President Donald Trump’s administration needs to provide additional explanations for statements that Attorney General Pam Bondi and United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey Alina Habba made about evidence associated with Jeffrey Epstein.

In a letter to Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Kash Patel dated February 27, 2025, Bondi stated:

By 8:00 a.m. tomorrow, February 28, the FBI will deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office, including all records, documents, audio and video recordings, and materials related to Jeffrey Epstein and his clients, regardless of how such information was obtained.

Did Bond receive the materials related to Epstein’s “clients”? Why did she request materials related to Epstein’s “clients?” Does the federal government have materials related to Epstein’s “clients” that are not publicly available? If so, what is in those materials, whether specifically or, if a court order is in place, generally?

Image created by ChatGPT.

On July 7, 2025, The Independent published an article about an interview in February 2025 that Piers Morgan conducted with then-White House counselor Alina Habba. The video of the interview is posted on Morgan’s YouTube channel, and beginning at 1:19:30 of the video, this exchange occurs:

Habba:  But in this case, in Epstein’s case, it is incredibly disturbing. We have flight logs, we have information, names that will come out.

Morgan: Is it going to be shocking?

Habba:  I don’t see how it’s not shocking — that there were so many individuals that were hidden and kept secret and not been held accountable. Let’s talk about the reverse. I believe in accountability. So you have to now go through your process. Now, I won’t say they’re guilty until they go through their time in court. But again, now it’s time for accountability.

. . .

Morgan: Do you think that by releasing information from these files we are likely to see criminal actions being taken?

Habba:  Absolutely.

Morgan: Really?

Habba:  I think it would be negligent for us not to. You have to hold individuals who are indeed rapists, accountable. We have to have them tried, in my opinion. And I do believe in that. You know, nobody should be just dismissed. You have to have your time in court, and your case will be heard. But, to hide lists, to protect political friends, we don’t have time for that.

Habba’s statements lead to myriad questions:

What do the “flight logs” show? What is the “information” and “names” that will come out?

What are the names of the “individuals that were hidden and kept secret and not been held accountable?”

What are the names of those who should “go through their time in court?”

What are the names of those who should be held accountable?

What are the names of those for whom we are “likely to see criminal actions being taken?”

What are the names of those for whom it would be “negligent” on the part of the Government if they were not the subject of “criminal actions?”

What are the names of the “individuals who are indeed rapists” who need to be held “accountable” and “tried?”

Are there any “lists” that are being hidden, and if so, specifically what is on those lists?

Are there any “political friends” that are being protected, and if so, what are their names and what are the names of their protectors?

On July 6, 2025, Axios published an unsigned U.S. Department of Justice memorandum that stated:

This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.’ There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.

Bondi and Habba should jointly testify before Congressional committees to try to reconcile their statements with the DOJ memorandum.

Allan J. Favish is an attorney in Los Angeles. His website is allanfavish.com. In 2010, James Fernald and Mr. Favish co-authored a book about what might happen if the government ran Disneyland, entitled “Fireworks! If the Government Ran the Fairest Kingdom of Them All (A Very Unauthorized Fantasy).

Note from Andrea Widburg: For over 30 years of working in litigation, I participated in what seemed like hundreds of document productions. In response to legitimate document requests, the routine was to produce responsive documents except for those that were privileged or otherwise protected. For those documents we believed were privileged or protected, we would identify the documents and the reason they could not be produced. I would highly recommend that the DOJ do the same here.