The Justice Department’s management of the Epstein files is starting to seem less like a careful process and more like a slow stumble, at least according to those familiar with federal courtrooms. This was the clear takeaway from a blunt assessment given by Nick Akerman, a former Watergate prosecutor, the day after Christmas.
Akerman, who served as an assistant special Watergate prosecutor and later as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York, appeared on CNN to discuss the DOJ’s explanation for the chaotic release of the Epstein files. When asked about the department’s claim that it was surprised by the existence of about one million Epstein-related files, Akerman quickly responded, “Total nonsense.”
From his view, the idea that senior Justice Department officials were surprised by the volume of material simply doesn’t make sense. This is especially true considering how federal prosecutions work and the people currently in charge.
“They had to know that these files existed from the beginning,” Akerman said. He first pointed to reports that, months before the release, Pam Bondi had FBI agents searching through Epstein files for any mention of President Trump. In Akerman’s eyes, that alone contradicts the claim that the department was unaware of the whereabouts or extent of the documents.
However, he pointed out that the larger issue is even more fundamental and harder to defend. The Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases were prosecuted in the Southern District of New York. This is important because prosecutors there are legally obligated to gather every potentially relevant document from the federal government to meet their duty to provide exculpatory evidence to the defense.
Under the Supreme Court’s Brady doctrine, prosecutors must share evidence that could help the accused. To comply, Akerman explained, they must obtain all relevant files under their control, no matter if those files are with the FBI, the FAA, or any other federal agency. In other words, the presence of a large collection of Epstein-related documents shouldn’t have surprised anyone familiar with the case.
Akerman specifically criticized Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general overseeing the release of the Epstein files. Blanche is a former assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. According to Akerman, his background makes the DOJ’s claim of surprise even harder to accept.
“He should have known that,” Akerman said, continuing: “So they had to know that these were there. There’s no excuse for it.”
These comments come amid growing frustration over how the Epstein files are being released. The Justice Department has issued documents in batches, often with warnings that some material contains unverified or sensational claims. While this caution may be legally sensible, it hasn’t prevented confusion, particularly after the DOJ admitted that at least one widely circulated document was fake.
At the same time, tensions have been rising in the political sphere. Recent releases have included multiple mentions of Trump, prompting the DOJ to clarify that a name in the files does not imply wrongdoing. Trump has publicly expressed outrage, calling the disclosures a hoax and criticizing the media coverage, which has only kept the story alive during the holidays.
Legal analysts and former prosecutors watching from the sidelines argue that the issue isn’t just about what’s in the files but also how the department is justifying its actions. Saying the process is complicated is one thing. Claiming officials were caught off guard is another.
For many, the DOJ is harming its own credibility by providing explanations that don’t align with reality. The Epstein Saga has been a disaster for Trump and Pam Bondi, who once said she had it on her desk. It’s fair to say that the Trump Administration likely regrets campaigning on the Epstein Files release, which they have yet to deliver in full.
