After months of mounting pressure from victims and the general public, Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, and President Trump signed it into law on November 19, 2025. The law required the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all unclassified documents, records, and materials related to Jeffrey Epstein before December 19, 2025.
However, according to a Time story by Connor Greene, “Less than 1% of the Epstein files have been released, DOJ says.”
The article continues, “More than two weeks after the deadline for the release of all files related to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, top Department of Justice officials have disclosed that more than 99% of the materials have not yet been made public. Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche wrote in an update to a federal judge who oversaw the case ... that over two million documents ‘remain in various phases of review and redaction.’”
It’s obvious from photographs and other materials that Donald Trump was more than just a passing acquaintance of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who claimed that for several years he was Trump’s best friend. It seems equally obvious that the DOJ is reluctant to release the Epstein Files, in defiance of the law, because they are protecting President Trump.
Could the DOJ be charged with obstruction of justice? That conversation would just have to wait, as more pressing matters have pushed the Epstein Files out of the headlines.
On January 3, the US launched a military strike against Venezuela, invading the capital of Caracas and capturing Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores. Numerous pundits, politicians, and everyday people saw the military action as a deliberate and desperate attempt to divert attention away from the Epstein Files. Some likened the attempt at distraction to the 1997 film, “Wag the Dog,” in which a war with Albania is created to distract US voters from a presidential sex scandal.
A debate ensued about the president’s power to wage war without congressional approval. On January 14, Vice President J. D. Vance cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate to defeat a War Powers resolution aimed at curbing the president’s power to wage war in Venezuela.
Three Republican senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Susan Collins of Maine, voted with Democrats to force Vance’s tie-breaking vote. President Trump declared they “should never be elected to office again.”
President Trump proclaimed the US would “run” Venezuela, and US oil companies would fix Venezuela’s “broken infrastructure.” How would that work exactly? Would Trump run Venezuela from afar in the same way he runs Mar-a-Lago from the White House? At least a few Big Oil executives expressed concerns about investing in Venezuela, where they have been burned in the past. President Trump said he would fix all that, but does he have the authority to use US tax dollars to rebuild Venezuela for Big Oil?
That conversation would just have to wait, as new threats made by the president against Greenland and Denmark pushed Venezuela out of the headlines.
In an exclusive NBC interview, Peter Nicholas and Alexander Smith report, “Asked if he would use force to seize Greenland, the president said, ‘No comment,’ in a brief telephone interview with NBC News.
“Trump has stepped up his push to take possession of Greenland. He said Saturday he would impose 10% tariffs on Denmark and seven other European nations until a deal is struck for America’s acquisition of Greenland.”
The following day, Tuesday, January 20, the stock market plunged 2%. On Wednesday, January 21, Trump spoke at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and ruled out using military force to acquire Greenland. Trump said top officials have reached “a framework of a future deal” on Greenland, and he softened his stance on new tariffs aimed at the eight countries who opposed the US takeover of Greenland.
Meanwhile, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sent thousands of armed federal agents into Minnesota, and Renée Good, a 37-year-old American citizen and protester, was fatally shot and killed in Minneapolis by ICE agent Jonathan Ross. Within hours of the killing, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed Good had “proceeded to weaponize her vehicle and she attempted to run a law enforcement officer over. This appears as an attempt to kill or to cause bodily harm to agents, an act of domestic terrorism.”
Every major survey and poll show a majority of Americans think the killing was unjustified, while a fairly small minority believe it was justified. Should a federal agent be exempt from prosecution simply because a cabinet secretary declares that the victim was a domestic terrorist? That conversation would just have to wait – along with all the others that have been placed on a back burner, while the media direct their attention on the latest crisis in the news.
These are all important developments, and they should not be ignored. Nor should we ignore the possibility, if not likelihood, that these are not just random events, but part of an overall strategy.
In a Newsweek article titled “Steve Bannon’s ‘Flood the Zone’ Strategy Explained Amid Trump Policy Blitz,” Peter Aitken explains, “The ‘flood the zone’ strategy seemingly being used by the Trump administration, which has resulted in a relentless onslaught of new directives and policy announcements, is drawing renewed scrutiny during the beginning of his second term.
“The term was reportedly coined by former Trump White House chief strategist Steve Bannon in 2018 when he said the best way to deal with media was to ‘flood the zone.’
“The strategy from Bannon was to continually attempt to overwhelm opposition from Democrats as well as the media through a flurry of moves that would be difficult to respond to all at once.”
While we struggle to keep up with Trump’s relentless barrage of outrageous policy decisions, the rich are getting richer and the rest of us are not. More importantly perhaps, the uber-rich are increasingly using their wealth and power to further their stranglehold on politics, not just in America, but all around the globe.
In CNBC, Lucy Handley reports, “Billionaires’ wealth has risen sharply to a record high of $18.3 trillion — with the super-rich seeking power ‘for their own gain,’ according to a report by the global charity Oxfam released Monday.
“The number of billionaires reached more than 3,000 last year, and collectively they saw their fortunes increase by 16%, or $2.5 trillion, the report said.
“Oxfam also said the super-rich often use their wealth to secure political power as well as media ownership, noting billionaire Elon Musk’s involvement in the U.S. administration at the start of 2025, Jeff Bezos’s ownership of The Washington Post and billionaire Vincent Bollore’s acquisition of French news site CNews.”
Elon Musk, who spent nearly $300 million on Trump’s 2024 campaign, has recently donated $10 million to Nate Morris, a Republican running for the US Senate in Kentucky.
Republicans have cut taxes on the richest Americans and American corporations six times since 1980. Conservatives further boost the bottom lines of their corporate overlords with deregulation, opposition to an increase in the federal minimum wage, as well as a variety of policies and initiatives that increase the profits of Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Banks.
It’s damnably easy for us not to see the forest for the trees as democracies slide increasingly toward autocracy in America and all around the world.
--30--
Comments
