What specifically did the DOJ/FBI say about the authenticity of documents in the Epstein files that mentioned Donald Trump?
Executive summary
The Department of Justice publicly warned that portions of the newly released Epstein materials include "untrue and sensationalist claims" about President Donald Trump, and the FBI separately concluded at least one high-profile item—a handwritten letter purportedly from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry Nassar—was fake based on handwriting, postmark, and mailing irregularities [1] [2] [3]. The DOJ said the broader allegations are "unfounded and false," while still releasing the records under the new transparency law; critics dispute whether the department has been sufficiently transparent [2] [4] [5].
1. DOJ's blanket characterization: 'untrue and sensationalist claims'
In accompanying the document drop, the Department of Justice issued a statement saying some materials "contain untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election," and the department described those claims as "unfounded and false" even as it released the files in the interest of transparency [3] [2] [4].
2. The FBI's specific finding about the purported Epstein-to-Nassar letter
The FBI specifically determined that a handwritten letter presented in the files—purportedly from Epstein to Larry Nassar—was fake: the agency said the handwriting "does not appear to match" Epstein's, the letter was postmarked three days after Epstein's death, and the return address did not list the Manhattan jail or Epstein’s inmate number required for outgoing mail, prompting the FBI to flag it as inauthentic [2] [3] [6].
3. How the FBI reached that authenticity judgment
Reporting traces the FBI's conclusion to multiple factors recorded in the released files: a handwriting comparison flagged mismatch concerns, the suspicious postmark date relative to Epstein’s custody and death, and procedural inconsistencies with jail mail regulations—facts the DOJ and outlets summarized when announcing the finding [2] [3] [6].
4. DOJ’s approach to unverified tips and pre-election submissions
The department underlined that several allegations about Trump in the tranche were tips and unverified information submitted to the FBI shortly before the 2020 election, which the DOJ said lacked credibility; the DOJ nonetheless published the documents with victim-protection redactions as required by law [1] [3] [2].
5. What DOJ/FBI did not say — limits of the official statements
The DOJ and FBI statements, as reported, did not claim that every mention of Trump in the files was false nor did they provide a public, document-by-document authentication for the full set—only that some items were fake or unsubstantiated and that at least one letter was confirmed fake; the agencies also acknowledged vast numbers of files remain to be processed and reviewed [2] [7] [6].
6. Competing interpretations and political context
Critics and defenders read the brief DOJ/FBI statements through partisan lenses: the department framed the claims as uncredible and released the material under the law [2], while opponents accuse the DOJ under this administration of slow-walking releases and redacting or even temporarily removing some Trump-related images and files—moves that fueled skepticism about completeness and motive [8] [9] [5]. Media outlets uniformly note that being named in files is not proof of wrongdoing and that many mentions are press clippings or uncorroborated tips [10] [6].
7. Bottom line on authenticity: a narrow forensic finding amid broader caveats
Concretely, the FBI publicly concluded at least one high-profile handwritten item was fake based on handwriting and mailing evidence, and the DOJ characterized a set of late-submitted allegations about Trump as "untrue and sensationalist" and "unfounded and false"; however, neither agency provided an exhaustive authentication of every Trump-related entry in the releases, and large portions of the files remain under review or redacted [3] [2] [7].