🧵Late last night, DOJ filed responses in both the Epstein and Maxwell cases, addressing each judge’s questions regarding the unsealing of grand jury materials.
DOJ also submitted the following ex parte and under seal:
-An index of the grand jury materials
-A complete set of unredacted grand jury transcripts
-A complete set of redacted grand jury transcripts
-A description of other grand jury materials (exhibits, etc.)
DOJ's effort to unseal the Epstein grand jury material in SDFL was recently denied due to the 11th Circuit's binding opinion in Pitch v. United States, which restricted the judge in that case from unsealing them.
DOJ knew this going in and conceded it in their filing. They made the filing, knowing it would be denied, for purposes of appeal later.
In the 2nd Circuit, where SDNY is, that court has held that “there are certain ‘special circumstances’ in which release of grand jury records is appropriate..."
The factors for trial-level courts to consider are:
1. Who's asking? 2. Is the defendant or gov't opposed? 3. Why is disclosure being sought? 4. What info is being sought? 5. How long ago was the grand jury? 6. What's the current status of those involved in the grand jury? 7. How much of the info sought has already been made public? 8. Are witnesses to the grand jury who might be impacted by its release still alive? 9. Is there a particular need for maintaining secrecy of the material in the case?
1. Who's asking?
DOJ.
And the fact that it is the DOJ asking “serve[s] as a preliminary indication that the need for secrecy is not especially strong,”
2. Is the defendant or gov't opposed?
Epstein is dead, so he has nothing to say on this.
Maxwell has yet to file her position on the matter.
3. Why is disclosure being sought?
a) "clearly expressed interest from the public in Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s crimes."
b) "abundant public interest in the investigative work conducted by the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation into those crimes."
c) "Attention given to the Epstein and Maxwell cases has recently intensified in the wake of the July 6, 2025 Memo"
4. What info is being sought?
"the Government seeks the public disclosure of the grand jury transcripts in the Epstein and Maxwell cases"
They've indicated elsewhere in this filing and in others that they are seeking disclosures of exhibits and other materials, so I'm not sure why they do not say that here. Maybe it is implied?
5. How long ago was the grand jury?
Epstein was June/July 2019
Maxwell was June/July 2020 and March 2021
6. What's the current status of those targeted by the grand jury?
Epstein is dead.
Maxwell is incarcerated.
7. How much of the info sought has already been made public?
The transcripts have not been made public, though "certain aspects and subject matters of the transcripts became public during Maxwell’s trial."
"Many" of the victims/witnesses who testified to the grand jury later testified at trial and "some have also made public those factual accounts in the course of civil litigation."
8. Are witnesses to the grand jury who might be impacted by its release still alive?
The same FBI agent testified in both cases, and an NYPD detective testified in Maxwell.
Both are still alive and still working.
A list has been filed under seal of which victims are still alive.
9. Is there a particular need for maintaining secrecy of the material in the case?
"the grand jury transcripts contain victim-related and other personal identifying information related to third parties who neither have been charged or alleged to be involved in the crimes with which Epstein and Maxwell were charged"
That info will be redacted.
Additionally,
-DOJ reviewed the Epstein and Maxwell grand jury transcripts prior to filing (likely as part of their review before the July 6 Memo)
-Notice has been provided to all but one of the victims referenced in the grand jury materials
-Notice to other individuals identified in the transcripts is ongoing
Ha, remember that story that went around about AG Bondi telling Trump that he is in the Epstein files? Well, one, he already knew that, and two, she had notice him as part of this process!
I have a hunch that there's documentation that he HELPED CATCH Epstein back in the 2000's , maybe even an unserved subpoena for Trump to testify AGAINST Epstein!
Filing is signed by @AGPamBondi @DAGToddBlanche and @SDNYnews 's Jay Clayton.
@AGPamBondi @DAGToddBlanche @SDNYnews Also, completely separate from DOJ's efforts to unseal grand jury materials in Epstein and Maxwell is the recent 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Giuffre v. Maxwell.
@AGPamBondi @DAGToddBlanche @SDNYnews Picking that one apart will require far more time and posts in this thread than I can provide right now, but suffice to say that some materials from that case, which are currently sealed, MAY be unsealed in the future.
🧵Richman v. United States
(Arctic Haze search warrant material case)
ORDER: DOJ must get a search warrant for Arctic Haze/Richman materials seized from Richman in 2017, 2019, and 2020.
And that includes materials under seal in the EDVA and within DOJ "component" offices.
Backstory:
Just days after United States v. Comey was dismissed for Interim U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan being unlawfully appointed, Daniel Richman, who is Person 3 from the indictment in the Comey case, filed a civil case against the DOJ.
Richman wants the property he volunteered to DOJ in 2017 and the materials that were seized from him pursuant to the four Arctic Haze search warrants in 2019 and 2020 to be returned to him.
A D.C. Superior Court grand jury returned a two-count indictment against Cole for the same two counts charged in the criminal complaint—18 U.S.C. 844(d) and 844(i).
This indictment has not been filed publicly but was presented to the judge yesterday.
2/5
Federal prosecutors using a local grand jury in this way is a new thing in DC. It came about thanks to the Trump Admin's push to neutralize criminal activity in the capital.
But the issue is currently before the Court of Appeals.
- The post-arrest interview was hours long and video recorded.
- "Over the next approximately one and one-half hours, the defendant walked the interviewing agents in detail through his construction, transportation, and planting of the pipe bombs."
- Brian Cole Jr "reset" or "wiped" his Samsung smartphone 943 times between December 2020 and December 2025.
- The pipe bombs "were viable explosive devices."
- FBI found pipe bomb components in Cole Jr's home and in his vehicle.
-"According to the defendant, 'no one knows' his political views, including his family."
- "He made the black powder in the devices using charcoal, Lilly Miller sulfur dust, and potassium nitrate that he purchased from Lowes."
- He "denied that his actions were directed toward Congress or related to the proceedings scheduled to take place on January 6."
- Motive: "he explained that 'something just snapped' after 'watching everything, just everything getting worse.' The defendant wanted to do something 'to the parties' because 'they were in charge.' 'I really don’t like either party at this point.'"
The most important takeaway from the filing:
The J5 pipe bombs had nothing to do with the events of J6.
None of the popular narratives about the pipe bombs and how they fit into either side's J6 story are correct.
We rarely perceive a person, idea, or event exactly as it is/they are—we instead make a near-automatic inference based on context, emotions, the social status we attach to it/them, and the narratives that surround it (or don't).
We make these calculations instantaneously, without prompting.
Just like we all did when we first glanced at the example above and perceived the batteries to be of differing sizes, we do the same thing to people, ideas, and events. Right? : )