Johnson Tried to Block a Vote on the Epstein Files and Failed
The ball will soon be in the Senate's court
Let’s be clear that all Donald Trump needs to do is direct the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to release all files related to the investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. He can also direct the agencies to make all necessary redactions to protect the survivors of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s crimes. No legislation is necessary to take these steps. That’s not what has happened. No, what has happened is that Trump resisted and gaslit Americans about his relationship with Epstein and called the effort to publicly release the files a hoax.
We need to remember why we’re here. The main reason is that the survivors want the files released. During a press conference this morning, one of Epstein’s victims, Jena-Lisa Jones, appealed to Trump. She said, “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 the people other than yourself. I voted for you, but your behavior on this has been a national embarrassment.”
The other reason is that the Trump administration botched this in the worst possible way. In February, Attorney General Pam Bondi hosted far-right MAGA influencers at the White House and gave them binders marked “The Epstein Files: Phase 1.” DOJ publicly released those files. In March, Bondi hinted that a “truckload” of evidence had been delivered to the FBI and suggested an aggressive posture of transparency. Bondi answered a direct question about the client list, telling a Fox News anchor that it was “sitting on my desk right now to review.” It sounded like a commitment to openness. It wasn’t.
By early summer, DOJ abruptly pivoted, insisting there was no “client list,” no hidden ledger of names, and no additional files suitable for release. The messaging shift served a purpose. That purpose was to reframe the issue as a conspiracy theory rather than a transparency problem. DOJ attempted to delegitimize congressional scrutiny before it could gather momentum.
Both DOJ and the FBI leaned heavily on familiar statutory shields, such as grand jury secrecy, victim privacy protections, and the presence of lewd imagery of underage girls. Those issues are very real. However, those statutes also give the executive branch enormous discretion to withhold entire universes of documents without ever admitting it. DOJ and FBI used these exceptions not as scalpels but as tarps, covering everything and then announcing there was nothing left to see. What began as a flashy political rollout morphed into the DOJ’s default position: delay, contain, and prevent future embarrassment.
When House members began asking for briefings and unredacted files, the FBI responded with delays, partial disclosures, and bureaucratic foot-dragging. A federal judge eventually noted that DOJ’s posture amounted to diversion. DOJ kept pointing to grand jury materials it wanted unsealed while ignoring the broader set of files already in its possession. The signal was clear—DOJ would control the pace, the framing, and the inventory of what Congress could examine.
Whatever happened to shift the administration’s posture on the Epstein files between February and the summer appears to have occurred in May. That’s when Bondi briefed Trump and let him know that his name appears in the files. Considering how close Trump and Epstein were in the ‘90s and early ‘00s, Trump’s name appearing in the files isn’t surprising, and it doesn’t mean that he did anything illegal. Whatever reason Trump had for obstructing the release of the files, it wasn’t a good look.
It’s not just Trump and his administration who have tried to scuttle the effort led by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA).1 Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) did nearly everything he could to stop the momentum that Massie and Khanna were building for the discharge petition. Massie initiated the discharge petition process by introducing H.Res. 581 on July 15. Johnson badly wanted the issue to go away. He went so far as to have a competing measure introduced. That measure, H.Res. 589, would’ve supposedly directed Bondi to release the Epstein files. The problem is that H.Res. 589 is a nonbinding resolution. It’s a glorified press release without the force of law.
Because Massie’s resolution, H.Res. 581, is a rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 185, the discharge process is shorter. By rule, Massie was able to begin collecting signatures to discharge H.Res. 581 seven legislative days after its introduction. The seventh day was supposed to be July 24. Instead, Johnson canceled votes on July 24, and Members left town for the August recess. The Speaker, then, began criticizing the effort to release the Epstein files.
In the background, in late July, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously represented Trump during his criminal trial in New York City, visited Maxwell in FCI Tallahassee, where she was serving her 20-year sentence, and interviewed her. At some point after the interview, Maxwell was transferred to the federal prison camp in Bryan, Texas, where she is or was getting special treatment, as she prepares a request for a commutation.
When the House came back to town on September 2, Massie began collecting signatures. By September 8, 216 Members had signed the discharge petition. Massie secured the signatures of three of his Republican colleagues on the petition: Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), and Nancy Mace (R-SC). That was enough to force a vote after special elections were settled on the Democratic side. Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA) signed the petition on September 10, the same day he was sworn into office.2 Massie and Khanna needed only one more signature to reach 218.
After passing a short-term continuing resolution (CR) on September 19, Johnson canceled votes the week of September 29. On September 23, Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) won the special election to succeed her father, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ). Although Grijalva could have been sworn in during any pro forma day during the government shutdown, Johnson refused to do so. The perception, real or not, is that Johnson was using the government shutdown as an excuse to keep Grijalva from signing Massie’s discharge petition.
Trump, Bondi, and FBI Director Kash Patel unsuccessfully pressured Boebert and Mace to take their names off the petition. Bondi and Patel even brought Boebert into the Situation Room at the White House. Trump began going after Greene and rescinded his endorsement of her. When Grijalva was finally sworn in on November 12, she became the 218th signature on the petition. The petition became locked in on that same day when Massie made the motion to discharge.
Suddenly, on Sunday evening, Trump changed his tune. He wrote, “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown.’” House Republicans who previously opposed the discharge petition changed their tune.
Look, H.Res. 581 and H.R. 185 were going to pass. The votes were clearly there. The Republicans willing to break ranks didn’t end with the four who signed the discharge petition. Reps. Don Bacon (R-NE), Rob Bresnahan (R-PA), Warren Davidson (R-OH), Tim Burchett (R-TN), and Eli Crane (R-AZ) had all said that they intended to vote for at least the underlying bill, H.R. 185. There were rumors that at least a few dozen would vote for it.
But even as the House is on the cusp of passing the Epstein Files Transparency Act, Johnson is still trying to sabotage the effort. Johnson continues to claim that the legislation lacks protections for victims and “innocent persons”—individuals who may be named in the files that perhaps face “non-credible allegations.” First, the bill includes protections for victims. Also, victims literally appeared at a press conference this morning and demanded passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act and the release of the files. Second, due process is required in criminal proceedings, but the public has a right to know, because of the magnitude of this situation, who is named in the files and what allegations have been made.
Ultimately, we don’t know what will come from today’s vote in the House. The vote is on H.R. 4405,3 not the Massie discharge petition. The Senate will still have to consider the Epstein Files Transparency Act. It’s entirely in the realm of possibility that the Senate guts or kills this effort, or that DOJ will play games with the files, either by redacting them to hell or some other reason. Still, the survivors of Epstein’s crimes deserve justice. They shouldn’t have to continue to endure hearing the effort to release the files a “hoax,” as Trump has often said, or as House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) literally just said on the floor.
The effort to have the files released isn’t about Trump. It’s not. It’s about the survivors and learning the names of the people who violated them in the hopes that those men will face justice. Still, the discharge petition for this legislation isn’t necessary. Trump could direct Bondi to release the files right now. He hasn’t done that.
The national embarrassment over the Epstein files doesn’t end with Trump. It continues to every single person who helped stand in the way of a vote until Trump surrendered to the inevitable passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
Partisans see the discharge petition process as going against leadership when their party has the majority. It’s viewed as a sin because it empowers the minority. Again, that’s the red versus blue battle that’s ripping the United States apart.
Walkinshaw won the special election in Virginia’s 10th Congressional District on September 9, so he was sworn in the next day.
Leadership opted to put H.R. 4405 on the floor rather than complete the discharge petition process.