The Department of Justice is facing serious questions after a report alleged it briefly removed a document tied to Ghislaine Maxwell that could have major political implications.
According to investigative reporter Roger Sollenberger, the DOJ deleted records showing that Maxwell’s legal team had been given access to multiple FBI interviews connected to an accusation involving President Donald Trump. The missing material reportedly involved “a key document about a woman who told the FBI that Donald Trump sexually assaulted her when she was a child.”
Also Read: New Video shows Ghislaine Maxwell pleading the fifth as Congress demands answers about Epstein
Sollenberger laid out the timeline on Friday, explaining when the document disappeared from the DOJ’s website and how it was later restored after he reported on it. That sequence has fueled concerns about transparency and whether the public was meant to see the full scope of what Maxwell’s defense team had received ahead of her trial.
The report makes a striking claim about the number of interviews involved. “[T]his document shows the FBI conducted not just one but four interviews with Trump’s accuser,” the report stated. “[W]hile the government gave all four of those interviews to Maxwell’s legal team ahead of her trial, the government gave only one of those four interviews to us in the Epstein files.”
That discrepancy is at the heart of the controversy. If accurate, it means Maxwell’s attorneys had access to more detailed material than what was made publicly available in the Epstein files release.
Read More: Trump’s Epstein Files Law opens door for Ghislaine Maxwell’s latest Legal Challenge
Sollenberger did not mince words in his conclusion. “In other words, this document shows that, in choosing to withhold three of the four interviews from the Epstein files, the DOJ has granted Maxwell potential blackmail on the sitting president of the United States,” Sollenberger concluded.
The DOJ has not publicly explained why the document was temporarily removed or whether the deletion was intentional or administrative. The fact that it reappeared after media scrutiny has only intensified the debate.
For many Americans who have followed the Epstein case and its political fallout for years, this latest twist raises familiar questions about accountability and transparency. At minimum, the situation underscores how sensitive and explosive the Epstein files remain, especially when they intersect with powerful figures.
Whether this was a clerical error or something more deliberate, the episode is likely to keep pressure on the DOJ as lawmakers and the public continue to demand clarity about what is in the files and who has seen what.