How can we trust Trump's version of the Epstein files?

The administration is built on lawfare, lawlessness and lies. Cue the doubts about any documents it releases.

Photo by Donald Teel on Unsplash

WASHINGTON – In a simpler time, it would all be simple. The president would comply with the bill Congress passed.

But this is the Trump era, when Congress complies with Trump, a president who built his second term on lawfare, lawlessness and lies. That being the case, how can we expect the administration to neatly obey the law that compels the Justice Department to release files from the federal investigation of Jeffrey Epstein, the late friend of the famous and defiler of teenage girls?

We can’t. Instead, expect to see a conveniently redacted set of documents that offer few if any revelations about the long-ago friendship between Trump and Epstein.

In fact, a cover-up – or worse – may have already begun.

Though it went largely unnoticed amid the daily clamor of Trump news, the president on Nov. 14 ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate former President Bill Clinton, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman and former Harvard President Larry Summers – Democrats all – for any ties to Epstein.

How convenient! The bill before Congress at the time, which eventually passed, allows the attorney general to withhold or redact anything in the files that “would jeopardize an active federal investigation or ongoing prosecution, provided that such withholding is narrowly tailored and temporary.”

In other words, Trump crafted a way to continue to delay the release of the Epstein files shortly before Congress voted to force his hand. And since he’s been refusing to release the files since the day he was sworn in back in January, there’s no reason to think Trump won’t use that loophole in the law to keep the files secret.

Then again, that “investigation” could result in a limited release along with Trumped-up charges against Clinton or the other Democrats he named. Remember: Trump’s Justice Department specializes in Trumped-up charges. Just ask former FBI Director James Comey. Or former National Security Adviser John Bolton. Or New York State Attorney General Letitia James.

If the Justice Department is willing to prosecute all those longtime Trump adversaries, might it use the Epstein files as a convenient excuse to do the same to others? Probably.

It’s called “lawfare” the politicized prosecution of political opponents, and it’s all part of Trump’s larger lawlessness. On day one, Trump issued an executive order supposedly ending birthright citizenship, a clear-cut constitutional right under the 14th Amendment. Since then, Trump dissolved an agency Congress created (the U.S. Agency for International Development) and refused to spend funds Congress has appropriated – even though the Constitution clearly gives Congress the power of the purse.

Trump’s pardoning frenzy also proves his disregard for the law. In particular, it seems as if he’s never seen a corporate criminal he wouldn’t pardon. So ask yourself: would a president who pardoned a notorious crypto fraudster as well as the January 6 insurrectionists be OK with the politically selective editing of the Epstein files? Probably.

Last but not least, note the lies. PolitiFact, the indispensable fact-checking service run by the Poynter Institute, has done 1,129 fact checks on Trump since his political career began. In more than three-quarters of them, PolitiFact rated what Trump said either mostly false, false or “pants on fire.” Most recently, PolitiFact flagged pant-on-fire Trump claims that Barack Obama got $2.5 million from Obamacare and that voting in California is “rigged.”

PolitiFact also noted that back in July, Trump said the Epstein files were “made up” by Comey, Obama and Joe Biden. That’s another pants-on-fire whopper. Don’t you think that someone who would say that might also think it’s just fine to play seek-and-hide with anything in those files that might embarrass him? Probably.

So the release of the files probably won’t end anything. Instead, Trump’s version of the Epstein files may well prompt more ignominious indictments, as well as litigation from congressional Democrats aimed at forcing the administration to unredact some of what it redacts.

All the while, the drama will be far removed from its most important characters: the 1,000 or so women whom Epstein abused when they were young, who have been living with the emotional scars from the experience ever since.

MUSICAL CODA: Lady Gaga, “Til It Happens to You.”