What did the DOJ say about the authenticity of Trump-related claims in the Epstein file releases?
Executive summary
The Department of Justice warned that some of the newly released Jeffrey Epstein documents include “untrue and sensationalist claims” about President Donald Trump and said the FBI has identified at least one letter in the release as a fake, while also stressing that publishing records under the law does not validate the allegations they contain [1] [2]. The DOJ declined to specify which Trump-related claims were false and framed the releases as compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act even as its handling has invited scrutiny and political pushback [2] [3].
1. What the DOJ explicitly said: untrue and sensationalist claims, and a fake letter
In a social-media and press statement accompanying a roughly 30,000‑page tranche of files, DOJ officials cautioned that the batch “contain[ed] untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump” that had been submitted to the FBI shortly before the 2020 election, and the department later said the FBI had determined a letter purportedly from Jeffrey Epstein to Larry Nassar was fake — pointing to handwriting and other flags — and stressing that release of a document does not make the allegations within it factual [4] [1] [2].
2. What the DOJ did not and could not say: no catalog of which claims are false
While firm in its language about some items being “untrue” or “sensationalist,” the Justice Department did not identify, in public statements tied to the release, which specific Trump-related allegations were false or how the FBI assessed each item’s provenance; it repeatedly emphasized compliance with the statutory requirement to publish records and did not convert the release into a verdict on contested assertions [2] [3].
3. The concrete example the FBI flagged: the Nassar letter
DOJ and the FBI called out a particular item that circulated widely online — a letter signed “J. Epstein” that referenced “our President” and crude language about young women — as not authentic, saying it had been flagged at the time it was received in the jail and later deemed fake, a move the department used to caution readers about treating every released document as verified evidence [1] [5].
4. Other Trump references in the releases and DOJ context
Beyond the fake letter, the tranche included contemporaneous emails and flight records that mention Trump — for instance, a 2020 email from a federal prosecutor noting Trump was listed as a passenger on Epstein’s jet on at least eight flights in the 1990s — but the DOJ’s public messages made a distinction between factual records (like flight logs) and third‑party allegations that lack corroboration [6] [7].
5. How outside actors interpreted DOJ’s statements and the competing narratives
The DOJ’s language was seized by multiple outlets and political actors as either a defense of the president or a sober warning about unverified material; critics and some lawmakers argued the department was selectively shielding information or failing to fully explain redactions, while others noted DOJ was legally compelled to release documents even when their provenance was uncertain [8] [9] [3]. Observers pointed out that calling some claims “untrue” without granular detail leaves room for dispute over what the FBI actually verified versus what remains under review [2].
6. Why this matters: transparency, timing, and political stakes
The DOJ framed the releases as compliance with Congress’s transparency mandate while simultaneously grappling with the real-world harms of circulating unverified allegations in a charged political moment, and the department’s refusal to map each contested claim for the public has fueled demands for more oversight, independent review, and better context around what the files do — and do not — prove [3] [8] [9].