"... and made public only those portions needed to properly handle a case. The additional information that might interest us, and perhaps even help improve society, would remain secret. Federal prosecutors could generally be trusted to focus on their narrow criminal enforcement mission and to not abuse the tools given them for that limited purpose. No longer.... [S]o much of the raw investigative material in [the files] — untold layers of hearsay, unverified accusations and vague circumstantial connections — ought not be released for the public to pick over.... When materials collected in a criminal investigation get released in bulk for public consumption, the justification for the coercive and privacy-invading tools we give investigators gets a lot weaker...."
Writes former federal prosecutor Daniel Richman, in "The Epstein Files Should Never Have Been Released" (NYT).

71 comments:
As I started reading this post, I thought it was going to be in reference to Judge Cannon's decision regarding Jack Smith's report.
The DOJ leaks info all the time and has for ever. This guy is a pinhead. The issue is whether all the material should be released in an investigation or whether the DOJ should leak information to serve the agenda of a few people. We can use James Comey as an example.
Here’s the default rule. Don’t trust the DOJ. Don’t trust federal judges. Don’t trust Congress. Don’t trust the president. No one is telling the truth.
This is Comey's buddy and partner in crime. Maybe because the release of files backfired on the Left, this is notification to the liberals to "Never mind!".
Just in case you forgot, Dan Richman was Comey's big pal. He's the guy Comey leaked classified data to so it could be published and hurt Trump.
Why am i not, repeat not, surprised he wanted the Epstein files kept secret. Better for the public not to know. Why we should trust our betters, oops I mean the X-burts, to handle these sort of things.
Personally, like many seagulls at the beach, I like to "pick over things" and know what Epstein and his crowd were doing with large numbers of elected officials and people who had positions of authority.
Remember too the refusal to release the files, including the shooter's manifesto, from the shooting at a Christian school in Tennessee.
Just more amazing Epstein file coverage from the NYT's. Seems like the last thing the NYT's wants to do is actually go through the Epstein files and tell the public what's in them, and what it all means. Instead it'd rather publish corrupt officials - friend of disgraced ex- FBI Director Comey, about how terrible it is the files were released.
And based on what's given I can't even understand his arguement. So I can't push back on it. What exactly is the downside to releasing the files? That some people are made to look bad? Well, golly gee abner, that really is terrible.
"It's just a rabbit."
Mr. Richman is quite obviously still living in a pre-covid world.
So Democratic presidential administrations don't release the Epstein files, don't go after Epstein's cohort of friends indulging in human trafficking and sex crimes activity, but want Trump administration to "release files", but not to release files containing references to Dems, but release files that containing references to Republicans, but Trump is a Clinton Dem disguised as a MAGA Republican, so things are so confusing, so messed-up, the files get released and content outs a number of progressive liberal despicable men and some overly-ambitious amoral women, and oh but the travesty of releasing these files! Think he protests to loudly; this is what Joe Public expected, this is what Joe Public gets, and Comey and his buddies look like fools..
'...This didn't go as we wanted, and it's somebody's fault ! '
Now that we’ve demanded their release and didn’t find the Trump pony but found plenty of our allies in the shit, we demand you should have never looked in the first place…
Weren't these files released pursuant to an act of congress? (Why yes, yes they were!)
This has nothing to do with prosecutors and how we feel about them. It has everything to do with congress and how we feel about THEM.
The Epstein Files were much more useful to democrats before they were released and they could leak the stuff they wanted leaked.
#MeTooTwo is another selfie goal.
Oh, the 'burden'... uh, burden. Abort, sequester. Let us bray... for squirrel!
I can see Massie and Khanna remaking in this scence.
This would be fine if those who had a job to do would do it. Since politics is the goal of any criminal or civil investigation, these days, then they cannot be trusted.
"Writes former federal prosecutor Daniel Richman, in "The Epstein Files Should Never Have Been Released"
Short version: too much collateral damage.
If there was anything in there on Trump, we would know it better than a Christmas song by now. The fact that there is nothing on him only led the usual liars to simply pretend there was anyway, so the truth doesn't really mean anything in the modern political context. I was told that the internet would make us all smarter, and it does, but only in the way that Reagan explained about knowing so much that isn't true.
Release or not, the left's story hasn't changed, and probably won't. That's something we seem to have just decided to accept as normal now.
Really? Like more people are going to jail over this? Richman might have a point if the authorities had shown any willingness to prosecute, but not prosecuting was the plan from the beginning.
The word now is that there may be more Epsfiles in storage units across the country that may or may not fall into fedgov's hands. It would be funny if the contents of such units were auctioned off because of non-payment of the rent.
They forced halligan out to prevent comey whi worked for hsbc from being prosecuted
Agree with the above in terms of the author and how we got here. I would agree with the author as to why releasing such investigative information shouldn’t be shared. Here’s the thing about Epstein, we learned he got a sweat deal from DOJ, which means the government lost respect for its process. When that happens, the only way to gain it back (if you indeed ever want to gain it back) is to be more transparent. That’s what releasing the Epstein files does.
There is still reputational damage, but now, others that should have been held accountable all along, such as Andrew formerly known as Prince. That goes towards rebuilding respect in our justice system. Respect that Daniel Richman helped to lose and is doesn’t care to regain.
Now that the release has failed in its intended purpose of bring down Trump, it is not surprising that NYT would publish pieces like this. Hindsight is 20:20.
"Writes former federal prosecutor Daniel Richman, in "The Epstein Files Should Never Have Been Released""
Formal federal prosecutors are an unsavory bunch.
So this guy probably had an SAT score above 960, he can read and he still beclowns himself. What is it with Democrats?
Was this contemptible idiot living on Mars last November when Democrats’ hissy fits caused Congress to vote 427 - 1 for the "Epstein Files Transparency Act," which forced the DOJ to publicly release all unclassified records, documents, and materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation?
It’s rather hilarious. Epstein was an ethnic Jew, and not surprisingly, worked almost exclusively with Dems. They should have been smart enough to make sure that the Epstein material stayed deeply buried. But Trump was mentioned in the Epstein files, and here was their chance to finally take him down. So, they demanded to see everything, and got passed legislation that did just that. Turns out that Trump dropped the dime on Epstein, some 20 years ago, and Epstein tried to figure out who had done so. And that was most of why Trump was in the Epstein files. Big whoopsie.
Of course now that the Epstein files showed nothing but leftists collusion, they want them never to have been released...
Of course...
He's only about 10 months late with his awesome insight. This is what conservatives were saying last year.
Core point is almost correct. There are two attractors:
1. authorities spy on us fully while generally enjoying all the secrecy they themselves wish [status quo]
2. everyone is spied on equally incl. authorities, who do not have any discretion to limit access (privacy eroded equally). this would of course tend to limit the amount of surveillance ppl want
#2 has never been tried and probably handicaps nations who undertake it, but if we ever slide into single-world-govt 'kumbaya' it would be the only way to have any sort of trust in the integrity of the system. Epstein types would sabotage any such effort, ofc.
1+2 hybrid: AI does the spying + limited release impartially and we somehow can verify+trust the AI responsible. Ofc the Epstein types still sabotage this if they can.
Where's our resident Epstein expert?
The T-word: trigger
As Jeff Childers has pointed out in his marvelous "Coffee & Covid" substack, Daniel Richman is the "Columbia law professor" who James Comey used to leak the "Russia Collusion" hoax to the NYT. The very same NYT that spent years demanding that "The Epstein Files" be publicly disclosed to embarrass Trump is now platforming this blatant hypocrite's concerns about "untold layers of hearsay, unverified accusations and vague circumstantial connections," now that the wrong people are getting exposed.
GMAFB.
"Those are my principles, gentlemen. If you don't like them, I have others."
The torygraph is still looking for the pony
MTG: ""Writes former federal prosecutor Daniel Richman, in "The Epstein Files Should Never Have Been Released" Short version: too much collateral damage."
True. But much as we can all enjoy some Schadenfreude, at the expense of Dems, now that their original goal of getting Trump has been so thoroughly derailed, the release was still a mistake. Of course, we righties are fully aware of lawfare and prog double standards, and yet: the Epstein release is not good for the system, such as it is.
“the Epstein release is not good for the system, such as it is.“
I don’t understand this.
Leland said...
Here’s the thing about Epstein, we learned he got a sweat(sic) deal from DOJ,...
People need to stop repeating this because, as Shipwreckedcrew (Bill Shipley) explained a while ago, it's false. Alex Acosta has been lying his ass off because he lacks the balls to explain the DOJ reasoning in simple terms. Epstein had a gaggle of high-powered lawyers that were going to make a trial hell for the young women caught up in Epstein's mess, there was no chance for a Federal plea bargain because of conditions Epstein wanted, and the Fed investigators were ok with him serving time in the Florida system. The problems arose in the Florida judicial system where his lawyers got to a judge to divert him into a work release program for non-violent offenders, and the DOJ had no control over that.
A decade later the DOJ charged Epstein with the same stuff, a judge denied him bail, and then he killed himself.
Acosta and the W DOJ were lazy and corrupt.
Judge Cannon just nuked the release of the FL Trump case Appendix II. Some of her justifications included that the Appendix was full of Grand Jury testimony, included Attorney/Client protected information. And, of course, that the law of the case was that Smith’s case was ultra vires from the beginning, which means that any evidence collected by the prosecutors was illegally collected.
Loved that last point by Cannon. Sure, maybe her ruling that Smith was illegally appointed may not be correct (I think that she was correct there). But that doesn’t matter, since the government never perfected an appeal in the matter, so her ruling stands, regardless of its merits.
What they were trying to do was get damaging stuff out that they couldn’t get out otherwise, like Wiseman did with the Mueller committee Appendix. AG Baar shut the Mueller investigation down, and the Appendix was thrown in so that the butt hurt prosecutors could take one more swipe at Trump and his people. It was almost as illegal* as the one that Smith, Bratt, etc wanted to illegally dump in their FL case against Trump. But the release of the Mueller Investigation Appendix wasn’t worth fighting over.
*Illegal because the release violated numerous privileges and secrecy rules.
"“the Epstein release is not good for the system, such as it is.“ I don’t understand this." It will complicate investigations, undermine trust in prosecutors, etc. If coercive use of state power were to result routinely in things like the Epstein release, that would massively invade privacy.
All this is driven by the Dimocrat's delusion that somewhere in that mass of Epstein material there will be the smoking howitzer that will blow the Bad Orange Man out of the Oval Office. They don't care who else gets damaged as long as they get their man! Of course the fact that Merrick Garland and Team Joe Biden had four years to pore over the Epstein files and apparently couldn't find anything that would damage the Donald is lost on them. They're sort of like Gavin Newsom--all of them had SATs at 960 or below.
Most of the degenerate elites appear to be liberal Democrats.
plus openly fraudulent representations like the ts cover sheets,
there is no point they will not go, to inpugn
"When materials collected in a criminal investigation get released in bulk for public consumption, the justification for the coercive and privacy-invading tools we give investigators gets a lot weaker...."
"We would prefer that WE be the ones who get to decide what information we obtain from our coercive and privacy- invading tools gets released to the public. Otherwise the narrative we create will be subject to scrutiny. We don't like that."
The List of the Disgraced, so far.
And, with this afternoon's update.
the times takes exception to samizdat like nick shirley, data republican, you must read the shadows on the cave wall
JFC. This is never going to end, is it?
The establishment line is this Epstein thing is so...boring. And "innocent people" are being hurt. And gosh darn it, what did Epstein do that so wrong, anyway?
And hey there was no sweetheart deal, even though Acosta admits there was one because the Defense attorney's led by "I got my massage on Epstein Island" Deshwhatashit said Epstein was "intelligence" which is code word for Mossad/CIA.
The florida judicial system isn't the federal system, and Acosta was a Fed Prosecutor. Palm Beach DA had been bought off and wouldn't prosecute.
Given what we've seen of the Epstein files, I guess you can't say "Well, it a big nothing burger" so the Establishment has to scramble for other distactions and angles. Anything except talking about who Epstein was, what he did, and who was his friend - and why.
Israel or Israeli is mentioned 4800 times in the Epstein files. And 4800 more times than its mentioned in the NYT's or the WaPo. Can you say "Epstein and Israel" boys and girls? If you can, can you teach the MSM reporters how to do it?
vicky ward, was the supposed collector of that story, she was the one who wrote that very oblique profile, years before,
mike benz has probably been the most clear analyst on the subject, the khashoggi, pottinger, and other ties, all company related,
The Epstein scandal didn't just expose a network of people willing to rape children—or to cozy up to those who did.
It also revealed something equally ugly: a great many elite figures are simply loathsome, bigoted human beings.
Yet a certain strain of contrarian commentary—“actually, all this attention is bad!”—keeps implying the real problem is that we're unfairly tarnishing important people, not terrible ones.
History shows a great deal of overlap between those two categories.
Joe Bar said, "JFC. This is never going to end, is it?"
Nope. It shall enter the country's mythology just like the Southern Lost Cause, Roswell, Operation Northwoods, JFK and MK Ultra among many others, and rightfully so. The highly-cleared perpetrators of this farce will undoubtedly escape responsibility, but the least Americans can do is ensure it's never forgotten.
it is rather striking how pedestrian they make the narrative, of course that noam chomsky the brave dissident, (gack) was caught in the web, well that doesn't compute, but larry summers trying to squire a chinese princess, who gets the better of the deal, is amusing,
We should have fun soon -- the Clintons appearing in the US Congress regarding Epstein.
ah yes MK Ultra, the kind of scam only Bonesman, could conjure up, specially the ones like Luce, that savored the LSD for themselves, then certified it safe, (I don't think he was Bonesman, Operation Northwoods was an interesting one, that would have confused oliver stone, had he known about it then,
Operation Northwoods and JFK are more intimately linked than you think narciso. JFK is the one who practically demoted Lemnitzer. Dulles wasn't too keen on it being shelved either.
stone thought diverting the covert ops, to the pentagon would have been an improvement, well guess again
Richman is Comey’s tool who is unhappy that the vast majority of those hurt by release of the Epstein files are Democrats and other leftists. He is shameless. Live by the sword; die by the sword, Richman.
Yeah, sweet, not sweat, deal, but the idea it is “false”, BS. Everyone in Epstein’s orbit was given immunity. Don’t tell me it would have been hard on the victims and tough to win. They made it hard for any future case as well.
Please tell Mr. Richman, Comey's designated leaker, we'll take his opinions "under advisement," as they say.
Stellar comments above.
Nothing to add.
Super smart analysis by Bruce Hayden supra.
Kakistocracy said...
The Epstein scandal didn't just expose a network of people willing to rape children—or to cozy up to those who did.
It also revealed something equally ugly: a great many elite figures are simply loathsome, bigoted human beings.
They are also the same people you really don't want to pay tariffs.
Eva Marie said...
“the Epstein release is not good for the system, such as it is.“
"I don’t understand this."
It means, "We or our masters are hopelessly involved in this Epstein business and any release of information will show just how corrupt, depraved and soulless we all are."
Me thinks Master Daniel doth protest too much. Does he fear his name appearing or is this protest part of a long term strategy to gain a top job in any future Democrat/Left administration?
This just out - saved for the day of the State of the Union address - some of the details of an apparently false allegation about Trump and a minor have not been released, or something. The screams of the ninnys on PBS reporting this, who very carefully failed to say there is or ever was any evidence reported or withheld or covered up or destroyed, other than the reported allegation, are amazing to behold. They also failed to say that the Biden administration had this supposed report of an allegation from 40 years ago and did nothing with it, including releasing it to the public at all. One can hate the press, but never enough.
The torpedoes keep circling back to Democrats... So, sure, the Dems and their deep state allies had the Epstein files and the goods on Trump for the last decade, but they decided to go with a) the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax and then b) unhinged prosecutions.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.