Calls to release the Epstein files have grown louder in recent weeks—from both sides of the political aisle. While it is understandable that the public demands transparency from the government, what is most surprising is that figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer are now criticizing President Donald Trump for not releasing the files.
Schumer insists that all Epstein-related documents be made public. But under President Biden’s administration, no such effort was made.
The truth is simple: if Democrats had wanted to release the Epstein files, they had four full years to do so. Yet at no point did President Biden or his Department of Justice prioritize the issue. If the release of these documents is now considered an urgent matter, where was that urgency then?
It is dishonest to pretend that former President Biden lacked the legal authority to act.
The executive branch—particularly the Department of Justice—has immense influence over whether investigative records are withheld or released.
While not everything is directly under presidential control, the priorities of any administration are set from the top. Biden’s DOJ had full access to Epstein-related material held by federal agencies, including the FBI.
Many of these documents could have been declassified or made public, especially those not tied to active investigations. And even when certain records are under judicial seal, the DOJ has the legal authority to file motions requesting their release, particularly when compelling public interest is at stake.
The same framework now applies to President Trump. If he decides to release all Epstein-related materials, he will face the same legal and political constraints.
The difference is that Democrats stayed largely silent while they held power—until now, when they use the Epstein files as a weapon against Trump.
So the question is obvious: Why didn’t Democrats push for the release of the Epstein files when they had the power to do so?
The answer is just as obvious: partisanship. Democrat Party leaders did not suddenly develop a moral commitment to transparency. They discovered a convenient line of attack. For four years, they said nothing. But now, when they see political advantage in the issue, they claim to be outraged.
What makes this shift even more troubling is that the Democrat Party routinely presents itself as the champion of victims, of women, and of the abused. Epstein’s crimes were monstrous. If anyone should have led a national push to expose every detail of his criminal network, it should have been those in power who claimed to represent the vulnerable. But they did not.
Now, with Biden no longer at the center of the issue, they act as if they care.
That said, there is a legitimate debate over whether full disclosure of the Epstein files—particularly sealed grand jury material—is in the public’s best interest. Grand jury records are not evidence.
They are not the product of trial, nor have they been scrutinized through legal due process. In many cases, they consist of unverified allegations.
We’ve already seen the damage this can cause. Take Alan Dershowitz, who was never charged with a crime but was Epstein’s lawyer. His name was dragged through the media for years. Despite ultimately clearing his name, he spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal battles—and his reputation will never fully recover. That kind of damage cannot be undone.
Do we want to risk subjecting dozens of others to the same treatment simply because they once interacted with Epstein?
There are serious, good-faith arguments on both sides. Transparency matters. So does justice. But so do due process and the presumption of innocence. Whatever decision is made regarding the files will carry legitimacy.
What is not acceptable, however, is the cynical use of this issue as a partisan tool. Either both administrations had the authority to act, or neither did. Democrats cannot rewrite history. They had the chance to release the Epstein files. They chose not to.
The post BIDEN COULD HAVE RELEASED THE EPSTEIN FILES… HE DIDN’T appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.