DOJ Accused of Stonewalling Congress with Bureaucratic Bottleneck over Epstein Files
The Department of Justice is facing sharp criticism for what appears to be a deliberate effort to obstruct Congressional oversight regarding the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. In a move that critics are calling a transparent farce, the DOJ has reportedly granted Members of Congress access to the unredacted Epstein files under conditions that make meaningful review virtually impossible. According to the source detailing these restrictions, the DOJ has provided just four computers in a secure satellite office for the review of more than 3 million documents.
This logistical bottleneck is being viewed not as a security measure, but as a tactic of delay and obfuscation. With 217 Members of the House having signed a resolution demanding access to these files, the ratio of lawmakers to terminals is laughably inadequate. The source highlights the absurdity of the situation with a staggering calculation: even if investigators worked a standard 40-hour week focusing on absolutely nothing else but reading these documents, it would take more than seven years to get through the material.
Such a timeline renders the “transparency” offered by the DOJ effectively useless. A seven-year review process extends well beyond the legislative sessions and election cycles of the representatives tasked with this oversight. By limiting access to a mere quartet of computers, the DOJ has ensured that the vast majority of the 3 million documents will remain unread and unscrutinized for the foreseeable future.
This restrictive setup suggests that the Department is more interested in protecting the secrets contained within the Epstein archive than in serving the interests of justice or the American public. True transparency requires accessibility. By forcing hundreds of lawmakers to queue for four terminals to view a mountain of evidence, the DOJ is engaging in a form of malicious compliance designed to bury the truth under a layer of impossible logistics. The message from the source is clear: this is not cooperation; it is containment.
