Breaking — The Epstein Coverup Is Now Official

Trump's DOJ argues the Epstein Files Transparency Act cannot be enforced—and no one can make them comply

While others stenograph, grift, or chase the next distraction—this is the news that matters and how it’s connected.

The coverup is now official.

On Friday, the Trump Justice Department told a federal court that the Epstein Files Transparency Act—the bipartisan law requiring release of Jeffrey Epstein’s files—cannot be enforced.¹ Not “we need more time.” Not “we’re working on it.” The law itself is unenforceable. No one can make them comply.

Here’s the key passage, buried on page four: “The Act does not provide a cause of action... this Court may not ‘create[]’ that ‘action … through judicial mandate.’”¹

Translation: Congress passed a law. We’re ignoring it. And there’s nothing you can do about it.

The filing asks the judge to block Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie—the bipartisan duo who wrote the transparency act—from even appearing in court to argue for enforcement. DOJ’s position: the law has no teeth, oversight is impossible, and the executive branch answers to no one.

My guess: they — Khanna and Massie — will need to respond with a request for APA review or Mandamus.

Signed at the bottom: Attorney General Pamela Bondi, Deputy AG Todd Blanche, U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton. Three Trump loyalists, putting in writing that they don’t intend to release the Epstein files. Nobody else was willing to put their name on this absurd argument.

---

The Pattern of Defiance

This isn’t an isolated legal argument. It’s the culmination of months of obstruction:

December 19, 2025: The Act’s deadline passes. DOJ releases a fraction of the documents—less than 1% of the two million pages.²

January 3, 2026: DOJ misses the deadline to explain its redactions.³

January 8, 2026: Khanna and Massie write to the court expressing “urgent and grave concerns about DOJ’s failure to comply.”⁴

January 16, 2026: DOJ responds—not with compliance, but with a six-page argument that compliance can’t be compelled.¹

The missed deadlines weren’t accidents. The slow-walking wasn’t bureaucratic delay. This filing makes clear: DOJ never intended to comply. They were running out the clock while building their legal argument for permanent obstruction.

---

“There Are Billionaires in There”

Why fight this hard? A Republican already told us.

“There are billionaires in there they want to protect.” That’s Rep. Thomas Massie—Republican, Kentucky, co-author of the transparency act—explaining why Trump’s DOJ keeps blocking release.⁵

Two million documents. Names. Flight logs. Testimony about who visited Epstein’s island, who knew what, who participated in trafficking children. The Epstein Files Transparency Act passed with bipartisan support specifically to drag this into the light. Now DOJ is in court arguing that light can never come.

This is the party that screams about “protecting children” while shielding the files that would expose the men who raped them. The administration that promised transparency and delivered a legal doctrine of permanent concealment.

Ask any MAGA voter: If Trump wanted these files released, why is his Justice Department in court right now arguing that no one can make them do it?

---

The Call

This isn't an isolated incident. We track stories like this using the fascism syndrome—ten indicators that a democracy is sliding into fascism—so you don't lose the thread in the daily chaos:

• Capture of the state and elimination of accountability: DOJ argues Congress cannot enforce its own law. The executive branch declares itself immune from legislative oversight—on a law designed to expose child trafficking.

• War on reality: Promise to release files, argue in court they’re unenforceable, call it transparency. The doublespeak is the point.

• Consolidation of economic power: “There are billionaires in there they want to protect.” A Republican said it. DOJ’s filing proves it.

Miss deadlines. Argue the law is toothless. Shield the powerful. That’s not incompetence. That’s the coverup working exactly as designed. That’s fascism.

But naming the coverup is only half the job.

We built this publication to equip you with the tools to fight back—the frameworks, the messaging, the strategies that actually work. See the links below. But we can only keep doing this with your help. If this matters to you, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. You keep the fight alive.

• Fighting Fascism: How We Push Back and Win — The strategic playbook for reclaiming power

• The Trump Regime Messaging Guide — How to talk to people who’ve been captured by the machine

• The Freedom Illusion — How we got here, and the counter-ideology that gets us out

1. Jay Clayton, “Government Response Opposing Representatives Khanna and Massie’s Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief“, U.S. Department of Justice, Southern District of New York, January 16, 2026.

The filing that makes the coverup official. Signed by Attorney General Pamela Bondi, Deputy AG Todd Blanche, and U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton, this six-page motion argues that the Epstein Files Transparency Act “does not provide a cause of action” and therefore cannot be enforced. DOJ’s position: Congress passed the law, but no one can compel compliance. The document explicitly asks the court to block the bipartisan authors of the transparency act from even appearing in court to argue for enforcement.

2. Wikipedia, “Epstein files“, Wikipedia, accessed January 18, 2026.

Documents that the U.S. Department of Justice released some, but not all, of the Epstein files by the act’s deadline of December 19, 2025, leading to bipartisan criticism. As of January 2026, less than 1% of the two million pages have been publicly released.

3. Daysia Tolentino, “Trump DOJ Files Bonkers Motion to Keep Epstein Files Sealed“, Daily Beast, January 17, 2026.

Reports on DOJ’s motion to block independent oversight of Epstein file releases. Notes the January 3 deadline to explain redactions was missed—part of the pattern of noncompliance that preceded DOJ’s argument that the law itself is unenforceable.

4. Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie, “Letter to Judge Engelmayer Regarding Epstein Files Transparency Act Compliance“, U.S. House of Representatives, January 8, 2026.

The bipartisan letter expressing “urgent and grave concerns about DOJ’s failure to comply with the Act.” Notes that DOJ has not complied with Section 3 requiring reports to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. Eight days later, DOJ responded—not with compliance, but with a legal argument that the law cannot be enforced.

5. Sarah Davis, “Massie calls Clintons’ subpoena over Epstein ties ‘theater’: ‘Just release the doggone files’“, The Hill, January 17, 2026.

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, co-author of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, called the GOP’s Clinton subpoena “theater” and explained the real reason the files remain sealed: “There are billionaires in there they want to protect.” A Republican telling you who the administration is really serving.