asked by anchor Manu Raju how he would respond if the DOJ continued to flout the law, Massie said he was prepared to begin reading off the names of Epstein's clients on the House floor, provided the victims "believe that the best way to get justice is to force the DOJ to release these names."

Massie also remarked on the revelation in the latest batch of files that Trump's commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, who'd claimed to have cut ties with Epstein back in 2005, had actually continued a business and personal relationship with him years after he'd been convicted of sex crimes in 2008. This included joint business ventures, dinner gatherings, and a planned trip to Epstein's infamous private island in 2012.

Asked whether Lutnick should testify before the Judiciary Committee, Massie instead said, "No, he should just resign."

He said that Mandelson and the former Prince Andrew, another prominent Epstein associate who was stripped of his royal title, have resigned in disgrace from their posts "for less than Lutnick lied about."

On Friday, amid mounting pressure from lawmakers and the public, the DOJ sent a letter to members of Congress—obtained by the Associated Press—informing them that they could inspect the documents.

Legislators were required to give the DOJ 24 hours' notice before arriving and will be required to view the documents in a tightly-controlled "reading room." They are also barred from creating electronic copies of the files for distribution, but they may take notes.

In a post to social media Sunday, Massie called on inquisitive followers to point out which concerning documents they want him to scrutinize, saying those that receive the most "likes" will be his first priority.

Among the documents that have garnered the most outrage and demands for transparency are:

• A 2014 email in which a person, whose name has been redacted, thanked Epstein "for a fun night" and told him "your littlest girl was a little naughty";
• Another 2014 email in which a person, whose name has been redacted, said they were giving Epstein "permission to kill" an unspecified person;
• A 2009 email in which a person, whose name has been redacted, told Epstein they "loved the torture video";
• And a heavily redacted federal prosecution memo, sent after Epstein's death in 2019 to then-US Attorney Geoffrey Berman, which discusses investigative steps and possible liability of Epstein's associates, and several uninvestigated claims relating to complicity and participation in his crimes. That file was deleted shortly after being uploaded to the DOJ website.

As Khanna pointed out, she did not do this in July when she privately answered questions from Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.

Khanna has sent a letter to House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) containing a list of questions for Maxwell about any knowledge she has of other co-conspirators, the extent of Epstein's and Trump's involvement, and whether Trump offered her a pardon in exchange for her silence.

"The American people will see that there's an inconsistency," Khanna told reporters on Monday. "Why didn't she plead the Fifth when Blanche asked her questions, but now she's pleading the Fifth about things that don't implicate her, but may implicate many of the other powerful people in the Epstein class that committed these crimes?"