The Department of Justice has quietly removed records of four separate FBI interviews with a woman who accused President Trump of sexual assault when she was underage. These records were part of the Jeffrey Epstein files and are supposed to be publicly available under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

The woman, identified as one of Epstein’s victims, accused President Trump of forcing her to engage in oral sex sometime between 1983 and 1985, when she was in her early teens. She described a violent encounter where she bit Trump’s exposed penis, after which he allegedly punched her in the head and kicked her out. She also told the DOJ that Jeffrey Epstein first introduced her to President Trump in 1984.

Independent journalists Roger Sollenberger and Nina Burleigh brought this to light, noting that DOJ records clearly showed the FBI spoke to this woman at least four separate times. According to The New Republic, Sollenberger found records of these interviews, which took place in the summer and fall of 2019, in a separate document database that was originally provided to Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyers for her trial.

The timeline of these disappearing records raises serious questions about accountability

The interview records spanned from July 24, 2019, to October 16, 2019, and have since been removed from public access. The first interview took place on July 24, 2019, but was not entered into the FBI’s case files until August 9, 2019, a 16-day gap. This is unusual, as FBI agents typically have a five-day deadline to file interview write-ups. Epstein was found dead in his jail cell just one day after that first interview was finally filed.

Despite these documented interviews and the allegations, Attorney General Pam Bondi recently stated there was “no evidence” President Trump had committed any crime. Lawmakers have also accused the DOJ of failing its final obligation under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, adding to concerns that the department is not being fully transparent. Many see this as part of a broader effort to shield the president from scrutiny connected to the Epstein scandal.

The FBI interviewed one of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims four times over her allegation that Donald Trump assaulted her when she was underage—but most accusations against the president appear to have been removed from the government’s documents. https://t.co/jmRc4QZylS pic.twitter.com/bnrXMI1WgT

— The New Republic (@newrepublic) February 21, 2026

In the U.K., Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former British prince, was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office, directly tied to the Epstein files. This development has drawn attention to the question of whether equally powerful figures connected to Epstein in the U.S. are being held to the same standard.

Some observers have noted that the rule of law should apply equally to everyone, and that justice should not stop with one imprisoned accomplice while others with more influence avoid scrutiny. The truth, no matter how “politically explosive,” needs to be fully examined.

The disappearance of these interview records, given the broader context of the Epstein case, has added to concerns that certain powerful individuals are not being treated the same way as others under investigation. This comes alongside other controversies involving the department, including reports of the DOJ displaying a pro-Trump banner inside its offices after Trump had previously sued the department for $230 million.

The UK government is considering whether to remove former Prince Andrew from the line of succession as a police investigation continues into the former royal. The developments were reported by Fox News, which noted officials saying they are not ruling out further steps.

Andrew was arrested Thursday morning, February 19, on suspicion of misconduct in public office, a charge that carries a maximum sentence of life in prison. He was released from custody hours later, and authorities have said the investigation is ongoing.

Although Andrew was stripped of his princely title in October 2025, he remains eighth in line to the throne. Any change to his position would require new legislation, making it a significant political and constitutional step for the government.

Removing a royal from succession would require a new law

James Murray, the government’s chief secretary to the Treasury, said the government is considering what additional steps might be required and that officials are not ruling anything out. Defence Minister Luke Pollard echoed the same message, saying the government and Buckingham Palace have been working together to prevent Andrew from “potentially being a heartbeat away from the throne,” as other political headlines, including Trump warning to Iran, continue to draw attention.

Pressure Grows to Remove Former Prince Andrew From the Line of Succession https://t.co/RS6Wu1iDPs

— TOWN&COUNTRY (@TandCmag) February 21, 2026

Pollard said he hopes any action would receive cross-party support, but emphasized it is something that would only happen when the police investigation concludes. The comments underscore that, while officials are weighing options, the matter is tied to the outcome of an active process rather than an immediate policy decision.

King Charles III also addressed the situation in a statement from Buckingham Palace. He said he had learned with the “deepest concern” of the news regarding Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and the suspicion of misconduct in public office, while stressing the need for a “full, fair and proper process.”

The King said authorities would receive “full and wholehearted support and co-operation,” adding that “the law must take its course,” and that it would not be right to comment further while the investigation continues. The broader public response has also played out alongside viral flashpoints, including Home Depot CEO pricing dispute, that have kept attention on how quickly online narratives spread.

The last time a royal was formally removed from the line of succession was in 1936, after King Edward VIII abdicated. That required a change in law that removed him and any descendants from the succession list, underscoring the historical and legal weight of the step being discussed now.

Andrew has faced public scrutiny for years over his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and allegations from Virginia Roberts Giuffre, who said Andrew had sex with her when she was 17. Andrew has repeatedly denied the allegations.

In October 2025, Andrew said he would no longer use his title or the honors conferred upon him. Later that month, Buckingham Palace confirmed King Charles had initiated a formal process to remove Andrew’s style, titles, and honors, and that he would be known as Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. Andrew remains in the line of succession as the police investigation continues following his February 19 arrest and release.

New Mexico is officially reopening a criminal inquiry into Jeffrey Epstein’s infamous Zorro Ranch. This is a huge development, especially since new allegations are surfacing from recently released Justice Department files concerning the convicted sex offender.

State prosecutors are making it clear they’re taking a “broad and comprehensive” look at the ranch, according to Attorney General Raúl Torrez on X. They’re actively seeking full access to all the unredacted Epstein files related to Zorro Ranch that federal investigators are holding in Washington D.C. Plus, they’ve pledged to team up with the new “Epstein truth commission” that state legislators just set up.

This bipartisan, four-member panel has a big job on its hands. It’s investigating serious allegations that the ranch might have been a hub for SA and trafficking. One of the state legislators on the commission, Andrea Romero of Santa Fe, told the BBC that there might have been reports to the FBI back in 2019, or even earlier, about bodies being buried and people being trafficked. 

New email from anonymous sender has everyone scurrying for answers

In fact, the state confirmed it’s investigating a specific 2019 email from the recently released documents. This email, from an anonymous sender, alleged that Epstein had ordered the bodies of two foreign girls to be buried outside the ranch. 

US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is also seeking an unredacted copy of that email. The lawmakers on the commission also want to know why Epstein didn’t register as a sex offender after pleading guilty to soliciting prostitution from an underage girl way back in 2008.

We are taking a broad and comprehensive look at Zorro Ranch–related matters and working alongside the truth commission and law enforcement partners. We will follow the facts and keep the public informed. pic.twitter.com/FXoCKBZGeG

— New Mexico Department of Justice (@NewMexicoDOJ) February 19, 2026

This isn’t the first time New Mexico has looked into the ranch. The state actually shelved its initial investigation back in 2019 at the request of federal prosecutors in New York. Epstein, who died in a Manhattan jail in 2019, never faced any charges in New Mexico, but prosecutors did confirm in 2019 that they had interviewed possible victims who visited the property. There are reports from a number of women alleging they were abused by Epstein at Zorro Ranch. 

Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernandez of New Mexico highlighted how isolated and beautiful the landscape of Zorro Ranch is, noting, “We know that there are horrible things that occurred at that ranch.”

Zorro Ranch is located south of Santa Fe. There are thousands of references to it in the millions of documents released by the US Justice Department in late January. The ranch boasts a huge 21,000 square foot mansion perched on a hilltop, overlooking nearly 10,000 acres of desert. It even had its own private airstrip and helipad nearby.

Today, Zorro Ranch is owned by former Texas state Senator Don Huffines, who purchased it from Epstein’s estate in 2023.

President Trump weighed in on the arrest of Britain’s Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, formerly known as Prince Andrew, calling the whole situation “very sad,” as reported by The Hill. “I think it’s a shame,” President Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One as he headed to Georgia.

He added, “I think it’s very sad. I think it’s so bad for the royal family.” He even took a moment to praise Mountbatten-Windsor’s brother, King Charles III, calling him “fantastic” and noting that the British monarch will be visiting the U.S. pretty soon.

Mountbatten-Windsor was arrested at Sandringham House, a historical estate in the English countryside that belongs to the royal family. Thames Valley Police confirmed they arrested a man in his 60s from Norfolk “on suspicion of misconduct in public office.” They also mentioned that searches are underway at addresses in both Norfolk and Berkshire, which tells you this is a serious investigation. After the arrest, Mountbatten-Windsor was later photographed leaving the police station in a car.

This arrest comes on the heels of new revelations from documents released by the U.S. DOJ under the Epstein Files Transparency Act

These documents reportedly show Mountbatten-Windsor sharing confidential information with Jeffrey Epstein during his time as the U.K.’s special representative for trade and investment. The fallout from the documents linked to the convicted sex offender Epstein has really shaken things up on both sides of the Atlantic. King Charles stripped his brother of his royal titles just last year. That decision came after files released by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee unveiled even more details about Mountbatten-Windsor’s connections to Epstein.

One of Epstein’s victims, Virginia Giuffre, who tragically died by suicide last year, wrote in her posthumous memoir that Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell trafficked her to Mountbatten-Windsor, who she alleged sexually abused her. For his part, the former prince has consistently denied any wrongdoing in connection to Epstein, maintaining his innocence.

Trump on former Prince Andrew arrest: ‘I think it’s very sad’https://t.co/p64txiesHr

— KRON4 News (@kron4news) February 20, 2026

Amid all this, President Trump himself is mentioned numerous times throughout the Epstein documents, but it’s important to note that he hasn’t been publicly accused of any wrongdoing. However, when asked about Epstein on Wednesday, President Trump took a rather surprising turn in his comments.

“It’s really interesting because nobody used to speak about Epstein when he was alive, but now they speak,” President Trump said to reporters. He then added a personal take: “But now I’m the one who can talk about him because I’ve been totally exonerated. I did nothing.”

Then came the truly unexpected pivot: “He was against me. He was fighting me in the election, which I just found out through the last 3 million pages of documents.”

Larry Summers, one of America’s most recognizable economists, just got hit with a lifetime ban from the American Economic Association (AEA) because of his extensive ties to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, as reported by CNN. For someone who has spent their entire career in this field, this is truly awful for his professional standing and legacy. The AEA, which is a major professional organization boasting more than 17,000 members, released a statement on Tuesday confirming the ban.

The AEA noted that they accepted Summers’ voluntary resignation from the group, but they didn’t stop there. Effective immediately, the AEA is imposing a total lifetime prohibition on him. This means Summers can’t attend, speak at, or participate in any AEA-sponsored events or activities. On top of that, he won’t be serving in any editorial or refereeing capacity for their academic journals. That is a comprehensive exclusion that effectively severs his formal connection to the professional organization for life.

This whole situation escalated after a House committee published years of email correspondence between Summers and Epstein last month. This new information really fueled the fire leading to the AEA’s strong reaction. The details in those exchanges were pretty damning. They included instances where Summers made sexist remarks and even sought romantic advice from Epstein.

From Treasury Secretary to pariah, Summers’ downfall has been nothing short of spectacular

The AEA issued a strong condemnation of his actions. The AEA stated that it “condemns Mr. Summers’ conduct, as reflected in publicly reported communications, as fundamentally inconsistent with its standards of professional integrity and with the trust placed in mentors within the economics profession.” The group felt that the details revealed in those emails completely violated the trust that the profession places in its senior leaders and mentors.

The fallout has been swift and severe across the board. Summers released a statement last month addressing the controversy. He admitted he was “deeply ashamed” of his actions and recognized “the pain they have caused.” He also promised he would step back from his public commitments in light of the damaging reports. This was following President Trump’s order to the DOJ to investigate powerful people with Epstein ties, which included Summers.

New: Larry Summers has received a lifetime ban by the American Economic Association after his connections to Jeffrey Epstein was revealed pic.twitter.com/DlkRE5Utwr

— The Calvin Coolidge Project (@TheCalvinCooli1) December 3, 2025

We’ve seen that follow through already in several high-profile roles. He took leave from teaching at Harvard while the university investigates the full scope of his relationship with Epstein. Plus, he resigned from his position on the board of OpenAI.

It’s important to remember just how prominent Summers is in the economic world. He’s not some minor figure; he has held some of the most influential positions in the country. He served as Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton, who found himself tied to the whole scandal following leaked emails. When someone with that level of influence is publicly condemned by their professional peers, it sends a powerful message.

Representative Robert Garcia is calling out Attorney General Pam Bondi, arguing that the Department of Justice can’t use a last-minute legal loophole to hold back the complete, un-redacted Jeffrey Epstein files from Congress. According to The Hill, Garcia, who serves as the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wrote a letter to Bondi on Friday insisting that the DOJ must comply with the committee’s subpoena, regardless of any new investigations the administration might launch.

If you’re keeping track of the legislative side, Congress just passed a new bill demanding the DOJ release these documents to lawmakers. This bill had nearly unanimous support, with only one member of the House voting against it, and it requires the documents to be released within 30 days.

Here’s where things get messy and frankly, concerning. Even though that bill passed, it includes a provision that allows the DOJ to withhold information if it’s deemed relevant to “ongoing investigations.” This is awful news for transparency. At the direction of President Trump, Bondi recently launched a probe specifically into Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Democrats.

This move seems perfectly timed to exploit the provision and potentially shield certain information from public view

Garcia isn’t having it, though. He stated his concern that President Trump will try, “on dubious legal grounds, to exploit a provision which allows DOJ to withhold information relevant to ongoing investigations.”

Garcia stressed that their subpoena demands everything, writing, “I write to remind you that the subpoena issued by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform requires you to release the complete, un-redacted Epstein files to the Committee, including classified information and material relevant to ongoing investigations, while protecting the identity of survivors and potential victims.” He made it crystal clear that “Any additional federal investigations launched by the DOJ or the President do not impact our subpoena.”

AG Pam Bondi needs to release the files immediately. We now have signed legislation that has passed Congress and an official Oversight Committee subpoena that we passed in August.

Release the Epstein files! pic.twitter.com/gHTT2tYz7Y

— Congressman Robert Garcia (@RepRobertGarcia) November 20, 2025

This fight over the remaining files is huge because the documents released so far have already dropped some massive bombs. Just last week, Garcia himself released emails showing Epstein discussing President Trump. In those emails, Epstein stated that the president “knew about the girls.” That is an incredibly damning piece of evidence, and I think it shows exactly why the administration is fighting so hard to control what comes out next.

We’ve also already seen the notorious birthday note President Trump allegedly wrote to Epstein back in 2003. In that note, he claimed the two share a “wonderful secret” and “have certain things in common.” President Trump has denied writing the message, and he even sued The Wall Street Journal after they first reported on it.

However, House Oversight Democrats compared the signature on that image to other documents signed by President Trump, and they argue there’s little doubt it’s authentic.