&w=3840&q=100)
Trump says he will 'release everything' related to Epstein Files amid reports of FBI redacting his name
The clamour for releasing the Epstein files has overshadowed Trump's desperate bid to highlight the success of his first six months in power because it's not his rivals but his own base, which is up in arms. File image
Hours after an explosive report revealed that the FBI 'redacted' US President Donald Trump's name from the Epstein Files, the American leader said that he wants to release 'everything" about the document revealing the ill-deeds of convicted sex offender and British financier Jeffrey Epstein.
The proclamation from the president came amid growing backlash even among Republicans over his administration's reluctance to release the files. Trump's recent comment also marked a flip-flop from his previous assertion when he questioned the 'fascination" of his supporters with the case, dubbing it 'pretty boring stuff'.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
During an interview with Newsmax, the president also gave an insight into Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche's conversation with the deceased sex offender's convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, which went on for nine hours at a federal prison estate in Florida.
'I think [Blanche] probably wanted to know, you know, just to get a feeling of it, because we'd like to release everything, but we don't want people to get hurt that shouldn't be hurt,' Trump told Newsmax host Rob Finnerty. 'I want to release everything,' the president declared. 'I just don't want people to get hurt.'
BREAKING: Trump says he wants to release 'everything' related to Epstein files…
Wait…
So Obama didn't 'write them' and it's not a 'hoax,' after the FBI redacted his name?
pic.twitter.com/iBbJwHlmpF — Brian Krassenstein (@krassenstein) August 2, 2025
'Todd went in, and I think he just wants to make sure that innocent people aren't hurt,' Trump added. However, the president maintained that he hasn't spoken with his deputy attorney general about Maxwell and doesn't know if there are plans to release a transcript of the interview.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
FBI reportedly redacted Trump's name from Epstein Files
While the Trump administration often boasted about being 'transparent', an explosive report revealed that the president's name was redacted from documents surrounding the investigation into sex offender Jeffrey Epstein as the administration prepared for their potential public release.
According to a report by Bloomberg, an investigator in the case reportedly blacked out Trump's name and the names of other high-profile figures, claiming that the information constituted an 'unwarranted invasion of privacy". In a previous report from The Wall Street Journal, it was mentioned that Attorney General Pam Bondi told the president that his name was in the files back in May.
The matter garnered public anger in July after the Department of Justice and the FBI declined to release any additional documents. Public scrutiny of Trump's connections to Epstein and the financier's crimes and circumstances of his death intensified soon after the memo was released.
In February this year, the White House handed over binders of largely publicly available Epstein-related documents to several far-right influencers in an apparent effort to prove that the administration was being transparent about the files. At that time, Bondi called the release of the documents the 'first phase' and went on to tell Fox News that other documents, including the so-called 'client list', are sitting on her desk for review.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
However, in the July memo, the FBI and DoJ backtracked and said that there is 'no basis to revisit the disclosure of those materials' despite demands from MAGA supporters and allies for full accountability. Hence, it remains unclear whether the Trump administration would ever release the full Epstein Files.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
8 minutes ago
- First Post
'If her name or complexion bothers you...': Ohio SG Mathura Sridharan trolled, AG claps back to troll
Indian-origin jurist Mathura Sridharan received racist backlash from online trolls after she was appointed as Ohio's 12th solicitor general. Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost hits back at the troll by issuing a lengthy statement on the matter read more Mathura Sridharan was trolled for her Indian-origin after her name was announced as Ohio's Solicitor General. LinkedIn Indian-origin Mathura Sridharan was appointed as Ohio's 12th solicitor general. However, her feat garnered wrath online with trolls questioning why a 'non-US-origin' person was picked for the post. Soon after her appointment, Sridharan's LinkedIn went viral with critics questioning her credibility. All this prompted Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost to issue a clarification, slamming the troll for ignorance. Yost, who appointed Mathura for the post, said that she is wrongly being portrayed as a non-American. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'A few commenters have asserted incorrectly that Mathura is not American. She is a United States citizen, married to a US citizen, and the child of naturalised US citizens,' he said. 'If her name or her complexion bothers you, the problem is not with her or her appointment,' Yost said in a statement. 'Mathura is brilliant… she won her argument at SCOTUS last year. Both the SGs she worked under (Flowers & Gaiser) recommended her. I told her when I originally hired her that I needed her to argue with me. She does… All the time! Excited to promote her. She will serve Ohio well,' he added. Trolls question her religious identity However, Yost's take on the matter was also met with trolling as people pointed out that she is not 'American-American', with some even questioning her religious identity. 'Is she a Christian? That's the biggest factor that concerns me. Based on the bindi on her forehead, I worry she is not,' one user wrote online. 'Another American job… given away to foreigners,' another wrote. 'She's Indian. They all have a loyalty first to other Indians. Horrible pick. Un-American. The GOP is pathetic,' a third user exclaimed. When it comes to Mathura's career, before joining the Ohio Solicitor's Office, Mathura clerked for Judge Steven J. Menashi of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and Judge Deborah A. Batts of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. She holds a Juris Doctorate from the New York University School of Law, a Master's Degree in Electrical Engineering & Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as a Bachelor's Degree in Economics and Electrical Engineering & Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
New Indian Express
8 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Indian-origin founder of ‘Punjabi devils' biker gang arrested by FBI on firearms, explosives charges
CHANDIGARH: Jashanpreet Singh, a 26-year-old Indian-origin man from Lodi, California, and founder of the 'Punjabi Devils' Motorcycle Club, was arrested by the FBI at San Francisco International Airport as he attempted to flee to India. He now faces multiple federal firearms charges in the United States, including unlawful dealing of firearms and unlawful possession of a machine gun. According to a statement by Acting U.S. Attorney Kimberly A. Sanchez, a federal grand jury has returned a three-count indictment against Singh, charging him with: Unlawful dealing of firearms Unlawful possession of a machine gun Possession of an unregistered short-barrelled rifle Court documents reveal that Singh founded the 'Punjabi Devils,' an outlaw motorcycle gang (OMG) based in Stockton and associated with the Hells Angels. On June 6, Singh allegedly attempted to sell several weapons to an undercover officer, including a short-barrelled rifle, three other assault weapons, three machine gun conversion devices, and a revolver. A search of his residence later uncovered more firearms, a silencer, and explosive devices.
Time of India
8 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump's America First biodiesel policy could cost US companies, consumers, trade groups warn
The Trump administration's push to discourage the use of foreign feedstocks in domestic biodiesel could lead to higher energy prices for US consumers and restricted domestic production, according to some refining and biofuel trade groups. The warning reflects ongoing friction between President Donald Trump's Environmental Protection Agency and the administration's traditional allies in the energy and agriculture industries over biofuels policy. Trump has promised to slash consumer energy costs , but is also trying to advance his America First agenda to support domestic production through trade protectionism - which can often make costs go up instead. At issue is a proposal from the EPA in June that would for the first time allocate only half as many tradable renewable fuel credits to biodiesel that is either imported or made with foreign feedstocks. Under the Renewable Fuel Standard, refiners must blend large volumes of biofuels into the US fuel supply or purchase the credits, called RINs, from those that do. While meant to help domestic farmers and producers, the new proposal - set to be finalized this autumn - would place unprecedented demand on domestic raw materials needed to make biodiesel like soybean oil, used cooking oil, and animal fat, in a market that currently must look abroad to meet its needs. Meanwhile, restricting the number of RINs that can be generated through such imports will raise credit prices, with a potential spillover impact on diesel and home heating oil, according to the industry groups. "This credit restriction ... will jeopardize the economic viability of renewable fuel production assets and raise overall compliance costs for all obligated parties, which ultimately harms US consumers," Chet Thompson, head of the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers group representing refiners, said in a July 25 letter to top Republican lawmakers. The Advanced Biofuels Association also said the policy could mean ramped up consumer costs, by putting a $250 per metric ton premium on domestic versus imported feedstocks, according to a study it commissioned. "Economic analysis shows this would impose significant costs on US biorefineries, raise fuel prices for millions of Americans, and benefit only a narrow set of stakeholders," ABFA President Michael McAdams said in a statement. The White House and EPA declined to comment directly on the price concerns, saying the administration is still seeking public comment on the proposal until August 8. Others in the biofuel industry backed the proposal. "American farmers need all the demand they can get. We should be developing our capacity here, rather than relying on imported used cooking oil from China, or giving Brazilian feedstocks preferential treatment at the expense of US producers and their farm partners," said Emily Skor, CEO of Growth Energy. However, US companies such as ADM, Bunge and Cargill that have global assets and process US soy, as well as foreign companies with significant US operations, will likely see negative effects. That includes Australia's Nufarm , which contracts with farmers in South America to grow new oilseed crops. Uncertain numbers The biofuel industry had not been seeking the import shift in EPA's June proposal, according to multiple renewable fuel lobbyists and company officials. The White House has since held several meetings with industry officials to hear about potential unintended consequences of the changes, according to multiple sources. The EPA's proposal in June was meant to set out biofuel blending mandates for the next two years. It included a quota of 7.12 billion biomass-based diesel RINs for 2026 - a measurement of the number of tradable credits generated by blending the fuel - and projected that mandate would lead to the blending of 5.61 billion gallons. The biofuels industry and the American Petroleum Institute, an oil trade group, had banded together to lobby the administration to set biomass-based diesel mandates to at least 5.25 billion gallons. The mandate was just 3.35 billion gallons in 2025. Still, there are scenarios in the EPA's accounting that could lead to a lower volume outcome. If all the biodiesel and renewable diesel used in the US next year came from domestic feedstocks, for example, the RIN mandate would yield just 4.45 billion gallons, according to several industry analyses reviewed by Reuters. Ditching the penalty on imported feedstocks could help raise that number, according to the analyses. "That probably aligns with what the administration was trying to do in terms of supporting the agricultural side and farmers," said one industry analyst, who asked to remain anonymous to speak candidly.
