President Donald Trump’s call for the release of grand jury transcripts from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation is already facing sharp criticism from legal experts, who argue the move is hollow and politically calculated.
On Thursday night, following a Wall Street Journal report about a birthday note allegedly sent from Trump to Epstein in 2003, the president — who has threatened to sue the newspaper and its owner, Rupert Murdoch, claiming the note is fake — posted on Truth Social that he had directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to “produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony” from the Epstein case, subject to court approval. Bondi quickly agreed, saying she would move the court to unseal the transcripts.
But legal experts immediately characterized the move as a stunt. “They need a judge’s permission & a judge could easily say no,” former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama Joyce Vance pointed out on X. “That’s probably the point. Trump can say, yet again, that he tried & the courts stood in his way.”
Critics also emphasized that grand jury transcripts represent only a tiny fraction of the investigative record.
Elie Honig, a former assistant U.S. attorney, explained that the entirety of the Epstein files reportedly amounts to about 300 gigabytes of material; grand jury testimony would cover just a sliver. “And what Trump said to do there is not to turn over all the Epstein files. It is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of those files,” Honig said on CNN, noting that “most witnesses don’t even go into the grand jury. They just talk to you in a conference room, not in the grand jury. So we’re talking about a 1%, 2%.”
Start your day with essential news from Salon.Sign up for our free morning newsletter, Crash Course.
Kristy Greenberg, former deputy chief of the criminal division for the Southern District of New York, added that the transcripts were unlikely to implicate Trump at all. “Trump knows SDNY prosecutors seeking to indict Epstein and Maxwell didn’t ask questions about him in their grand jury presentations while he was POTUS,” she wrote. “It’s a red herring to distract from the evidence that matters: witness interview notes, videos, photos, etc.”
Heath Mayo, a conservative attorney and Trump critic, argued that the move was a signal that the president wants “buried” information to stay buried, writing: “Anybody who knows anything knows that the Grand Jury testimony won’t show even a fraction of the evidence that was obtained. This is a desperate defensive move. These guys are already on tilt.”
Democratic lawmakers have echoed these concerns, questioning the motives and scope of Trump’s request.
Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., wrote on X: “Nice try @AGPamBondi. What about videos, photographs and other recordings? What about FBI 302’s (witness interviews)? What about texts and emails? That’s where the evidence about Trump and others will be. Grand jury testimony will only relate to Epstein and Maxwell.”
Read more
about Trump and Epstein
