- Massie accuses FBI Director Kash Patel of dodging questions and "troubling deflection" over complying with the newly signed Epstein Files Transparency Act.
- With a 30-day deadline looming, survivors demand full disclosure despite Patel citing court orders, protective seals, and Epstein estate stonewalling.
Just one week after President Donald Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law, a brewing feud between Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and FBI Director Kash Patel has thrust the long-simmering Jeffrey Epstein scandal back into the spotlight.
Massie, the architect of the bipartisan legislation aimed at prying open decades of sealed documents, accused Patel of dodging questions about the release timeline in a recent interview, labeling it a “troubling deflection.”
As the 30-day deadline looms — set to expire on December 19 — Epstein survivors and advocates are issuing urgent pleas for compliance, warning that any foot-dragging could perpetuate a legacy of institutional betrayal.
The FrankNez Media Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.
The tension erupted publicly on Wednesday when Massie fired back at supporters rallying around Patel amid unrelated controversies.
In a reply to Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who posted a video declaring, “I stand with @FBIDirectorKash. Who’s with me?”, Massie wrote: “Ask me after he complies with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.”
This came hours after Massie’s earlier broadside on X, where he zeroed in on Patel’s appearance on Catherine Herridge’s “Straight to the Point” podcast.
“Troubling deflection by @FBIDirectorKash when asked if he will follow Epstein Files Transparency LAW passed by Congress and signed by the President,” Massie posted, adding, “Example of documents in his possession that must be released: FD-302 forms summarizing interviews (w/ only victim names redacted).”
Patel Cites Court Orders, Protective Seals, and Estate Stonewalling
Patel’s comments, which aired Tuesday, came in response to Herridge’s direct question about meeting the act’s mandate.
The FBI director emphasized collaboration with the Department of Justice but invoked legal barriers.
“We are working with our partners at the Department of Justice to produce, as we have always committed to producing, what we can lawfully, legally produce,” Patel said.
He elaborated: “And we will continue to meet those metrics, reminding the public that there are court orders in place, protective orders, orders to seal in place, that legally prohibit the disclosure of information related to any investigation when there’s a court order of that fashion. So we’re working with DOJ to see if we can produce anything more.”
In a separate segment of the interview, Patel highlighted another wrinkle: Epstein’s estate has rebuffed repeated FBI requests for key records, creating “two separate boxes of information.”
“The Epstein estate has not been willing to share information with the U.S. government…and so even though we’ve requested them to do so,” he noted, underscoring that the DOJ holds “enormous” troves of materials — including photos and possibly videos — beyond what’s in the estate’s possession.
Massie’s Victory Lap—and a Jab at Trump
For Massie, who spearheaded a House discharge petition that forced the bill’s floor vote, Patel’s remarks smack of evasion.
The Kentucky lawmaker, known for his libertarian streak and willingness to buck party leadership, has framed the act as a fulfillment of Trump’s campaign pledge for “full transparency.”
In a celebratory post last Monday, Massie touted the law as “Public Law 119-38,” noting it as the 38th bill Trump signed in his second term — one he “forced through Congress.”
Yet even as he notched that win, Massie couldn’t resist a jab at the president, who had initially urged Republicans to vote against the measure before reversing course amid overwhelming support.
Quoting a clip of Trump criticizing him as “perhaps the worst republican congressman in our history” and a “stupid person,” Massie wrote: “Trump just signed a bill I forced through Congress to realize his campaign promise radically releasing the Epstein files!”
What the New Law Actually Requires
The Epstein saga, a toxic blend of elite connections, sex trafficking, and suspicious death, has long fueled conspiracy theories and demands for accountability.
Epstein, the financier convicted in 2008 of procuring a minor for prostitution, died by suicide in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges.
His associate Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted in 2021 on related counts and is serving a 20-year sentence.
But survivors and investigators argue the full network — spanning politicians, business tycoons, and royals — remains obscured by redactions and sealed files.
Public Law 119-38, formally H.R. 4405, couldn’t be clearer in its intent.
Signed November 19 after a lopsided House passage (427-1) and swift Senate approval, it compels Attorney General Pam Bondi to disclose, within 30 days, all unclassified DOJ-held records on Epstein, Maxwell, flight logs, immunity deals, internal communications, and even details surrounding his detention and death.
The law explicitly bars withholding on grounds of “embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity,” though it permits narrow redactions for victim privacy, child exploitation material, active probes, or classified national security info — with justifications published in the Federal Register and reported to Congress.
It also mandates declassification where possible and unclassified summaries for any withheld classified portions.
Survivors Confront Congress: ‘We Are Fighting for the Children’
Survivors, whose tireless advocacy turned the bill into reality, greeted its passage with a potent mix of hope and wariness.
On November 18, hours before the House #vote, a group gathered on Capitol Hill, holding childhood photos as stark reminders of stolen innocence.
Haley Robson, who was groomed into Epstein’s orbit as a teen, implored lawmakers: “We are fighting for the children.”
Turning to Trump, she added a steely challenge: “While I do understand that your position has changed on the Epstein files and I’m grateful that you have pledged to sign this bill, I can’t help to be skeptical of what the agenda is. So with that being said, I want to relay this message to you: I am traumatized. I am not stupid.”
Jena-Lisa Jones echoed the sentiment, urging the president: “I beg you, President Trump, please stop making this political. It is not about you, President Trump. You are our president. Please start acting like it. Show some class, show some real leadership, show that you actually care about people other than yourself. I voted for you, but your behavior on this issue has been a national embarrassment.”
Annie Farmer, one of the few to testify against Maxwell at trial, framed the fight as systemic: “This is not an issue of a few corrupt Democrats or a few corrupt Republicans. This is a case of institutional betrayal. Because these crimes were not properly investigated, so many more girls and women were harmed.”
Post-signing, the mood among advocates remains “cautiously optimistic,” as survivor Jess Michaels put it in a CBC interview.
Abused by Epstein starting in 1991, Michaels described an emotional whirlwind: “I’ve hit every range of overwhelm to numb to exhilarated and empowered to even being filled with rage that it’s taken this long.”
She vowed continued vigilance: “We know we have 30 days of continued pressure on this government to make sure they do the right thing,” adding, “We know that the American people and actually the whole world is behind us, and that gives us a level of trust and confidence that is almost indescribable.”
‘The World Will Finally See the Full Scope’
Their legal champion, attorney Spencer Kuvin — who represented one of the first Epstein accusers in Palm Beach — sees the act as a potential “breath of fresh air.”
In a PBS NewsHour interview, he stressed: “To be able to have the world see the full breadth and scope of this sexual pyramid that Jeffrey Epstein had built over the years… finally the world will get to see exactly who was involved, and not just Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, but everyone that was involved in this or complicit in this.”
Kuvin, whose clients remain “hopeful, as they always have been, that ultimately truth will set free,” zeroed in on unreleased evidence: “The most important thing that needs to be released are the photographs and the videotapes surveillance that was taken inside the mansion at Epstein’s home. The FBI and the Department of Justice are currently sitting on hundreds of hours of videotapes… That’s what’s going to be significant for the world to see.”
He dismissed Trump’s flip-flops as a “W-turn,” noting the president could have declassified the files unilaterally: “If President Trump had just abided by his campaign promise… he could have released this information at the stroke of a pen.”
23 Days Left: Will the Files Illuminate the Shadows?
As Bondi’s office races the clock, the stakes feel profoundly personal for those scarred by Epstein’s web.
Sky Roberts, brother of the late Virginia Giuffre — an Epstein victim who died by suicide earlier this year — cut through the noise at the Capitol rally: “My sister is not a political tool for you to use. These survivors are not political tools for you to use. These are real stories, real trauma, and it’s time for you to stop just talking about it and act. Vote yes.”
With 23 days remaining, the question hangs: Will the files finally illuminate the shadows, or will legal asterisks dim the light once more?
Also Read: A DOJ Whistleblower Now Makes Revelation That Undermines the Judicial System’s Integrity
