by Stefano Vaccara
NEW YORK (USA) (ITALPRESS) – The scoop arrived the very morning of the State of the Union, casting a heavy shadow on the narration of transparency of the White House. To reveal it first was journalist Stephen Fowler on NPR, discovering how the Justice Department would remove or retain dozens of pages of documents relating to a woman who accused Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump of abusing her when she was a minor. The Npr investigation, signed by Fowler and relaunched throughout the country, is based on a cross-examination of documents published by the Department of Justice in the dissemination of Epstein Files. According to the reconstruction, the FBI would interview the witness at least four times in 2019. However, only the minutes of the first interview appear in the public database made available by the government. The internal numberings of the documents – the so-called Bates numbers – indicate a gap of over fifty pages between the existing materials and those actually published.
At the heart of the political complaint is the Democratic MP of California Robert Garcia, a prominent member of the House’s Control Committee. After examining documents not obscured at the Justice Department, Garcia argued that reports and notes relating to the interrogations of the alleged victim would be kept openly speaking of possible cover. The Democrats have announced the start of a parallel investigation to see if the Epstein Files publication law has been violated. Among the materials that emerged there would also be an internal presentation of the FBI in which Trump’s name appears among the “prominent names” mentioned in the accusations related to Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The accusation, referring to episodes occurred between 1983 and 1985, would have been considered credible enough to be forwarded to an investigative office for further verification, although the outcome of the investigation is not known.
The Department of Justice rejected the allegations, claiming in an answer to Npr that it did not provide detailed explanations but referring to the statements already made: no document would have been deleted and all the relevant material would have been published, except duplicates, content covered by legal privilege or parts of investigations still in progress. The White House, for its part, continues to argue that there is nothing incriminating about the president and defines the “unfounding and sensationalistic” accusations. But the political knot remains. While the administration demands total transparency on the Epstein Files, the emergence of missing pages and the public complaint of a possible cover-up by members of Congress fuel suspicions on the completeness of revelations, transforming a judicial case never really closed into an increasingly destabilizing political problem for the Trump administration.
– photo IPA Agency –
(ITALPRESS).
