How to Read the Epstein Files Like an Expert

This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here.

Sometime in the next 15 days, the Justice Department is set to release a huge cache of files related to the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. The release, mandated under a law passed by Congress last month, has been the subject of a great deal of anticipation—but not a lot of clarity.

To try to understand what the files might include and what they might not, I turned to Julie K. Brown, the Miami Herald investigative reporter who has covered Epstein’s case for years and likely knows more about it than anyone else. (My colleague Adrienne LaFrance interviewed her about Epstein for Radio Atlantic in July.) Here are five tips for reading the Epstein files like an expert.

1. Curb Your Expectations

The reason that the Epstein story has been such a huge scandal is the same reason the files may not contain any bombshells: Law enforcement’s pursuit of Epstein was long insufficient. “I honestly think these files may not be as explosive as what people hope, because the FBI just didn’t dig hard enough into this case,” Brown told me. Although the files reportedly include tens of thousands of pages, some may be repetitive, and others have already been made public, whether by House investigators or through prior reporting; the Herald has sued to obtain many documents related to Epstein. But Brown pointed out that even information that was previously public may not be well known, and so it could still come as a revelation to many observers. “What might not be new for me might be new for three-quarters of America,” she said.

2. Pay Attention to the Original Investigation

Brown said she’ll be looking closely for materials related to the initial 2000s federal prosecution of Epstein, which ended in a sweetheart plea deal in 2008. Prosecutors drew up an indictment but never used or released it, and that draft could be part of the files. So might relevant evidence. Computers, which possibly stored videos, were removed from Epstein’s Palm Beach property prior to a 2005 police search. “It’ll be curious to see how hard [the FBI] fought to get those computers,” Brown said. The files might also shed light on whether any unusual communications occurred between Epstein and figures in the Justice Department, including Matthew Menchel, who took the lead on the original prosecution. Another name to look for is Bruce Reinhart, a lawyer who went directly from working in the U.S. Attorney’s Office—though he’s maintained that he did not work on the Epstein case—to representing Epstein employees. (Both Menchel and Reinhart have denied having acted improperly.)

3. Pay Attention to the 2019 Case Files

Another place to search for new information is in documents related to the 2019 investigation into Epstein. (He died in a New York jail cell that year; his ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of child sex trafficking in 2021.) “We don’t really know what the Justice Department did during that time period” the way we do about “what happened in 2008 in Florida,” Brown said. “It’s a hard case to do because we’re talking about victims whose memories fade after 15 years, 20 years,” she told me. “But that doesn’t mean there’s not statements in there from victims where they said they were raped by so-and-so.”

4. Scrutinize the Redactions

Whenever the government releases sensitive documents, some parts are blacked out—occasionally just individual names, but sometimes entire pages. The law requiring the Epstein files’ release specifically allows DOJ to withhold information pertaining to ongoing investigations. One likely outcome, Brown told me, is that things that are already public or shouldn’t be redacted will be hidden, while information that should be redacted isn’t. Already, Epstein victims have complained that their names were improperly exposed in House releases. “I’ve seen it many, many times where they just have the victim’s name out there, and yet there’s full pages full of redactions that don’t make any sense,” Brown said.

5. Beware of Missing Context

Though the files already released provide a peek into Epstein’s private interactions, they are also necessarily incomplete and fragmented. That’s allowed speculation and insinuation that may not hold up to scrutiny. (What’s up with that “Bubba” email, anyway?) “I keep hearing, Why isn’t the mainstream media reporting this?,” Brown told me, referring to some theories circulating online and in alternative media. “Mainstream media isn’t reporting it because we’re very skeptical of the context of some of his emails. Because, let’s face it: He was a liar. He didn’t really tell the truth all the time,” Brown said. “I don’t know if him saying ‘I have all the dirt on Trump’ really means he has any dirt on Trump.”

One fundamental question in this release is whether the public can believe that the DOJ will release the files fully and without interference. The Trump administration has done little to earn the benefit of the doubt on this, and the Epstein story has been rife with officials failing to hold appalling behavior to account. “I think the American public is correct to be skeptical about what they’re going to show us and not show us,” Brown told me. Naturally, that skepticism is particularly pronounced when it comes to the role of the president of the United States. Trump has repeatedly denied any knowledge of or involvement in Epstein’s criminal schemes, and Brown said she has long doubted that Trump was directly involved in them, but she’s been surprised by his recent handling of the matter. “I think the most telling thing is the fact that Trump has fought so hard” to keep the files sealed, she said. “I just don’t know what that means, you know?” Perhaps the Epstein files will provide an answer—or at least some hints.

Related:

Here are three new stories from The Atlantic:

Today’s News

President Donald Trump hosted the leaders of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda for meetings at the White House. After the meetings, Trump joined them for a signing ceremony to advance a peace agreement aimed at ending decades of conflict in eastern Congo at the newly renamed “Donald J. Trump United States Institute of Peace.”
The FBI arrested a suspect for planting pipe bombs outside the headquarters of the Democratic and Republican national committees on January 5, 2021, the day before the Capitol riot.
Admiral Frank Bradley is expected to tell lawmakers today that two survivors of a September 2 U.S. strike on an alleged drug-smuggling boat were still attempting to continue their drug-smuggling mission, making them legitimate targets for a second, fatal attack. The closed-door briefing comes as Congress questions whether the follow-up strike violated the laws of war.

Dispatches

Time-Travel Thursdays: Idrees Kahloon explores the long line of pessimists about America’s schools.

Explore all of our newsletters here.

Evening Read

A black-and-white vintage photo of people wearing dresses, waiting in line — Charles Hewitt / Getty

The One Line Americans (Weirdly) Choose to Wait In

By Valerie Trapp

A recent grocery run in Brooklyn left me properly confused. When I approached the registers, little coconut waters in hand, two options presented themselves: I could get in the self-checkout line, in which dozens of headphone-wearing customers thumbed through their phones. Or I could go through the staffed checkout lane, which had no wait at all. What a bunch of schmucks! I thought. I breezed through the cashier’s lane and was soon out the door, while many of my fellow shoppers remained in self-checkout, languishing.

Read the full article.