Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

What Happened

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s slate of fiery progressives swept establishment-backed Democrats in the state’s congressional primaries on Tuesday, ousting two sitting congressmen in a resounding show of force for the democratic socialist leader of America’s largest city, who is fighting to reshape the Democratic Party in New York and beyond.

Tuesday’s primaries represented a major political gamble for the 34-year-old mayor, whose strength is surging, and a potential headache for Democratic leaders, who fear that Mamdani and his loyalists may push the party too far left ahead of November’s midterm elections — when voters across the nation will decide which party controls Congress for the last two years of Trump’s final term.

The noticeable shift to the left by Democratic primary voters comes at a time when Trump-backed partisan gerrymandering is pushing Republican-majority districts farther to the right. The gambit could backfire, however, as is evidenced by New York’s primary elections, as well as the steady stream of upset victories Democrats have won in special elections since Trump was reelected.

Even in races where Republicans win, they’re doing so by much smaller margins than in previous years. It’s a clear sign from voters that they don’t think the party in power is listening to their needs. It’s led to Democrats regaining control of the Michigan state senate, the Virginia House, and chipping away at Republican supermajorities in Arkansas and Florida.

Heather Williams, president of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, believes Republicans may have overplayed their hand, and 2026 could be the year Republicans lose control of a number of state legislatures where they hold narrow majorities.

*The Associated Press contributed to this story.

@couriernewsroom
As Democrats make gains in places Republicans assumed they could always win, National Correspondent Camaron Stevenson explains why the GOP’s redistricting advantage is no longer a sure thing.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

Timeline: Epstein’s 30-year friendship with billionaire Leon Black

The House Oversight Committee is scheduled on Friday to interview a fourth implicated billionaire as part of its investigation into the government’s handling of the case against Jeffrey Epstein’s international human trafficking ring.

The transcribed interview will be the first time Wall Street billionaire Leon Black has appeared before Congress to answer questions about his relationship with Epstein, although it is far from the first time he’s been asked to testify. Black successfully avoided subpoenas from prosecutors as a defendant in 2021 and a witness 2026, when civil cases he was named in were settled before he was compelled to speak.

Black’s long, sordid relationship with Epstein is of particular interest to congressional investigators, who view his role as friend and financier as crucial to understanding how a failed high school teacher came to own two islands, develop close relationships with the world’s richest and most powerful people, amass a personal fortune of over $500 million, and operate an international trafficking and money laundering network seemingly undisturbed for nearly 30 years.

US Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), who launched an investigation into Epstein’s finances in 2021, has uncovered a number of suspicious financial entanglements between Black and Epstein. In addition to overpayments for tax services to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, Wyden claims Black “appears to have” used Epstein as an intermediary to avoid paying taxes on payments made to women he had affairs with. He’s also raised questions surrounding Epstein’s use of Black’s transactions to launder money to his trafficking accomplices in Eastern Europe.

“It appears that Epstein kept close tabs of women who Black had reached settlements/NDAs with and reached out to Russian government officials to help Black with these so-called problems,” Wyden said in a statement. “Epstein even appears to have acted as a middleman for Black to pay women on Black’s behalf, raising concerns of potential money laundering.”

Wyden’s inquiries into Epstein and Black’s financial dealings have so far been stymied by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has refused to grant congressional investigators access to confidential financial documents. The Treasury Department also provided Wyden extremely limited access during the Biden administration — just one day onsite — and in that short period, investigators identified roughly $1 billion in suspicious transactions flowing through Epstein’s accounts. Wyden has requested expanded access from Bessent, who in turn has threatened to launch financial investigations into Wyden.

Black’s interview with the Oversight Committee could provide a glimpse into Epstein’s financial web, as the two were monetarily entangled from 1997 to 2018.

To better understand Black’s involvement in Epstein’s dealings, COURIER created a timeline of their relationship based on legal filings, financial records, internal correspondence, and other evidence contained in the Epstein Files, portions of which have been published in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Mid-1990s

Leon Black first meets Jeffrey Epstein.

1997

Black appoints Epstein as the sole director of the Black Family Foundation, an institution he set up as the vehicle for his charitable giving. Epstein remained on the board until 2012.

2002

A woman claimed in a lawsuit that Black raped her in 2002 when she was 16 years old at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion. The case was later dropped after the judge concluded the plaintiff had falsified evidence.

2003

Black joins a handful of Epstein’s close associates in contributing to a scrapbook commemorating Epstein’s 50th birthday.

2006

Epstein is indicted by a Florida grand jury and charged with soliciting prostitution.

2008

A woman named Guzel Ganieva claims she met Black at an International Women’s Day event, where he offered to help her make professional connections. Months later, Ganieva alleged in a lawsuit, Black flew her against her will to meet Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach, where Epstein, Black, and Sarah Kellen tried to pressure her into having a threesome with the two men. The lawsuit was dismissed by a Manhattan Supreme Court judge in May 2023, according to CNBC.

Later that year, Epstein pleads guilty to soliciting prostitution from a minor.

2009

According to an ongoing investigation by the Senate Finance Committee, Black directly paid a Siberian woman named Irina Chernova hundreds of thousands of dollars over a four-year period. After 2012, Black continued making payments to Chernova through Epstein, using him as an intermediary to avoid paying the federal tax on gifts.

A full account of Chernova’s involvement with Epstein and Black can be read at American Freakshow.

On the day Epstein’s prison sentence ends for solicitation of a minor prostitute, Black sends him a message stating “Happy Days are Here Again”.

2011

Financial Trust, Epstein’s financial advisory firm, invests in an environmental company where two of Black’s sons served as board members.

Throughout 2011 and 2012, Epstein helps cultivate a relationship between Black and one of his alleged recruiters, Victoria Housez, according to an in-depth analysis conducted by American Freakshow authors Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth. Black gifts Housez more than $50,000, and she privately discusses with Epstein ways she could convince Black to bestow more of his fortune to her.

In a statement to American Freakshow, Black’s attorney denied wrongdoing, but did not respond to the allegations surrounding Housez or Chernova.

2012

Black formally hires Epstein as a tax advisor, a role for which he is compensated $170 million over six years. While on a family vacation, Black sails to Epstein’s island, allegedly to attend a barbecue.

2013

Epstein establishes Southern Trust in the US Virgin Islands after successfully negotiating lucrative tax breaks with territory officials.

Black pays him $50 million for tax services through said company.

2014

Black pays Epstein $70 million for tax services.

2015

Black made $8 million in payments from 2015 to 2018 to Eastern European women, transactions that Wyden uncovered in 2026, and said “were potentially involved in prostitutions and possible victims of

Epstein’s trafficking scheme.”

As a result of a deal brokered by Epstein, Black agrees to pay Ganieva $18 million over a 15-year period in exchange for her signing an NDA related to their relationship. Shortly after Epstein helps Black negotiate the payout plan for his mistress’ discretion, Black pays Epstein $20 million. He pays an additional $30 million for tax services.

2016

The IRS begins an audit of the finances of Black and Anastasiya Siro, a woman he had been having an affair with. Black reported $600,000 in gifts to Siro when filing his taxes, but she did not report or pay taxes on the amount. Epstein steps in to resolve the matter for both Black and Siro, who he had known since 2010.

2017

Chernova contacts Epstein about a new arrangement between her and Black, in which she was told payments would come through Epstein. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), ranking member of the Finance Committee, believes this to be an example of one of the many avenues Epstein used to launder money.

2018

Among a number of growing disagreements, Black demands Epstein pay back a $30 million loan. He ultimately repaid only $10 million, according to the New York Times.

2019

In July, Epstein is arrested on federal charges of sex trafficking. Later that month, Black tells Apollo Global Management investors he only had “a limited relationship” with Epstein.

2020

In January, US Virgin Islands Attorney General Denise George files a civil forfeiture lawsuit against Epstein’s estate, in which she alleges that Epstein trafficked girls and women in the Caribbean and deceived USVI officials to abuse the territory’s tax code for personal gain. Months later, she announces plans to subpoena Black for his role in subsidizing Epstein’s illegal activity.

Apollo Management Group hires the law firm Dechert to conduct an independent review of Black’s relationship with Epstein and determine any potential harm it may have caused to investors.

2021

Dechert concludes its review of Black and determines no wrongdoing. Months later, Black resigns from Apollo due to the “relentless” effects of Dechert’s report. The report omits most details around Black’s financial arrangements with Ganieva and Siro, as was later reported by the New York Times.

2022

Cheri Pierson files a lawsuit against Black and Epstein’s estate, alleging sexual abuse in 2002. Pierson dropped the suit in 2024.

2023

In January, Black settles with the US Virgin Islands for $62.5 million and admits that “Epstein used the money Black paid him to partially fund his operations in the Virgin Islands.”

2025

The government releases portions of its investigation into Epstein, as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The release includes sensitive details about Black’s finances, and previously unknown details about his relationship with Epstein.

2026

As a result of the information revealed in the Epstein Files, Apollo Global Management shareholders in March file a class action lawsuit against Black, accusing him of fraud by lying about his relationship with Epstein.

In May, Black is scheduled for a deposition for another Epstein-related civil lawsuit, filed by his victims against Bank of America. The parties involved reach a settlement agreement days before Black is due to testify.

Black is currently scheduled to appear for a transcribed interview on June 26 with the House Oversight Committee as part of its ongoing investigation into the government’s handling of the Epstein case.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. David Valadao, California’s 22nd Congressional District

Since taking office in 2012, Rep. Valadao has:

• Listed as both one of the poorest and richest members of Congress, due to his practice of taking out millions of dollars in debt, then filing for protected bankruptcy to retain his assets

• Sponsored 88 pieces of legislation, one of which has been signed into law

• Lost his seat for one term in 2018 by less than 1,000 votes

• Voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare

• Potentially kicked 40% of his district off its health insurance in order to subsidize billionaire tax cuts

• Catered legislation to benefit a wealthy donor who “uses more water than every home in LA combined”

• Refused to pay a lawsuit settlement of $325,000 for paying farm workers less than minimum wage

• Maintained generally terrible working conditions on his farms, resulting in injuries and amputations

Fun Facts

Valadao has spent the last decade walking on a Trumpian tightrope, opposing nearly everything about the President as a person but supporting every fiber of his agenda. The balancing act began in 2016, when Valadao withdrew his endorsement of Trump on the grounds that he “denigrates people based on their ethnicity, religion, or disabilities.” His conviction didn’t extend to policymaking, however; Valadao voted in line with Trump 98% of the time and shielded the president from financial transparency.

This unholy alliance temporarily cost Valadao his seat when he was voted out in 2018. He won back in 2020, after receiving Trump’s endorsement, but the latter’s loss that year set the stage for Valadao’s loyalties to be tested again. After Trump incited the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection in an attempt to retain power, Valadao was one of 10 Republicans who voted in favor of impeachment. He later went against his party by voting to establish the January 6th Committee.

The two mended fences eventually, and Valadao proudly attended the second inauguration of a man he believed goaded a violent mob into attacking the US Capitol so he could overturn the 2020 election results.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

The House Oversight Committee is scheduled on Friday to interview a fourth implicated billionaire as part of its investigation into the government’s handling of the case against Jeffrey Epstein’s international human trafficking ring.

The transcribed interview will be the first time Wall Street billionaire Leon Black has appeared before Congress to answer questions about his relationship with Epstein, although it is far from the first time he’s been asked to testify. Black successfully avoided subpoenas from prosecutors as a defendant in 2021 and a witness 2026, when civil cases he was named in were settled before he was compelled to speak.

Black’s long, sordid relationship with Epstein is of particular interest to congressional investigators, who view his role as friend and financier as crucial to understanding how a failed high school teacher came to own two islands, develop close relationships with the world’s richest and most powerful people, amass a personal fortune of over $500 million, and operate an international trafficking and money laundering network seemingly undisturbed for nearly 30 years.

US Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), who launched an investigation into Epstein’s finances in 2021, has uncovered a number of suspicious financial entanglements between Black and Epstein. In addition to overpayments for tax services to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, Wyden claims Black “appears to have” used Epstein as an intermediary to avoid paying taxes on payments made to women he had affairs with. He’s also raised questions surrounding Epstein’s use of Black’s transactions to launder money to his trafficking accomplices in Eastern Europe.

“It appears that Epstein kept close tabs of women who Black had reached settlements/NDAs with and reached out to Russian government officials to help Black with these so-called problems,” Wyden said in a statement. “Epstein even appears to have acted as a middleman for Black to pay women on Black’s behalf, raising concerns of potential money laundering.”

Wyden’s inquiries into Epstein and Black’s financial dealings have so far been stymied by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who has refused to grant congressional investigators access to confidential financial documents. The Treasury Department also provided Wyden extremely limited access during the Biden administration — just one day onsite — and in that short period, investigators identified roughly $1 billion in suspicious transactions flowing through Epstein’s accounts. Wyden has requested expanded access from Bessent, who in turn has threatened to launch financial investigations into Wyden.

Black’s interview with the Oversight Committee could provide a glimpse into Epstein’s financial web, as the two were monetarily entangled from 1997 to 2018.

To better understand Black’s involvement in Epstein’s dealings, COURIER created a timeline of their relationship based on legal filings, financial records, internal correspondence, and other evidence contained in the Epstein Files, portions of which have been published in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Subscribe now

Mid-1990s

Leon Black first meets Jeffrey Epstein.

1997

Black appoints Epstein as the sole director of the Black Family Foundation, an institution he set up as the vehicle for his charitable giving. Epstein remained on the board until 2012.

2002

A woman claimed in a lawsuit that Black raped her in 2002 when she was 16 years old at Epstein’s Manhattan mansion. The case was later dropped after the judge concluded the plaintiff had falsified evidence.

2003

Black joins a handful of Epstein’s close associates in contributing to a scrapbook commemorating Epstein’s 50th birthday.

2006

Epstein is indicted by a Florida grand jury and charged with soliciting prostitution.

2008

A woman named Guzel Ganieva claims she met Black at an International Women’s Day event, where he offered to help her make professional connections. Months later, Ganieva alleged in a lawsuit, Black flew her against her will to meet Jeffrey Epstein in Palm Beach, where Epstein, Black, and Sarah Kellen tried to pressure her into having a threesome with the two men. The lawsuit was dismissed by a Manhattan Supreme Court judge in May 2023, according to CNBC.

Later that year, Epstein pleads guilty to soliciting prostitution from a minor.

2009

According to an ongoing investigation by the Senate Finance Committee, Black directly paid a Siberian woman named Irina Chernova hundreds of thousands of dollars over a four-year period. After 2012, Black continued making payments to Chernova through Epstein, using him as an intermediary to avoid paying the federal tax on gifts.

A full account of Chernova’s involvement with Epstein and Black can be read at American Freakshow.

On the day Epstein’s prison sentence ends for solicitation of a minor prostitute, Black sends him a message stating “Happy Days are Here Again”.

2011

Financial Trust, Epstein’s financial advisory firm, invests in an environmental company where two of Black’s sons served as board members.

Throughout 2011 and 2012, Epstein helps cultivate a relationship between Black and one of his alleged recruiters, Victoria Housez, according to an in-depth analysis conducted by American Freakshow authors Nina Burleigh and Katie Chenoweth. Black gifts Housez more than $50,000, and she privately discusses with Epstein ways she could convince Black to bestow more of his fortune to her.

In a statement to American Freakshow, Black’s attorney denied wrongdoing, but did not respond to the allegations surrounding Housez or Chernova.

2012

Black formally hires Epstein as a tax advisor, a role for which he is compensated $170 million over six years. While on a family vacation, Black sails to Epstein’s island, allegedly to attend a barbecue.

2013

Epstein establishes Southern Trust in the US Virgin Islands after successfully negotiating lucrative tax breaks with territory officials.

Black pays him $50 million for tax services through said company.

2014

Black pays Epstein $70 million for tax services.

2015

Black made $8 million in payments from 2015 to 2018 to Eastern European women, transactions that Wyden uncovered in 2026, and said “were potentially involved in prostitutions and possible victims of Epstein’s trafficking scheme.”

As a result of a deal brokered by Epstein, Black agrees to pay Ganieva $18 million over a 15-year period in exchange for her signing an NDA related to their relationship. Shortly after Epstein helps Black negotiate the payout plan for his mistress’ discretion, Black pays Epstein $20 million. He pays an additional $30 million for tax services.

2016

The IRS begins an audit of the finances of Black and Anastasiya Siro, a woman he had been having an affair with. Black reported $600,000 in gifts to Siro when filing his taxes, but she did not report or pay taxes on the amount. Epstein steps in to resolve the matter for both Black and Siro, who he had known since 2010.

2017

Chernova contacts Epstein about a new arrangement between her and Black, in which she was told payments would come through Epstein. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), ranking member of the Finance Committee, believes this to be an example of one of the many avenues Epstein used to launder money.

2018

Among a number of growing disagreements, Black demands Epstein pay back a $30 million loan. He ultimately repaid only $10 million, according to the New York Times.

2019

In July, Epstein is arrested on federal charges of sex trafficking. Later that month, Black tells Apollo Global Management investors he only had “a limited relationship” with Epstein.

2020

In January, US Virgin Islands Attorney General Denise George files a civil forfeiture lawsuit against Epstein’s estate, in which she alleges that Epstein trafficked girls and women in the Caribbean and deceived USVI officials to abuse the territory’s tax code for personal gain. Months later, she announces plans to subpoena Black for his role in subsidizing Epstein’s illegal activity.

Apollo Management Group hires the law firm Dechert to conduct an independent review of Black’s relationship with Epstein and determine any potential harm it may have caused to investors.

2021

Dechert concludes its review of Black and determines no wrongdoing. Months later, Black resigns from Apollo due to the “relentless” effects of Dechert’s report. The report omits most details around Black’s financial arrangements with Ganieva and Siro, as was later reported by the New York Times.

2022

Cheri Pierson files a lawsuit against Black and Epstein’s estate, alleging sexual abuse in 2002. Pierson dropped the suit in 2024.

2023

In January, Black settles with the US Virgin Islands for $62.5 million and admits that “Epstein used the money Black paid him to partially fund his operations in the Virgin Islands.”

2025

The government releases portions of its investigation into Epstein, as required by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The release includes sensitive details about Black’s finances, and previously unknown details about his relationship with Epstein.

2026

As a result of the information revealed in the Epstein Files, Apollo Global Management shareholders in March file a class action lawsuit against Black, accusing him of fraud by lying about his relationship with Epstein.

In May, Black is scheduled for a deposition for another Epstein-related civil lawsuit, filed by his victims against Bank of America. The parties involved reach a settlement agreement days before Black is due to testify.

Black is currently scheduled to appear for a transcribed interview on June 26 with the House Oversight Committee as part of its ongoing investigation into the government’s handling of the Epstein case.

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

ICE rushes public comment period to create mega-prison in Arizona desert

The Department of Homeland Security is pushing through plans to reopen a closed, 500-capacity prison in southern Arizona and use it to hold nearly 1,500 detainees.

The proposed location in Marana has been met with fierce opposition from local communities. Earlier this year, both the Pima County Board of Supervisors and the neighboring Tucson City Council voted to oppose the site’s use as a detention center. In an apparent attempt to sidestep that pushback, DHS has cut its typical 30-day public comment period down to eight days.

Because this is a federal project, members of the public from across the country are encouraged to submit comments regarding the proposal to icesustainability@ice.dhs.gov by June 18. Grassroots group Pima Resists ICE first noticed the expedited timeline only days before it was set to close. The group has carefully monitored the proposed site since it was first announced, and lead organizer Caroline Isaacs believes the attempt to block the community out of the process is a sign that public pressure is working.

“This is a pattern that we’re seeing in this administration, and particularly within DHS of systematic dismantling of any shred of accountability, of transparency, of checks and balances,” Isaacs told COURIER. “It’s very clear from every step that they’ve taken that they have no interest in hearing community concerns or addressing them, and they’re not going to go out of their way to allow for what used to be standard public input processes and good governance.”

Isaacs advised anyone submitting comments to focus on the purpose of the public comment period — namely, environmental concerns. While the administration could dismiss human rights violations as outside the scope of the review, issues relating to the site’s potentially hazardous location on a 100-year floodplain, the light pollution that could come with increased capacity, or the impact of additional barbed wire fences on property values are more likely to be seriously considered.

The Marana proposal is one of the latest in a string of prison camps the Trump administration has attempted to rush through without public consent. Local governments in Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Virginia, Utah, and several other states have enacted measures of opposition to stall or prevent facilities from opening, though those efforts have only succeeded in a handful of cases.

Members of Congress have joined protestors in pressuring DHS to abandon its incarceration plans in Georgia, New York, and Arizona, with mixed results. The Trump administration ignored requests from Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) and the residents of Circle City, Georgia, and purchased a site expected to hold 10,000 people. In response, city officials determined there wasn’t adequate utility infrastructure and shut off the water to the site. In Chester, New York, DHS abandoned its plans after Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) collected more than 20,000 petition signatures from community members in opposition to the site.

In Surprise, Arizona, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) was initially opposed to the proposed site in his district, but got on board after DHS officials assured him they would listen to community concerns. Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ), who represents Marana, has remained silent on the issue, prompting his colleague in a neighboring district to take action.

Once again, DHS is rushing through a public comment period to avoid public scrutiny and expedite Trump’s mass deportation agenda. Our community has already made its concerns clear. DHS should extend the review period by at least 30 days to give the public a meaningful opportunity to review this report and provide feedback,” said Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ). “Human beings are not cargo to be warehoused in detention facilities, where far too many are denied even the most basic medical care and treatment. DHS should abandon its plans for this facility, just as they have done with others around the country.”

“Detention expansion is a money-making machine for the private prison industry. Arbitrary deportation quotas mean more beds, bigger contracts, and more profits for companies that have poured millions into Trump’s campaign,” Rep. Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) said after the site was announced. “Time and again, these facilities have operated with too little oversight and accountability – with devastating human consequences, including dozens of deaths in custody. Our community deserves transparency, and families deserve an immigration system rooted in dignity and due process, not corporate profit.”

Opposition to the mass incarceration of immigrants has risen sharply since December 2025, when plans made by the Trump administration to convert industrial warehouses into detention camps were leaked to the Washington Post. The decision to hold massive amounts of people in uninhabitable warehouses, coupled with the murders of Renee Goode and Alex Pretti by ICE agents in Minnesota, caused a seismic shift in public support for the president’s anti-immigration efforts.

*Editor’s Note: This story has been updated with a statement from Rep. Grijalva.

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Marina Lacerda was twelve years old when she had to become the main provider for her mom and little sister. She was able to get odd jobs around Queens thanks to an older friend — nothing glamorous, but it kept the lights on.

After about a year, her friend came to her with what sounded like a huge break: a rich guy in Manhattan who paid $300 for massages. She’d told him about Marina’s situation and he said to bring her by. In 2002, that was two weeks’ rent — money that would normally take a week of hard work to earn.

So she went.

“I immediately thought, wow, this is the real deal. Having a maid open the door and seeing all that — it was so different from what I was used to,” Marina told COURIER. “Seeing that, and just walking into his mansion, and walking into his waiting room, seeing all the pictures with different presidents and different friends and celebrities. I was just so impressed — and, you know, shocked that I was even in this mansion.”

The extravagance was intimidating, but Marina’s friend reassured her it would be a quick job with a big payoff. The maid took them up to the third floor, where they waited in the massage parlor until the owner arrived.

“He walked into the room, he was wearing a robe, and he comes up and he puts out his hand,” Marina recalled. “And he says, ‘Hi, my name is Jeffrey.’”

Marina was first ensnared by Jeffrey Epstein when she was 13 years old and remained in his web for six years. The grooming and sexual abuse she encountered with him wasn’t entirely unfamiliar; it reminded her of her stepfather, who would creep into her room at night when she was younger.

Both men preyed on her youth and her desperation. But while she eventually reported her stepfather to the police to put an end to his abuse, Epstein was experienced. He knew exactly how to coerce her both into coming back and into silence. Every visit ended with a thick envelope of cash, either from him directly or from his executive assistant, Lesley Groff. Lesley even gave Marina her cell phone number and encouraged her to call if she needed anything. There was always just enough money to help Marina get by — but never enough for her to break the cycle of abuse.

“If I was going to get paid, Jeffrey Epstein would pay me directly with cash. But if I did need money or if I wanted something else, or if I needed furniture, I would have to call Lesley Groff,” Marina said. “If I even wanted to speak to Jeffrey Epstein, I had to go through Lesley Groff.”

Groff was questioned by congressional investigators in June as part of their probe into the government’s handling of the now-closed case against Epstein’s trafficking empire. She claimed to have had absolutely no knowledge of her boss’ criminal activity during her long tenure as his executive assistant.

“For 18 years, I worked for Dr. Jekyll but was never permitted to see the true Mr. Hyde,” Groff said in a prepared statement. “Mr. Epstein was, in hindsight, a master manipulater [sic] and deceiver who separated his legitimate life from his secret life as an abuser and made sure, that as his secretary, those two worlds did not collide.”

But accounts from Marina and other survivors tell a completely different story. Lesley was the point-of-contact for New York girls in Epstein’s orbit, just as Sarah Kellen was for girls in Florida. Lesley met Marina in person, scheduled massages over the phone, and gave her money.

Marina may have been forced to do adult things, but she was very much a child — in voice, in size, in mentality. Those aren’t the sort of things that go unnoticed. And, by all accounts, they didn’t.

Marina said that by the time she was 17, Epstein had lost interest in her sexually and told her she was looking and acting too old for him.

That’s when he and Lesley pushed her into recruiting.

“I didn’t know what trafficking was,” Marina said. “I didn’t think that me bringing my friends and some of the girls that I thought needed help, who were also immigrants, were also getting kicked out of their house and were also in a house where there was drug abuse, where there was alcohol abuse. I’m thinking that I’m helping these women — I’m sorry, these girls.”

For a little while, she did what her friend had done: found girls in her neighborhood who could use the money, brought them to Epstein’s mansion, and they both got paid.

Marina didn’t recruit for long. She eventually cut ties and tried to move on from Epstein completely. And she thought she had, until a few years later, there was a knock at her door.

“So in 2008, when the FBI agents reached my door and knocked on the door, I opened up the door and they introduced themselves and they said, we want to talk to you about Jeffrey Epstein. And immediately, my first reaction was like, ‘Oh no,’” Marina said. I closed the door, and when I closed the door, the FBI agent put her foot on the door and said to me, ‘You’re going to speak to me whether you like it or not.’ And she dropped her card inside my house and I closed the door. And when I closed the door, I picked up the card and I was just like, ‘Oh my God, like, what do I do?”

As Marina describes it, the government treated her more like a suspect than a victim — and it looked like they were still deciding which one she was.

Buried within the Epstein Files are internal documents and email correspondence between the agents assigned to Marina’s case and Epstein’s attorneys. These files pull back the curtain on what was going on. Many of the source files have since been taken down by the US Department of Justice after it was discovered that they were improperly redacted; Marina’s name was illegally left unredacted at least 50 times, even on pages where the names of Epstein’s known accomplices were blacked out.

Prosecutors were unsure how to handle the complicated victim/accomplice structure Epstein had created: was Marina a victim due to the sexual abuse, or an accomplice as a result of her participation in recruiting other girls? The FBI wanted to use her as a witness, but at the time of their visit, had not determined whether or not to grant her immunity.

“Lacerda was a victim (she was paid to perform sexual acts when she was under 18) and was also paid to bring girls to Epstein, thus Lacerda could be classified both as a victim and as a co-conspirator,” agents wrote in their immunity determination, listing four federal crimes she would face if immunity was not granted.

While prosecutors deliberated, Marina reached out to the only person she knew with the resources to help.

“I ran up my stairs and I called Lesley and I said, ‘Lesley, I’m very confused. I have two FBI agents here asking me about Jeffrey Epstein.’ And she says, ‘Don’t worry, Jeffrey’s going to call you right away.’ Jeffrey calls me within seconds, and when he called me, I said, ‘What the hell is going on? Why are there FBI agents in my door?’” Marina said. “And he said, ‘Listen, don’t call me. Don’t call the office. Don’t do anything.’ And I said, ‘Jeffrey, I’m very scared. I need to call these people. The FBI agent said that I need to speak to her.’ He said, ‘Don’t worry, I’m going to have lawyers call you.’ And within five minutes I had lawyers calling me.”

After that, the lawyers went to work — for Jeffrey Epstein.

“I went to their office and my first question was, ‘Should I be completely honest about everything?’ And they said, ‘Yes, you need to be completely honest about everything that you know,’” Marina said. “And I was honest, I think too honest to the point that they were telling me, ‘You’re going to go to jail. You were trafficking women.’ And I was like, ‘But I was 14 years old, 13, 15 years old. They’re like, ‘Well, what you did is against the law.’”

The FBI did eventually determine that Marina should receive immunity and wanted to bring her in to testify before a grand jury, but instead of contacting her directly, prosecutors went through Epstein’s attorneys. Marina was never told about the deal, and Epstein’s lawyers told prosecutors that if they compelled her to appear, she would plead the Fifth and refuse to cooperate with the investigation.

As a result, prosecutors left the entire New York side of Epstein’s operation out of the 2008 indictment. It severely limited their case and paved the way for the sweetheart deal that allowed Epstein to continue trafficking for another decade.

Marina knew none of this until the Epstein Files were released.

She also discovered an answer to a question she’d had for years — one that could provide a tangible, undeniable thread connecting Epstein’s clients, accomplices, and co-conspirators to the countless crimes they committed.

“It’s crazy how today I can see all my files and see how the FBI found me in 2008. From what I understand, and from what I’ve learned so far, it’s that they had a piece of paper with my name on it, and he was in his West Palm Beach home,” Marina said. “He threw it out in the garbage, and I guess they were conducting an investigation, and they found that piece of paper. And that’s how they found me in New York in 2008.”

According to a 2019 prosecution memo, Epstein kept notes on his criminal conspiracy. He wrote down his conversations, how he spent his cash, and kept a ledger of where his money was going and what it was used for. Those notes are referenced in the files, but don’t appear to have been released by the DOJ, an omission that would be in direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker

Since taking office in 2007, Sen. Wicker has:

• Seen his net worth decrease from $1.5M to $796K

• Sponsored 332 bills, 15 of which have been signed into law

• Believes the US should execute a preemptive nuclear strike against Russia

• Opposes humanitarian aid of any kind to Palestine

• Opposed President Obama nominating a Supreme Court Justice in an election year: “American people should have the opportunity to make their voices heard before filling a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court.”

• Supported President Trump nominating a Supreme Court Justice in an election year: “Republicans promised to confirm well-qualified, conservative judges and justices to the federal courts. We should continue to fulfill this promise.”

Fun Facts

Sen. Wicker is loyal to his campaign donors — and the return on their investment has been well worth it. One of his first successes in office was to guarantee $6 million in spending to Aurora Flight Sciences, a defense contractor whose president had donated $8,000 to his first Senate run in 2006. Wicker has continued to fight for the private company’s bottom line, securing them another $48 million contract in 2018.

His opposition to addressing climate change appears to be financially motivated as well. Wicker was quiet on the subject until the oil and gas industry began donating to his campaign in 2012. Two years later, he was pushing for the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. In 2015, Wicker was the only senator to vote against the formal recognition of climate change, and in 2017, he was one of the primary voices that convinced Trump to leave the Paris Climate Agreement.

Wicker was generously rewarded for his actions: he received $200,000 from the oil and gas industry before the Paris pullout and another $1 million in the years since.

Subscribe now

Share

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Marina Lacerda was twelve years old when she had to become the main provider for her mom and little sister. She was able to get odd jobs around Queens thanks to an older friend — nothing glamorous, but it kept the lights on.

After about a year, her friend came to her with what sounded like a huge break: a rich guy in Manhattan who paid $300 for massages. She’d told him about Marina’s situation and he said to bring her by. In 2002, that was two weeks’ rent — money that would normally take a week of hard work to earn.

So she went.

“I immediately thought, wow, this is the real deal. Having a maid open the door and seeing all that — it was so different from what I was used to,” Marina told COURIER. “Seeing that, and just walking into his mansion, and walking into his waiting room, seeing all the pictures with different presidents and different friends and celebrities. I was just so impressed — and, you know, shocked that I was even in this mansion.”

The extravagance was intimidating, but Marina’s friend reassured her it would be a quick job with a big payoff. The maid took them up to the third floor, where they waited in the massage parlor until the owner arrived.

“He walked into the room, he was wearing a robe, and he comes up and he puts out his hand,” Marina recalled. “And he says, ‘Hi, my name is Jeffrey.’”

Subscribe now

Marina was first ensnared by Jeffrey Epstein when she was 13 years old and remained in his web for six years. The grooming and sexual abuse she encountered with him wasn’t entirely unfamiliar; it reminded her of her stepfather, who would creep into her room at night when she was younger.

Both men preyed on her youth and her desperation. But while she eventually reported her stepfather to the police to put an end to his abuse, Epstein was experienced. He knew exactly how to coerce her both into coming back and into silence. Every visit ended with a thick envelope of cash, either from him directly or from his executive assistant, Lesley Groff. Lesley even gave Marina her cell phone number and encouraged her to call if she needed anything. There was always just enough money to help Marina get by — but never enough for her to break the cycle of abuse.

“If I was going to get paid, Jeffrey Epstein would pay me directly with cash. But if I did need money or if I wanted something else, or if I needed furniture, I would have to call Lesley Groff,” Marina said. “If I even wanted to speak to Jeffrey Epstein, I had to go through Lesley Groff.”

Groff was questioned by congressional investigators in June as part of their probe into the government’s handling of the now-closed case against Epstein’s trafficking empire. She claimed to have had absolutely no knowledge of her boss’ criminal activity during her long tenure as his executive assistant.

“For 18 years, I worked for Dr. Jekyll but was never permitted to see the true Mr. Hyde,” Groff said in a prepared statement. “Mr. Epstein was, in hindsight, a master manipulater [sic] and deceiver who separated his legitimate life from his secret life as an abuser and made sure, that as his secretary, those two worlds did not collide.”

But accounts from Marina and other survivors tell a completely different story. Lesley was the point-of-contact for New York girls in Epstein’s orbit, just as Sarah Kellen was for girls in Florida. Lesley met Marina in person, scheduled massages over the phone, and gave her money.

Marina may have been forced to do adult things, but she was very much a child — in voice, in size, in mentality. Those aren’t the sort of things that go unnoticed. And, by all accounts, they didn’t.

Marina said that by the time she was 17, Epstein had lost interest in her sexually and told her she was looking and acting too old for him.

That’s when he and Lesley pushed her into recruiting.

“I didn’t know what trafficking was,” Marina said. “I didn’t think that me bringing my friends and some of the girls that I thought needed help, who were also immigrants, were also getting kicked out of their house and were also in a house where there was drug abuse, where there was alcohol abuse. I’m thinking that I’m helping these women — I’m sorry, these girls.”

For a little while, she did what her friend had done: found girls in her neighborhood who could use the money, brought them to Epstein’s mansion, and they both got paid.

Marina didn’t recruit for long. She eventually cut ties and tried to move on from Epstein completely. And she thought she had, until a few years later, there was a knock at her door.

“So in 2008, when the FBI agents reached my door and knocked on the door, I opened up the door and they introduced themselves and they said, we want to talk to you about Jeffrey Epstein. And immediately, my first reaction was like, ‘Oh no,’” Marina said. I closed the door, and when I closed the door, the FBI agent put her foot on the door and said to me, ‘You’re going to speak to me whether you like it or not.’ And she dropped her card inside my house and I closed the door. And when I closed the door, I picked up the card and I was just like, ‘Oh my God, like, what do I do?”

As Marina describes it, the government treated her more like a suspect than a victim — and it looked like they were still deciding which one she was.

Buried within the Epstein Files are internal documents and email correspondence between the agents assigned to Marina’s case and Epstein’s attorneys. These files pull back the curtain on what was going on. Many of the source files have since been taken down by the US Department of Justice after it was discovered that they were improperly redacted; Marina’s name was illegally left unredacted at least 50 times, even on pages where the names of Epstein’s known accomplices were blacked out.

Subscribe now

Prosecutors were unsure how to handle the complicated victim/accomplice structure Epstein had created: was Marina a victim due to the sexual abuse, or an accomplice as a result of her participation in recruiting other girls? The FBI wanted to use her as a witness, but at the time of their visit, had not determined whether or not to grant her immunity.

“Lacerda was a victim (she was paid to perform sexual acts when she was under 18) and was also paid to bring girls to Epstein, thus Lacerda could be classified both as a victim and as a co-conspirator,” agents wrote in their immunity determination, listing four federal crimes she would face if immunity was not granted.

While prosecutors deliberated, Marina reached out to the only person she knew with the resources to help.

“I ran up my stairs and I called Lesley and I said, ‘Lesley, I’m very confused. I have two FBI agents here asking me about Jeffrey Epstein.’ And she says, ‘Don’t worry, Jeffrey’s going to call you right away.’ Jeffrey calls me within seconds, and when he called me, I said, ‘What the hell is going on? Why are there FBI agents in my door?’” Marina said. “And he said, ‘Listen, don’t call me. Don’t call the office. Don’t do anything.’ And I said, ‘Jeffrey, I’m very scared. I need to call these people. The FBI agent said that I need to speak to her.’ He said, ‘Don’t worry, I’m going to have lawyers call you.’ And within five minutes I had lawyers calling me.”

After that, the lawyers went to work — for Jeffrey Epstein.

“I went to their office and my first question was, ‘Should I be completely honest about everything?’ And they said, ‘Yes, you need to be completely honest about everything that you know,’” Marina said. “And I was honest, I think too honest to the point that they were telling me, ‘You’re going to go to jail. You were trafficking women.’ And I was like, ‘But I was 14 years old, 13, 15 years old. They’re like, ‘Well, what you did is against the law.’”

The FBI did eventually determine that Marina should receive immunity and wanted to bring her in to testify before a grand jury, but instead of contacting her directly, prosecutors went through Epstein’s attorneys. Marina was never told about the deal, and Epstein’s lawyers told prosecutors that if they compelled her to appear, she would plead the Fifth and refuse to cooperate with the investigation.

As a result, prosecutors left the entire New York side of Epstein’s operation out of the 2008 indictment. It severely limited their case and paved the way for the sweetheart deal that allowed Epstein to continue trafficking for another decade.

Marina knew none of this until the Epstein Files were released.

She also discovered an answer to a question she’d had for years — one that could provide a tangible, undeniable thread connecting Epstein’s clients, accomplices, and co-conspirators to the countless crimes they committed.

“It’s crazy how today I can see all my files and see how the FBI found me in 2008. From what I understand, and from what I’ve learned so far, it’s that they had a piece of paper with my name on it, and he was in his West Palm Beach home,” Marina said. “He threw it out in the garbage, and I guess they were conducting an investigation, and they found that piece of paper. And that’s how they found me in New York in 2008.”

According to a 2019 prosecution memo, Epstein kept notes on his criminal conspiracy. He wrote down his conversations, how he spent his cash, and kept a ledger of where his money was going and what it was used for. Those notes are referenced in the files, but don’t appear to have been released by the DOJ, an omission that would be in direct violation of the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

The House Oversight Committee on Wednesday interviewed a third billionaire as part of its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal enterprise, providing further clarity into the world of wealth and privilege that fostered his trafficking operation.

Tech billionaire Bill Gates sat with congressional investigators for over four hours, answering questions about his relationship with Epstein and responding to accusations made against him. Like fast-fashion mogul Les Wexner, Gates chalked up the relationship to poor judgement, allowing business interests to trump any ethical concerns. And like Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Gates denied having a personal relationship with Epstein, despite evidence from both of their wives at the time to the contrary.

While the trio’s answers to the committee were fairly sanitized, filtered through high-profile lawyers and exceptionally poor memories, Oversight Committee member Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ), said the broad similarities revealed an austere mentality collectively held by our country’s wealthiest elites.

“Ultimately, what this shows to be is this culture in the Epstein Class that exists in the billionaire class in this country, of legitimizing people even when they have committed crimes,” said Ansari. “It’s not just about Bill Gates, but all of the other rich and powerful people who surrounded Jeffrey Epstein and continued to engage with him and meet with him and hang out with him. That is what allowed Jeffrey Epstein to continue the crimes and to continue abusing countless other women, even after 2008 until 2019, when he was finally arrested.​​”

Nearly every person interviewed by the committee who wasn’t a survivor of Epstein’s depravity has been adamant that, despite their proximity to him, they were completely unaware of his multibillion-dollar international criminal enterprise that claimed over 1,000 victims. Even the financial institutions that facilitated and documented Epstein’s money laundering deny any knowledge of wrongdoing, despite paying more than $1 billion in civil lawsuit settlements to keep cases against them from going to trial.

For Gates, Wexner, Lutnick, and Wall Street billionaire Leon Black — one of Epstein’s primary bankrollers, who is scheduled to testify June 26 — Epstein’s criminal history and rumors surrounding his sexual abuse seemed to warrant such little consideration that it didn’t even register as part of standard business due diligence. Gates, who built his fortune by carefully analyzing Microsoft’s startup competitors and crushing them by way of illegal monopolization, claims he “didn’t take the time to “fully understand the extent of the crimes [Epstein] committed” when he sought to leverage billions from the disgraced financier for his philanthropic endeavors.

“It’s obviously really, really troubling, and I’m somebody who believes that Bill Gates has done extraordinary philanthropic work around the world and truly life-saving work,” committee member Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.), told Politico. “But we obviously have to separate our feelings about that from this investigation, and those two things co-exist.”

While Gates sought money from Epstein’s network, Wexner and Black entrusted their own wealth to him, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Wexner went so far as to grant Epstein power of attorney over his personal finances, and Black admitted in 2023 that he helped fund operations on Epstein’s islands in the US Virgin Islands.

Fellow billionaire and Epstein associate President Donald Trump similarly maintained a relationship with the deceased sex trafficker, though his association was primarily social. The pair were known to spend significant time together, and it was revealed in 2025 that Epstein used Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort as a recruiting ground, grooming young female employees and luring them to his neighboring mansion, where he sexually abused them.

Ansari says it’s simply not believable that men who had climbed to such high positions of power could have been completely unaware of the risks that came with associating with Epstein. The freshman congresswoman was in high school when Epstein was first arrested and remembers stories about Epstein’s pedophilia and evasion of justice percolating amongst her teenage social circles.

“I was a child in 2008 when Jeffrey Epstein got this crazy sweetheart deal, when he was accused of abusing girls, children, and then ultimately was prosecuted,” Ansari said. “Everybody knew about Jeffrey Epstein, at least about accusations against him, even if you didn’t believe the accusations.”

Attempts to Sanewash

• “I’ve Never Victimized Anyone,” Bill Gates Said in a Hearing on the Epstein Case.

• Bill Gates calls Epstein meetings a ‘grave error’ while defending actions in house testimony

• Bill Gates Tells Congress His Affairs Had Nothing to Do With Epstein

Far-Right Spin

• ‘GRAVE ERROR’: Diabolical Depopulationist Bill Gates Reveals Information That Jeffrey Epstein Tried to ‘Leverage’ Against Him

• Prominent Nick Kristof Donor Bill Gates Questioned By Congress Over Yearslong Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein

• We Asked Lawmakers Why Epstein’s Pal Bill Gates Was Allowed To Testify Behind Closed Doors

Share

From COURIER Texas: Republicans held a hearing to defend Turning Point USA from the SPLC. Rep. Jasmine Crockett responded by reading Charlie Kirk’s own words aloud, then asked a former federal prosecutor what she thought.

@couriertexasRepublicans held a hearing to defend Turning Point USA from the SPLC. Rep. Jasmine Crockett responded by reading Charlie Kirk's own words aloud, then asked a former federal prosecutor what she thought.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Mike Bost, Illinois’ 12th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2015, Rep. Mike Bost has:

• Seen his net worth increase from $385K to $478K

• Sponsored 140 bills, seven of which have been signed into law

• In 1986, a beagle bit his daughter. He drove to the owner’s house, found the dog in its kennel, shot it, and killed it

• Got so upset during a debate over concealed carry laws that he smashed his microphone

Fun Facts

“Meltdown Mike” has a well-documented history of temper tantrums that extends far beyond destruction of property and killing household pets. Bost’s 2012 outburst, where he lost it on the Illinois House Floor and compared reading lengthy bills to being a slave. The outburst landed him a top spot on CNN’s “Best Celebrity Flip-Outs of All-Time” list and is merely one in a series of emotional moments for Bost, who is known for screaming, throwing things, and breaking whatever he can get his hands on.

While his love for firearms is well-documented, Bost’s ability to document where his guns are is less of a priority. In 2006, a prized revolver owned by Bost was used in an attack and was retrieved by the police. When they questioned Bost, he didn’t know the gun was missing and blamed a 17-year-old girl who had been staying with him—why she was living with him at the time is also unclear.

Two years later, Bost voted against a bill that would have required gun owners to report a stolen firearm as soon as it was discovered to be missing.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

[ PLEDGE ]

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Internal communications from the Department of Justice reveal that the decision to close the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein was made after a narrowly focused review of less than 7% of the case files, centered entirely on photo and video evidence.

FBI Director Kash Patel tasked agents in March 2025 to “determine if there are any images of individuals on any videos which should be considered for prosecution,” according to emails published as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The resulting review examined an estimated 400,000 of the 6 million files compiled against Epstein and did not include financial documents, personal communications, or a majority of witness testimony.

The review was conducted by an agent working out of the DOJ’s Southern District of New York office and completed within a few hours of the request. It supposedly found no evidence implicating anyone other than Epstein and his now-convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell.

“All videos and images from the case file and from Epstein’s residences and devices were reviewed for evidence of a crime,” the agent wrote in their analysis. “Those reviews revealed no evidence from any of the searches we conducted or any of the files we reviewed that any videos or other images exist of any victims in this case being sexually abused. Nor did those reviews reveal any evidence that anyone other than Epstein and Maxwell participated in the sexual abuse of victims in this case.”

The internal memo sheds new light on the agency’s abrupt decision to end its investigation into Epstein’s multi-billion dollar sex trafficking operation, and adds context to the public memo on the matter that many derided as woefully insufficient. In the analysis, the agent emphasized that their determinations were made exclusively based on visual evidence, and even that was limited to include investigations specific to the SDNY.

The review omitted all surveillance footage, for example, as the 2019 search warrant executed at Epstein’s properties only authorized confiscation of evidence related to crimes committed within the preceding 20 years. Witness testimony was also severely limited: anything other than on-camera interviews with the Palm Beach Police department was not considered.

The language in Patel’s official FBI memo announcing the closure of the investigation mirrors the internal analysis almost identically, and a reexamination of the text suggests the video and image elements were the only determining factors.

“The files relating to Epstein include a large volume of images of Epstein, images and videos of victims who are either minors or appear to be minors, and over ten thousand downloaded videos and images of illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography. Teams of agents, analysts, attorneys, and privacy and civil liberties experts combed through the digital and documentary evidence” the memo stated. “This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.’ There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

The DOJ and FBI did not respond to requests for comment on this story.

The decision to close the investigation into Epstein’s criminal enterprise without pursuing additional inquiries into potential accomplices or co-conspirators was seen as a miscarriage of justice by survivors, witnesses, and members of Congress, particularly after the DOJ acknowledged that there were “over one thousand victims” connected to the case.

Two weeks after the investigation was closed, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee forced a vote to open an inquiry into the government’s handling of the files. Patel’s decision not to pursue charges based on a small, selective portion of evidence reinforces committee members’ assertion that the DOJ has been involved in a cover-up to protect those implicated from harm.

“This is obviously really concerning. We have a lot of questions about this,” said Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), ranking member of the Oversight Committee. “We have some other information as it relates to the FBI director and the way he’s mismanaged the redaction process, so there are a lot of questions for Kash Patel, including the really serious ones that you raised. And so this is why Kash Patel has got to be in front of the committee, and he’s got to answer our questions.”

On Tuesday, Garcia sent a letter to committee chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) requesting that Patel and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche be brought in for questioning.

@couriernewsroomPam Bondi is refusing to answer fully in testimony. Hear from COURIER's Camaron Stevenson.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Patel and Blanche were repeatedly referenced by former Attorney General Pam Bondi during her recent interview with the committee, during which she redirected nearly all criticism to her subordinates. According to Bondi, Blanche handled the day-to-day affairs of the Epstein investigation — including transferring convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a more desirable prison with low security and luxurious amenities — while Patel oversaw the consolidation of the files and redaction process.

“Pam Bondi deflected to Todd Blanche over 30 times. I mean, it was crazy how often she would put the blame on Blanche. So, if that’s going to be the case, we want to talk to Blanche. We want to understand why Bondi was saying that Blanche was the one in charge of the redactions, in charge of the investigation. He has questions to answer,” said Garcia. “She did mention Patel numerous times on the FBI redaction side. And so we have questions obviously for Kash Patel. These are people that we want to talk to as soon as possible.”

Survivors of Epstein’s abuse have also come forward in support of Garcia’s request, demanding answers as to why they were never contacted by the DOJ as part of its investigation and why the FBI failed to redact personal and identifying information about them while adding redactions to the names of those implicated in criminal activity.

Share

Nationwide anti-corruption tour aims to help local communities fight back against political corruption

While polarization is part of the Trump administration’s brand, Donald Trump’s insistence on using his position for personal gain has united voters around one issue: the fight against corruption.

Concerns about political corruption rank among voters’ top issues — even higher than affordability, according to polling commissioned by the political action committee End Citizens United. Anti-corruption sentiment spans the political spectrum, exacerbated by Trump’s penchant for trading stocks based on privileged information, abusing the unregulated cryptocurrency market, and selling pardons for profit and personal favors.

While the six-times-bankrupted Trump and his family have leveraged his position in public service to make $4 billion, wages across the US have remained stagnant, the cost of basic necessities has skyrocketed, and inflation has risen to its highest point in nearly a year with no sign of relief.

“Americans are fed up with the pay-to-play culture that has taken over government,” said Tiffany Muller, president of End Citizens United. “They’re watching the cost of everyday essentials like groceries and health care go up while wages stagnate and opportunities disappear. At the same time, they see their elected officials tripping over themselves to reward billionaire donors and corporations while working families get ignored.”

Many, including Muller, see her organization’s namesake as the root of the problem: since the US Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. FEC, the amount of money spent on political campaigns per cycle has exploded. In presidential elections alone, spending — largely by corporations and billionaires — increased from $16 million in 2008 to $2.6 billion in 2024.

In an attempt to tap into that frustration and give voters resources to fight back against corruption in local and national politics, End Citizens United plans to hold a nationwide Kick Out Corruption tour. At each stop, local politicians will present their plans to address the abuses of position and power that have become entrenched in modern American politics.

The tour is a joint effort between End Citizens United and anti-corruption advocacy nonprofit Stand Up America. The first stop is scheduled for June 7 in Tempe, Arizona, where Sen. Mark Kelly will deliver remarks focused primarily on stock trading. He is expected to outline his legislation that would require members of Congress and their families to put their stock holdings in blind trusts while in office, preventing them from profiting from nonpublic information obtained through their positions.

At least seven stops are planned for the tour so far. In addition to insider trading, organizers plan to address aspects of corruption that tend to fly under the radar, including politicians changing the rules in order to remain in power — such as through congressional gerrymandering — and preferential treatment for donors once in office, like the no-bid contracts awarded to private prison contractor GEO Group, a major Trump donor.

“Americans are paying more for health care, housing, and groceries because Donald Trump has handed Washington over to billionaires and powerful corporations who benefit when the system stays broken,” said Christina Harvey, executive director of Stand Up America. “The Kick Out Corruption Tour is our chance to elevate leaders who are serious about the reforms that will be needed to end the era of government by and for the powerful few.”

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Abe Hamadeh, Arizona’s 8th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2025, Rep. Hamadeh has:

• Sponsored 25 bills, none of which have been signed into law

• Praised Trump’s military birthday parade and was rewarded with Trump’s endorsement

• Allegedly altered his mom’s ballot to vote for Barack Obama in 2008

• Ran on election denialism because “the crazies love to see me fighting”

• Spent his teenage years on Ron Paul message boards, where his 4,000+ posts are littered with sexism, antisemitism, and confessions of voter fraud

Fun Facts

Shortly after winning his election, an elderly Democratic constituent went to Hamadeh’s office to talk with him. Instead of meeting with her, his office had her car towed. They then lied about it, but records from the tow yard have Hamadeh’s office as the point of contact for the tow. Not the most neighborly move, but odds are Hamadeh and the people he represents live anywhere near each other, since he doesn’t live in the district.

When first running for office in 2022, Hamadeh was an unknown longshot. It wasn’t until he tricked Trump into endorsing him—thanks to his announcement that he raised a massive $1 million in campaign contributions—that he became a frontrunner. The war chest turned out to be smoke and mirrors: Hamadeh’s brother loaned the campaign $1 million shortly before the campaign finance reporting period ended, and the money was returned shortly after.

And, oddly enough, Trump endorses Hamadeh on his birthday weekend every year.

After losing his bid to be Arizona Attorney General, Hamadeh spent the next several years—including during his congressional run—suing the state to swear him in. He claimed in court that he was “personally entitled” to be the state’s chief legal officer.

In the early 2000s, when he wasn’t on the Ron Paul Forums advocating for ethnic cleansing—he believed it was “good we’re targetting [sic] Arabs now, next we target Jews” — he was writing Sarah Palin fan mail.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Internal communications from the Department of Justice reveal that the decision to close the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein was made after a narrowly focused review of less than 7% of the case files, centered entirely on photo and video evidence.

FBI Director Kash Patel tasked agents in March 2025 to “determine if there are any images of individuals on any videos which should be considered for prosecution,” according to emails published as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. The resulting review examined an estimated 400,000 of the 6 million files compiled against Epstein and did not include financial documents, personal communications, or a majority of witness testimony.

The review was conducted by an agent working out of the DOJ’s Southern District of New York office and completed within a few hours of the request. It supposedly found no evidence implicating anyone other than Epstein and his now-convicted accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell.

Subscribe now

“All videos and images from the case file and from Epstein’s residences and devices were reviewed for evidence of a crime,” the agent wrote in their analysis. “Those reviews revealed no evidence from any of the searches we conducted or any of the files we reviewed that any videos or other images exist of any victims in this case being sexually abused. Nor did those reviews reveal any evidence that anyone other than Epstein and Maxwell participated in the sexual abuse of victims in this case.”

The internal memo sheds new light on the agency’s abrupt decision to end its investigation into Epstein’s multi-billion dollar sex trafficking operation, and adds context to the public memo on the matter that many derided as woefully insufficient. In the analysis, the agent emphasized that their determinations were made exclusively based on visual evidence, and even that was limited to include investigations specific to the SDNY.

The review omitted all surveillance footage, for example, as the 2019 search warrant executed at Epstein’s properties only authorized confiscation of evidence related to crimes committed within the preceding 20 years. Witness testimony was also severely limited: anything other than on-camera interviews with the Palm Beach Police department was not considered.

The language in Patel’s official FBI memo announcing the closure of the investigation mirrors the internal analysis almost identically, and a reexamination of the text suggests the video and image elements were the only determining factors.

“The files relating to Epstein include a large volume of images of Epstein, images and videos of victims who are either minors or appear to be minors, and over ten thousand downloaded videos and images of illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography. Teams of agents, analysts, attorneys, and privacy and civil liberties experts combed through the digital and documentary evidence” the memo stated. “This systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.’ There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions. We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”

The DOJ and FBI did not respond to requests for comment on this story.

The decision to close the investigation into Epstein’s criminal enterprise without pursuing additional inquiries into potential accomplices or co-conspirators was seen as a miscarriage of justice by survivors, witnesses, and members of Congress, particularly after the DOJ acknowledged that there were “over one thousand victims” connected to the case.

Two weeks after the investigation was closed, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee forced a vote to open an inquiry into the government’s handling of the files. Patel’s decision not to pursue charges based on a small, selective portion of evidence reinforces committee members’ assertion that the DOJ has been involved in a cover-up to protect those implicated from harm.

“This is obviously really concerning. We have a lot of questions about this,” said Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), ranking member of the Oversight Committee. “We have some other information as it relates to the FBI director and the way he’s mismanaged the redaction process, so there are a lot of questions for Kash Patel, including the really serious ones that you raised. And so this is why Kash Patel has got to be in front of the committee, and he’s got to answer our questions.”

On Tuesday, Garcia sent a letter to committee chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) requesting that Patel and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche be brought in for questioning.

@couriernewsroomPam Bondi is refusing to answer fully in testimony. Hear from COURIER's Camaron Stevenson.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Patel and Blanche were repeatedly referenced by former Attorney General Pam Bondi during her recent interview with the committee, during which she redirected nearly all criticism to her subordinates. According to Bondi, Blanche handled the day-to-day affairs of the Epstein investigation — including transferring convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to a more desirable prison with low security and luxurious amenities — while Patel oversaw the consolidation of the files and redaction process.

“Pam Bondi deflected to Todd Blanche over 30 times. I mean, it was crazy how often she would put the blame on Blanche. So, if that’s going to be the case, we want to talk to Blanche. We want to understand why Bondi was saying that Blanche was the one in charge of the redactions, in charge of the investigation. He has questions to answer,” said Garcia. “She did mention Patel numerous times on the FBI redaction side. And so we have questions obviously for Kash Patel. These are people that we want to talk to as soon as possible.”

Survivors of Epstein’s abuse have also come forward in support of Garcia’s request, demanding answers as to why they were never contacted by the DOJ as part of its investigation and why the FBI failed to redact personal and identifying information about them while adding redactions to the names of those implicated in criminal activity.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

What initially appeared to be a failed political stunt by the Trump administration — gifting far-right influencers binders of material related to Jeffrey Epstein — now appears to have served another purpose entirely: providing cover for a massive redaction effort designed to protect the president.

Internal correspondence between federal agents, published as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, outlines exactly how former US Attorney General Pam Bondi used the public stunt to quietly launch the redaction project within the DOJ. In a public letter sent to FBI Director Kash Patel on Feb. 27, Bondi demanded that his bureau “deliver the full and complete Epstein Files to my office” in Washington, DC.

“By 8:00 a.m. tomorrow, February 28, the FBI will deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office, including all records, documents, audio and video recordings, and materials related to Jeffrey Epstein and his clients, regardless of how such information was obtained,” Bondi wrote. “The Department of Justice will ensure that any public disclosure of these files will be done in a manner to protect the privacy of victims and in accordance with law, as I have done my entire career as a prosecutor.”

Patel went to great lengths to help prop up the facade of transparency, loading physical documents into a rented U-Haul so the full files could be transferred simultaneously. The operation, first reported on by ABC News in March 2025, was at the time characterized as a Trump-style media stunt, a cartoonish waste of time and resources meant to satisfy his supporters’ lust for the release of the Epstein Files.

But internal DOJ communications tell a different story. Officials made clear that the case file consolidation was intended to facilitate a massive redaction project that ultimately cost nearly $1 million in overtime pay alone. The process focused on redacting names of high-profile individuals like Donald Trump, while exposing the names and violating the privacy of hundreds of Epstein’s victims.

“Pursuant to the Attorney General’s letter dated February 27, 2025, FBI transferred all Epstein files out of the child sex trafficking case as well as all related Epstein cases from the New York Field Office to Washington Field Office for review,” the memo stated. “All redactions will be conducted under a hybrid of FBI Freedom of Information Act and Civil Litigation Standards.”

The Files eventually made their way to a field office in Winchester, Virginia, not Washington, where the agents assigned to the project were poorly trained on the hybrid redaction process. According to a whistleblower who contacted Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) last year, agents instead prioritized cataloging every mention of Trump and removing his footprint from the files.

“My office was told that these personnel were instructed to ‘flag’ any records in which President Trump was mentioned,” said Durbin. “Despite tens of thousands of personnel hours reviewing and re-reviewing these Epstein-related records over the course of two weeks in March, it took DOJ more than three additional months to officially find there is ‘no incriminating client list.’”

The determination that there is no client list — and not enough evidence to prosecute any of Epstein’s clients, accomplices, or co-conspirators — stems from Bondi’s rush-order redaction assignment. Emails contained within the Epstein Files detail how Patel would occasionally make requests for information, which would later be carefully used to nip any investigative threads in the bud.

When the redaction process first began, Patel asked agents on duty to determine whether there was any photo or video evidence that could be used for future prosecutions. Weeks later, an agent sent Patel a detailed and nuanced response in the negative.

“All videos and images from the case file and from Epstein’s residences and devices were reviewed for evidence of a crime,” the agent wrote. “Those reviews revealed no evidence from any of the searches we conducted or any of the files we reviewed that any videos or other images exist of any victims in this case being sexually abused. Nor did those reviews reveal any evidence that anyone other than Epstein and Maxwell participated in the sexual abuse of victims in this case.”

This specific finding — that there was no visual evidence that could incriminate anyone other than Epstein — was later cited more broadly in Bondi’s decision to close the case without pursuing further prosecutions, omitting the possibility that evidence could still exist in financial records, private emails, or other text-based documents in the Files.

The decision marked the end of an anti-climactic, whiplash-inducing chapter in Bondi’s saga with the Epstein Files. For a comprehensive breakdown of Bondi’s time at the DOJ — and how it became inexorably tied to an apparent cover-up for the Trump administration — American Freakshow has put together a timeline of the former attorney general’s “swan song.”

Bondi is expected to appear before the House Oversight Committee on Friday, where congressional investigators plan to question her about her stewardship of the Epstein Files during her brief tenure as Attorney General. Republicans on the committee have agreed to keep the interview off-camera and not under oath, a compromise Democrats say is unacceptable. Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ), who sits on the committee, said Bondi has much to answer for, and relegating the deposition to a transcribed interview as opposed to a recorded video is a disservice to the American public.

“We need to make sure that the [Republican] majority demands that Pam Bondi testify under oath and on video. We’ve been calling for this, but we have not received reassurances,” said Ansari. “It’s up to her whether or not she’s going to be honest. She’s been at the center of this. She has a lot of knowledge. She has an opportunity here to really course-correct and, at least, save herself in this cover-up.”

Share

Trump border wall destroys 1,000-year-old sacred site in Arizona

Written by Zineb Haddaji, The Copper Courier / COURIER

The Tohono O’odham Nation said April 28 it was notified that a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contractor building a secondary federal border wall destroyed the Las Playas Intaglio — A 1,000-year-old, fish-shaped geoglyph etched into the floor of the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, on the ancestral lands of the Tohono O’odham Nation. About 60 to 70 feet of the roughly 200-foot-long geoglyph were lost. The site had been flagged by a cultural protection monitor as one for contractors to avoid.

For the Nation, the site is not just land whose status can simply be changed by law. It represents a living connection to their ancestors, their history, and their identity. This wall also threatens the animals the tribe considers “spiritual guardians”, including endangered jaguars whose range spans the border.

The Las Playas Intaglio acted as a spiritual compass pointing toward the ocean, which is tied to the salt-gathering ceremonies that bring the summer monsoon rains to replenish the desert, according to David Martinez professor of American Indian studies at Arizona State University.

“When that Intaglio is damaged, and when it’s destroyed, it’s destroying that kinship relationship that we have to maintain… with the spirits that keep our world running,” Martinez said. “The world is out of balance right now because of that destruction.”

Haddaji’s full story available here.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Ken Calvert, California’s 41st Congressional District

Since taking office in 1993, Rep. Calvert has:

• Seen his net worth increase from $3 million to nearly $23 million

• Sponsored 284 bills, 12 of which have been signed into law

• Received more money from the defense industry during the 2022 midterms than almost any other congressional candidate

• Staffed his congressional office with dozens of lobbyists, including representatives for Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and the National Potato Council

• Received a $265,000 campaign boost from Elon Musk during the 2024 election

• Used his position to allegedly score lucrative land deals for himself and his realtor friends

• Promised to only serve six terms, but is now serving his 16th and running for reelection

Fun Facts

Throughout his three decades in Congress, Rep. Calvert has made it a priority to bring his real estate expertise to Washington — particularly when it scores him a nice payoff. He’s shown an acute ability to use earmarks — guarantees in the federal budget that certain amounts of money can only be used for certain projects — to make previously worthless land spike in value. Maps of earmarked transportation projects he’s signed off on are often lined with properties tied to Calvert. Such dealings were found to violate state laws in 2007 and made him the subject of an FBI investigation in 2009. As recently as 2024, Calvert faced renewed criticism after securing millions in federal funds to improve the areas around 10 rental properties he owns in Riverside.

But it hasn’t all been business: during his first term, Calvert was caught in what he described as “an extremely embarrassing situation” with someone police described as a “known prostitute.” The incident occurred during Calvert’s prime mid-life crisis years, shortly after his wife left him. It ultimately resulted in neither criminal nor political consequences.

Subscribe now

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

What initially appeared to be a failed political stunt by the Trump administration — gifting far-right influencers binders of material related to Jeffrey Epstein — now appears to have served another purpose entirely: providing cover for a massive redaction effort designed to protect the president.

Internal correspondence between federal agents, published as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, outlines exactly how former US Attorney General Pam Bondi used the public stunt to quietly launch the redaction project within the DOJ. In a public letter sent to FBI Director Kash Patel on Feb. 27, Bondi demanded that his bureau “deliver the full and complete Epstein Files to my office” in Washington, DC.

“By 8:00 a.m. tomorrow, February 28, the FBI will deliver the full and complete Epstein files to my office, including all records, documents, audio and video recordings, and materials related to Jeffrey Epstein and his clients, regardless of how such information was obtained,” Bondi wrote. “The Department of Justice will ensure that any public disclosure of these files will be done in a manner to protect the privacy of victims and in accordance with law, as I have done my entire career as a prosecutor.”

Patel went to great lengths to help prop up the facade of transparency, loading physical documents into a rented U-Haul so the full files could be transferred simultaneously. The operation, first reported on by ABC News in March 2025, was at the time characterized as a Trump-style media stunt, a cartoonish waste of time and resources meant to satisfy his supporters’ lust for the release of the Epstein Files.

But internal DOJ communications tell a different story. Officials made clear that the case file consolidation was intended to facilitate a massive redaction project that ultimately cost nearly $1 million in overtime pay alone. The process focused on redacting names of high-profile individuals like Donald Trump, while exposing the names and violating the privacy of hundreds of Epstein’s victims.

“Pursuant to the Attorney General’s letter dated February 27, 2025, FBI transferred all Epstein files out of the child sex trafficking case as well as all related Epstein cases from the New York Field Office to Washington Field Office for review,” the memo stated. “All redactions will be conducted under a hybrid of FBI Freedom of Information Act and Civil Litigation Standards.”

The Files eventually made their way to a field office in Winchester, Virginia, not Washington, where the agents assigned to the project were poorly trained on the hybrid redaction process. According to a whistleblower who contacted Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) last year, agents instead prioritized cataloging every mention of Trump and removing his footprint from the files.

“My office was told that these personnel were instructed to ‘flag’ any records in which President Trump was mentioned,” said Durbin. “Despite tens of thousands of personnel hours reviewing and re-reviewing these Epstein-related records over the course of two weeks in March, it took DOJ more than three additional months to officially find there is ‘no incriminating client list.’”

The determination that there is no client list — and not enough evidence to prosecute any of Epstein’s clients, accomplices, or co-conspirators — stems from Bondi’s rush-order redaction assignment. Emails contained within the Epstein Files detail how Patel would occasionally make requests for information, which would later be carefully used to nip any investigative threads in the bud.

When the redaction process first began, Patel asked agents on duty to determine whether there was any photo or video evidence that could be used for future prosecutions. Weeks later, an agent sent Patel a detailed and nuanced response in the negative.

“All videos and images from the case file and from Epstein’s residences and devices were reviewed for evidence of a crime,” the agent wrote. “Those reviews revealed no evidence from any of the searches we conducted or any of the files we reviewed that any videos or other images exist of any victims in this case being sexually abused. Nor did those reviews reveal any evidence that anyone other than Epstein and Maxwell participated in the sexual abuse of victims in this case.”

This specific finding — that there was no visual evidence that could incriminate anyone other than Epstein — was later cited more broadly in Bondi’s decision to close the case without pursuing further prosecutions, omitting the possibility that evidence could still exist in financial records, private emails, or other text-based documents in the Files.

The decision marked the end of an anti-climactic, whiplash-inducing chapter in Bondi’s saga with the Epstein Files. For a comprehensive breakdown of Bondi’s time at the DOJ — and how it became inexorably tied to an apparent cover-up for the Trump administration — American Freakshow has put together a timeline of the former attorney general’s “swan song.”

Bondi is expected to appear before the House Oversight Committee on Friday, where congressional investigators plan to question her about her stewardship of the Epstein Files during her brief tenure as Attorney General. Republicans on the committee have agreed to keep the interview off-camera and not under oath, a compromise Democrats say is unacceptable. Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ), who sits on the committee, said Bondi has much to answer for, and relegating the deposition to a transcribed interview as opposed to a recorded video is a disservice to the American public.

“We need to make sure that the [Republican] majority demands that Pam Bondi testify under oath and on video. We’ve been calling for this, but we have not received reassurances,” said Ansari. “It’s up to her whether or not she’s going to be honest. She’s been at the center of this. She has a lot of knowledge. She has an opportunity here to really course-correct and, at least, save herself in this cover-up.”

@couriernewsroomThere are three men stonewalling investigations into Epstein. COURIER’s Camaron Stevenson breaks down everything you need to know.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Private prison millionaire tapped to run ICE as detained population grows

A private prison executive has been selected by the Trump administration to lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement and spearhead efforts to mass-incarcerate thousands of immigrants per day.

The appointment of David Venturella is the Trump administration’s latest gift to his former employer, the private prison behemoth GEO Group, which has received more than $2 billion in no-bid contracts to provide nearly 30,000 beds for individuals abducted by ICE. Venturella’s role leading the Trump administration’s mass incarceration efforts will help streamline the process, providing massive profits for GEO Group at the expense of detainees’ basic human rights.

The lucrative contracts have proven GEO Group’s Trump 2024 campaign contributions — a little over $1.5 million — to be a massive return on investment. The influx of cash commitments from the federal government helped make 2025 the company’s most profitable year since its founding in 1984, according to Geo Group CEO George Zoley.

“Last year was the most successful period for new business wins in our company’s history,” Zoley told stockholders during a May earnings call.

Immigrants rights and prison reform groups believe Venturella’s appointment reflects the brazen extent the Trump administration is willing to go to in prioritizing profits above all else. Silky Shah, executive director of the Detention Watch Network, said this “revolving door” will only expedite the administration’s efforts to increase ICE’s prison capacity to more than 100,000.

“Venturella built his career on mass incarceration, including separating loved ones through detention and deportation, having previously worked at ICE during both the Bush and Obama administrations,” Shah said in a statement. “Like Tom Homan, Venturella’s intimate knowledge of ICE will likely yield another spike of ICE detention facility openings in the coming months as the agency operates with impunity and unprecedented funding.”

Public opposition over Trump’s anti-immigration efforts has increased dramatically since he took office in January 2025, as his agents have sexually abused detainees, killed protestors, and wreaked havoc on otherwise peaceful communities. Local resistance has successfully thwarted efforts to turn several industrial warehouses into prison camps, although several others are still in the works.

In an attempt to fly under the radar, ICE has also shifted tactics by using unmarked facilities as undisclosed detention sites. A review of ICE operations by COURIER identified 64 holding sites the agency has attempted to obscure from public view. Unlike traditional offices, these locations are unmarked buildings not listed in ICE’s online directories and can only be found using specific search terms. Even then, the listed information is often incorrect — for example, the Portland, Maine, office is described as the Boston Field Office.

Many of these sites are clustered around areas of heavy ICE activity, such as behind Home Depots or near airports used for deportation flights.

All 64 sites can be found here.

Similar to the fierce local backlash against warehouse detention proposals, community protests outside ICE’s unmarked facilities have begun to wear on ICE agents’ morale. Once it was discovered that an office space in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, was being used to hold immigrants — some as young as two years old — protests formed outside the building every month, according to TV9 reporter Jackson Valenti.

Eventually, the crowds grew large enough that agents felt uncomfortable, so they erected a fence to separate themselves. Undeterred, protestors have continued demonstrating, and the fence has since been turned into a memorial for individuals who have been killed in ICE custody.

Subscribe now

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

The US Secretary of Commerce spent the majority of a four-hour interview with congressional investigators emphasizing the disdain he and his wife had for their former neighbor, Jeffrey Epstein — a claim wholly undermined by his spouse’s own words.

The House Oversight Committee asked Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to speak with them after a 2012 photo surfaced showing him with Epstein on the financier’s private island, a known hub of Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. During the deposition, Lutnick admitted that he briefly visited the island with his family, but was adamant that he and his wife, Allison — also a Trump appointee — had agreed when they first met Epstein to never establish a relationship with him.

“I had an informal conversation with my wife, and that’s what we discussed, and I would think that most people who are married would understand,” said Lutnick. “They have a conversation with their wife, that someone says something inappropriate, gross, gross, that when you leave with your wife, she says, ‘You should avoid that guy. He’s gross,’ right. And I did. So I don’t think that’s like — I think that’s kind of inconsequential, which means just avoid him, which I did.”

Throughout the deposition, Lutnick repeatedly pointed to his wife’s insistence that he avoid a personal or professional relationship with Epstein. But despite his insistence — Lutnick referenced his wife at least 50 times, almost always in connection to how they both found Epstein “gross” or “disgusting” — Allison’s correspondence with Epstein’s staff when coordinating their island visit tells a very different story.

“Hi Lesley. This is Allison Lutnick. We are looking forward to visiting you,” Allison wrote to Lesley Groff, Epstein’s personal assistant. “We will be coming from Caneel Bay in the morning. We are a crowd...2 families each with 4 kids ranging in age from 7-16! 6 boys and 2 girls. I hope that’s okay. We would love to join you for lunch.”

The Lutnicks’ eager decision to sail a yacht full of minors to Epstein’s island came eight years after the couple says they agreed to avoid him and four years after Epstein registered in New York as a sex offender for soliciting an underage prostitute. At the time of the visit, Epstein was actively expanding his trafficking empire, according to documents released as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. In the weeks before and after the Lutnicks’ trip, Epstein was actively working with known accomplices to procure girls and manipulating women already under his control.

Allison’s apparent enthusiasm for spending part of her family’s winter holiday with Epstein pokes holes in her husband’s flimsy yet carefully crafted testimony before Congress. Throughout the four-hour deposition, Lutnick’s memory appears to begin and end where his name is mentioned in the Epstein Files. He vividly recalled writing exactly four emails to Epstein, claimed that their last communication was a 2018 correspondence included in the Files, and remembered only the portion of Epstein’s island shown in the released photograph.

Lutnick initially denied having any contact with Epstein after 2005, even after emails confirmed the 2012 island visit; it was only after the photograph of him there became public that his memory was apparently jogged. US Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA), a member of the Oversight Committee who questioned Lutnick, believes the Commerce Secretary had a personal and professional relationship with Epstein for years — far beyond what he disclosed to the committee.

“The most likely explanation here is that the visit to Epstein’s townhome when they, as neighbors, went over to visit — the entire story about Lutnick and his wife being, quote, grossed out by Epstein — it’s fabricated. I think that’s the logical explanation here, that Lutnick completely fabricated that original story after the fact, many years later, now, that Epstein is a liability,” Rep. Walkinshaw told COURIER. “It’s clear, based on that email and the other contact between Lutnick, Lutnick’s wife, and Epstein, and Epstein’s orbit, that there was a dialog and a relationship for many years — a friendly one, and they had no qualms about having a relationship and dialog with Jeffrey Epstein.”

The alleged fabrication is one of a series of misleading statements from individuals the Oversight Committee has interviewed as part of its investigation into the government’s lackluster case against Epstein. Earlier this year, close Epstein associates Richard Kahn and Darren Indyke claimed no knowledge of illegal activity — assertions disproved by numerous suspicious activity reports filed by Epstein’s financial institutions, as well as testimony from survivors.

While Oversight Chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) said he would hold anyone caught lying to Congress accountable, no action has been taken against Kahn, Indyke, or Lutnick. In contrast, former US Attorney General Pam Bondi quickly reversed her plans to ignore the committee’s subpoena after ranking committee member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) filed contempt charges over her refusal to testify.

Comer, a close ally of President Donald Trump, has so far been resistant to any action that could anger the president, who has worked to oust members of Congress who continue to investigate Epstein. The cooperation between Comer and the White House may provide only temporary reprieve for the Lutnicks and others, however, if Democrats take control of the US House in the 2026 midterm elections.

“In a future Congress, we’ll be able to get Lutnick in, under oath on camera, to answer these questions again, because there’s no question he tried to slip out of the lies that he told publicly,” said Walkinshaw. “I don’t think there’s any scenario under which Chairman Comer and the Republicans would agree to that, given the lengths they went to to keep the Howard interview as under wraps and covered up as possible. I don’t think they would go along with bringing in Mrs. Lutnick, but I think all that’s got to be on the table. We can’t rule out talking to anybody who might have information that could advance our investigation.”

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Bryan Steil, Wisconsin’s 1st Congressional District

Since taking office in 2019, Rep. Steil has:

• Seen his net worth increase from $50,000 to $2 million

• Sponsored 96 bills, one of which has been signed into law

• Condemned the Jan. 6 Insurrection

• Voted against Trump’s impeachment over his incitement of said insurrection

• Voted to codify same-sex marriage into law

• Signed an amicus brief urging the US Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade

• Hired an organizer in Arizona’s fake elector scheme to lead election oversight efforts

Fun Facts

Steil’s pre-political background is in manufacturing, but not as a blue collar worker. He spent nearly a decade as an industry executive and stayed aligned with management perspectives, opposing worker rights at every opportunity. He voted to limit access to trade labor jobs, defund the National Labor Relations Board, prohibit companies — like COURIER — from voluntarily recognizing their employees’ union, and voted against strengthening worker and union rights through the PRO Act.

Former Speaker Paul Ryan, now a Fox Corporation board member, gave Steil his first job in politics, and is often credited with molding him in his own likeness. Once a protégé, Steil has since been downgraded to bargain bin Ryan, as Wisconsin’s replacement policy wonk “has only a tiny fraction of the power and nowhere near the state and national name recognition that Ryan had.”

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

The US Secretary of Commerce spent the majority of a four-hour interview with congressional investigators emphasizing the disdain he and his wife had for their former neighbor, Jeffrey Epstein — a claim wholly undermined by his spouse’s own words.

The House Oversight Committee asked Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to speak with them after a 2012 photo surfaced showing him with Epstein on the financier’s private island, a known hub of Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. During the deposition, Lutnick admitted that he briefly visited the island with his family, but was adamant that he and his wife, Allison — also a Trump appointee — had agreed when they first met Epstein to never establish a relationship with him.

“I had an informal conversation with my wife, and that’s what we discussed, and I would think that most people who are married would understand,” said Lutnick. “They have a conversation with their wife, that someone says something inappropriate, gross, gross, that when you leave with your wife, she says, ‘You should avoid that guy. He’s gross,’ right. And I did. So I don’t think that’s like — I think that’s kind of inconsequential, which means just avoid him, which I did.”

Throughout the deposition, Lutnick repeatedly pointed to his wife’s insistence that he avoid a personal or professional relationship with Epstein. But despite his insistence — Lutnick referenced his wife at least 50 times, almost always in connection to how they both found Epstein “gross” or “disgusting” — Allison’s correspondence with Epstein’s staff when coordinating their island visit tells a very different story.

“Hi Lesley. This is Allison Lutnick. We are looking forward to visiting you,” Allison wrote to Lesley Groff, Epstein’s personal assistant. “We will be coming from Caneel Bay in the morning. We are a crowd...2 families each with 4 kids ranging in age from 7-16! 6 boys and 2 girls. I hope that’s okay. We would love to join you for lunch.”

The Lutnicks’ eager decision to sail a yacht full of minors to Epstein’s island came eight years after the couple says they agreed to avoid him and four years after Epstein registered in New York as a sex offender for soliciting an underage prostitute. At the time of the visit, Epstein was actively expanding his trafficking empire, according to documents released as part of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. In the weeks before and after the Lutnicks’ trip, Epstein was actively working with known accomplices to procure girls and manipulating women already under his control.

Allison’s apparent enthusiasm for spending part of her family’s winter holiday with Epstein pokes holes in her husband’s flimsy yet carefully crafted testimony before Congress. Throughout the four-hour deposition, Lutnick’s memory appears to begin and end where his name is mentioned in the Epstein Files. He vividly recalled writing exactly four emails to Epstein, claimed that their last communication was a 2018 correspondence included in the Files, and remembered only the portion of Epstein’s island shown in the released photograph.

Lutnick initially denied having any contact with Epstein after 2005, even after emails confirmed the 2012 island visit; it was only after the photograph of him there became public that his memory was apparently jogged. US Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-VA), a member of the Oversight Committee who questioned Lutnick, believes the Commerce Secretary had a personal and professional relationship with Epstein for years — far beyond what he disclosed to the committee.

“The most likely explanation here is that the visit to Epstein’s townhome when they, as neighbors, went over to visit — the entire story about Lutnick and his wife being, quote, grossed out by Epstein — it’s fabricated. I think that’s the logical explanation here, that Lutnick completely fabricated that original story after the fact, many years later, now, that Epstein is a liability,” Rep. Walkinshaw told COURIER. “It’s clear, based on that email and the other contact between Lutnick, Lutnick’s wife, and Epstein, and Epstein’s orbit, that there was a dialog and a relationship for many years — a friendly one, and they had no qualms about having a relationship and dialog with Jeffrey Epstein.”

The alleged fabrication is one of a series of misleading statements from individuals the Oversight Committee has interviewed as part of its investigation into the government’s lackluster case against Epstein. Earlier this year, close Epstein associates Richard Kahn and Darren Indyke claimed no knowledge of illegal activity — assertions disproved by numerous suspicious activity reports filed by Epstein’s financial institutions, as well as testimony from survivors.

While Oversight Chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY) said he would hold anyone caught lying to Congress accountable, no action has been taken against Kahn, Indyke, or Lutnick. In contrast, former US Attorney General Pam Bondi quickly reversed her plans to ignore the committee’s subpoena after ranking committee member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) filed contempt charges over her refusal to testify.

Comer, a close ally of President Donald Trump, has so far been resistant to any action that could anger the president, who has worked to oust members of Congress who continue to investigate Epstein. The cooperation between Comer and the White House may provide only temporary reprieve for the Lutnicks and others, however, if Democrats take control of the US House in the 2026 midterm elections.

“In a future Congress, we’ll be able to get Lutnick in, under oath on camera, to answer these questions again, because there’s no question he tried to slip out of the lies that he told publicly,” said Walkinshaw. “I don’t think there’s any scenario under which Chairman Comer and the Republicans would agree to that, given the lengths they went to to keep the Howard interview as under wraps and covered up as possible. I don’t think they would go along with bringing in Mrs. Lutnick, but I think all that’s got to be on the table. We can’t rule out talking to anybody who might have information that could advance our investigation.”

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Dr. Bernice King to lead voting rights rally in Selma

Just over 60 years after her father led the historic civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, Rev. Dr. Bernice King announced she will return to Montgomery to lead thousands in a rally to defend voting rights.

The All Roads Lead to the South rally was announced earlier this week, after Republican-led legislatures in Louisiana, Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia moved forward with plans to redraw their congressional maps and eliminate majority-Black districts. Southern states’ rapid push to dilute the power of Black voters comes in the wake of the US Supreme Court’s decision to roll back key protections for non-white citizens in the Voting Rights Act — legislation that was one of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s most seminal achievements.

“All Roads Lead To The South is a trumpet moment,” said Rev. Dr. Bernice King. “Like in Nehemiah, when the trumpet sounded, the people left their separate places on the wall and came together to defend what was sacred. The ruling is that sound. And this trumpet call is not for a moment; it is for a movement.”

Organizers say the rally is the beginning of a series of actions that will take place over the course of the summer and into the 2026 midterm elections. In addition to rallies and marches, they are planning voter registration drives, economic boycotts, and other tactics reminiscent of the Civil Rights Movement. Grassroots groups No Kings and Indivisible have come out in support of All Roads and plan to mobilize their massive volunteer bases to support its efforts.

For anyone interested in attending, free rides are available from Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Tennessee. Akilah Hughes, host of COURIER’s web series, How is this Better? will be covering the rally, with updates throughout the day on TikTok and Instagram.

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

During a field hearing on Tuesday in Palm Beach, Florida, Democratic members of the House Oversight Committee detailed 30 years of prosecutorial failures that allowed Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation to flourish into a multi-billion dollar criminal enterprise.

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), the committee’s ranking member, argued that systemic failures beginning in Palm Beach continued through both Trump administrations and remained largely unaddressed under the Biden administration. Aside from the conviction of Epstein associate Ghislane Maxwell, no additional alleged co-conspirators were prosecuted by Biden’s Department of Justice, while Trump’s DOJ has repeatedly claimed that there is not enough evidence to charge anyone else with a crime.

“I want to understand why Merrick Garland and the former Justice Department under the Biden administration did little to nothing to bring justice for the survivors or have additional prosecutions,” said Garcia. “Merrick Garland, for me, is at the top of that list of folks that we need to speak to and ask questions of.”

Tuesday’s hearing outlined how law enforcement and government prosecutors repeatedly bent over backwards to accommodate Epstein after his first arrest in 2006. Women who survived years of abuse described how the justice system not only failed them, but was often used against them. After Epstein pleaded guilty to solicitation of a minor, Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw approved unsupervised work release privileges that enabled him to continue his trafficking operation undeterred. Epstein would regularly tell his victims that if they went to the police, it was them, not him, who would be treated as the criminals.

“Jeffrey had already threatened my friend, and he had told me that I would be charged with prostitution if I ever interacted with law enforcement,” said Dani Bensky, a dance choreographer who had been abused by Epstein when she was a minor. “He made it clear that he held the cards.”

@couriernewsroomCOURIER correspondent Camaron Stevenson was on the ground in Palm Beach, covering how Jeffrey Epstein's control over the U.S. Government enabled his human trafficking.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Special treatment continued to follow Epstein wherever he went. He was granted at least $300 million in tax breaks by the US Virgin Islands, exempted from registering as a sex offender in New Mexico, and obtained discreet medical care in New York for girls and women he abused. Meanwhile, multiple banks turned a blind eye as Epstein made over $1 billion worth of suspicious transactions — activity that financial institutions are required to report to federal authorities as potential red flags for money laundering and human trafficking.

The privileges granted to Epstein appear to have extended to his clients and co-conspirators as well. Witness accounts allege sexual abuse by billionaires such as Leon Black and Donald Trump, money laundering by longtime Epstein associates Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, and questionable financial entanglements with high-level officials, including US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.

Even officials not associated with Epstein have appeared eager to maintain the status quo at the expense of justice. Former US Attorneys General Bill Barr, Merrick Garland, and Pam Bondi oversaw an investigation that members of the Oversight Committee believe produced countless leads, yet documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act indicate that none were pursued. Others, including current and former US Treasury Secretaries Scott Bessent and Janet Yellen, have stonewalled financial investigations in both the House and the Senate, prioritizing the interests of implicated financial institutions above all else.

Rep. Yassamin Ansari, a member of the committee who attended the hearing, said her goal is to put an end to the sweetheart deals and gentlemen’s agreements embedded in the system that make justice unobtainable.

“So much could have been prevented if institutions and government had done its job,” Ansari told COURIER. “Moving forward, we have a real opportunity here to right the wrongs of the past, to make sure that future generations and children and young girls who are watching this today feel that they can trust their government, feel that if they are abused or they are raped, or if they are assaulted and they report that abuse, that there will be accountability and that there will be justice.”

The committee plans to continue holding depositions and interviews, but without buy-in from Republicans, who currently control the House, it’s unclear whether any actions taken will carry real weight. Garcia and Ansari are hopeful that this dynamic could shift in January, however, if Democrats are able to secure a majority in Congress.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Virginia Foxx, North Carolina’s 5th Congressional District

Since taking office in 2005, Rep. Foxx has:

• Seen her net worth decrease from around $5.8 million to $5.3 million

• Sponsored 261 bills, 10 of which have been signed into law

• Expressed belief that sexual assault victims should be forced to birth the child of their abuser

• Voted against sending federal aid to victims of Hurricane Katrina

• Spend more than a decade trying to end birthright citizenship

• Described universal healthcare as a bigger threat than terrorism

• Rejected the idea that violence based on sexual orientation is a hate crime

Fun Facts

When she’s not telling reporters to shut up, Rep. Foxx is bullying ten-year-olds and taking pot shots at teachers, apparently. Earlier this year, an elementary school student from her district sent the octogenarian congresswoman a letter about electric vehicles as part of an assignment. In response, Foxx told the student that he should “turn away from this dangerous path,” and accused his teacher of indoctrinating him with propaganda.

@couriernewsroomRep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) is under scrutiny for her response to a 10-year-old student.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA), the committee’s ranking member, argued that systemic failures beginning in Palm Beach continued through both Trump administrations and remained largely unaddressed under the Biden administration. Aside from the conviction of Epstein associate Ghislane Maxwell, no additional alleged co-conspirators were prosecuted by Biden’s Department of Justice, while Trump’s DOJ has repeatedly claimed that there is not enough evidence to charge anyone else with a crime.

Subscribe now

“I want to understand why Merrick Garland and the former Justice Department under the Biden administration did little to nothing to bring justice for the survivors or have additional prosecutions,” said Garcia. “Merrick Garland, for me, is at the top of that list of folks that we need to speak to and ask questions of.”

Tuesday’s hearing outlined how law enforcement and government prosecutors repeatedly bent over backwards to accommodate Epstein after his first arrest in 2006. Women who survived years of abuse described how the justice system not only failed them, but was often used against them. After Epstein pleaded guilty to solicitation of a minor, Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw approved unsupervised work release privileges that enabled him to continue his trafficking operation undeterred. Epstein would regularly tell his victims that if they went to the police, it was them, not him, who would be treated as the criminals.

“Jeffrey had already threatened my friend, and he had told me that I would be charged with prostitution if I ever interacted with law enforcement,” said Dani Bensky, a dance choreographer who had been abused by Epstein when she was a minor. “He made it clear that he held the cards.”

@couriernewsroomCOURIER correspondent Camaron Stevenson was on the ground in Palm Beach, covering how Jeffrey Epstein's control over the U.S. Government enabled his human trafficking.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Special treatment continued to follow Epstein wherever he went. He was granted at least $300 million in tax breaks by the US Virgin Islands, exempted from registering as a sex offender in New Mexico, and obtained discreet medical care in New York for girls and women he abused. Meanwhile, multiple banks turned a blind eye as Epstein made over $1 billion worth of suspicious transactions — activity that financial institutions are required to report to federal authorities as potential red flags for money laundering and human trafficking.

The privileges granted to Epstein appear to have extended to his clients and co-conspirators as well. Witness accounts allege sexual abuse by billionaires such as Leon Black and Donald Trump, money laundering by longtime Epstein associates Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, and questionable financial entanglements with high-level officials, including US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.

Even officials not associated with Epstein have appeared eager to maintain the status quo at the expense of justice. Former US Attorneys General Bill Barr, Merrick Garland, and Pam Bondi oversaw an investigation that members of the Oversight Committee believe produced countless leads, yet documents released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act indicate that none were pursued. Others, including current and former US Treasury Secretaries Scott Bessent and Janet Yellen, have stonewalled financial investigations in both the House and the Senate, prioritizing the interests of implicated financial institutions above all else.

Rep. Yassamin Ansari, a member of the committee who attended the hearing, said her goal is to put an end to the sweetheart deals and gentlemen’s agreements embedded in the system that make justice unobtainable.

“So much could have been prevented if institutions and government had done its job,” Ansari told COURIER. “Moving forward, we have a real opportunity here to right the wrongs of the past, to make sure that future generations and children and young girls who are watching this today feel that they can trust their government, feel that if they are abused or they are raped, or if they are assaulted and they report that abuse, that there will be accountability and that there will be justice.”

The committee plans to continue holding depositions and interviews, but without buy-in from Republicans, who currently control the House, it’s unclear whether any actions taken will carry real weight. Garcia and Ansari are hopeful that this dynamic could shift in January, however, if Democrats are able to secure a majority in Congress.

Share

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with and ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Get more from Camaron Stevenson in the Substack app

Available for iOS and Android

Get the app

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

A flustered Commerce Secretary claimed during a closed-door congressional hearing Wednesday that Trump administration officials pressured him to walk back previous claims that convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein was “the greatest blackmailer ever” who possessed video footage of his clients abusing girls and women.

Wall Street billionaire and US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick spoke with the House Oversight Committee for several hours as part of the committee’s investigation into the government’s lackluster handling of the Epstein case. A key point of contention during the transcribed interview centered on comments Lutnick made in an October 2025 interview with the New York Post, in which he talked about Epstein at length.

“That’s what his MO was, you know: ‘get a massage, get a massage.’ And what happened in that massage room, I assume, was on video,” Lutnick said of Epstein. “This guy was the greatest blackmailer ever. He blackmailed people. That’s how he had money.”

When pressed by US Reps. (D-CA) and James Walkinshaw (D-VA), Lutnick reportedly became unsettled and repeatedly changed his responses. While the transcript of the interview has not yet been released publicly, Khanna recounted the exchange during a press briefing.

“I think he’s covering up for the administration,” Khanna began. “Secretary Lutnick said on the podcast that there was blackmail going on. Then he says to my inquiry, ‘well, no, no, no, I was just speculating.’”

“What was your basis for speculating?” Khanna asked.

“I didn’t have any basis,” Lutnick replied. “I take it back.”

“Why did you take it back?”

“I talked to administration officials.”

“Who did you talk to?” Walkinshaw interjected.

“No, no, no, I just learned about this in public,” Lutnick responded. I didn’t talk to the administration officials.”

Democratic lawmakers say the exchange points to a broader effort by the Trump administration to minimize the scale of Epstein’s billion-dollar criminal enterprise since Trump retook the presidency. The White House attempting to silence a cabinet member in order to impede a congressional investigation would mark a significant escalation, though not a wholly unprecedented one.

In 2017, Trump instructed his former attorney, Michael Cohen, to lie to Congress about a real estate deal in Russia. Cohen went on to serve three years in prison after being found guilty of making false statements to Congress, tax evasion, and campaign finance violations.

“This is why this is such a cover-up. I mean, he refused to say there was any blackmailing, even though he thought that happened in the past,” said Khanna. “Someone obviously got to him from the administration. In fact, he said he talked to people in the administration and that’s why he’s changed his tune. And the question is not just why he’s lying. The question is why he’s covering up, why he’s no longer willing to share what he knows about Epstein’s abhorrent behavior.”

@couriernewsroomHouse Democrat Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) gives insight into yesterday's closed-door testimony given by Trump admin official Howard Lutnick.

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY) later held an impromptu press briefing to refute accusations of a cover-up, instead listing off a number of unrelated issues using a deflective rhetorical technique known as whataboutism.

“I feel compelled to have to come out and clean up and correct some of the statements that the Democrats made. I couldn’t believe as I was getting updates of what they were saying, and I hope that when you get the transcripts, you fact check them on what they say,” said Comer. “The only cover-up that I’ve seen on the Oversight Committee is the cover-up of the Democrats trying to cover up our investigations of the Metro Police Department, lying about crime statistics, and the cover-up of the Minnesota fraud.”

Committee members also questioned Lutnick about his past relationship with Epstein, including business dealings, their time as next-door-neighbors in Manhattan, and Lutnick’s 2012 visit to the private island Epstein used to traffic and abuse girls and women. Lutnick had previously denied associating with Epstein after 2005, but changed his story once a portion of the Epstein Files were released in late 2025.

Wednesday’s inquiry marks the beginning of a series of high-profile hearings scheduled by the Oversight Committee as part of its investigation into Epstein. A hearing featuring several of Epstein’s victims and expert witnesses is scheduled for May 12 in Palm Beach, while former US Attorney General Pam Bondi is expected to speak with congressional investigators on May 29. Like Lutnick, Bondi will not be testifying under oath, but committee staff have emphasized that it is still a crime to lie to Congress, regardless of whether or not the subject has been sworn in.

“If we find that there were any misstatements by Lutnick, it’s a felony to lie to Congress, and you’ll be held accountable,” said Comer.

Attempts to Sanewash

• Lutnick’s testimony about Epstein draws praise from GOP chair and derision from Democrats

• Dueling descriptions from lawmakers on whether Lutnick was forthcoming or evasive about Epstein ties

• Commerce Secretary Lutnick appears before a House panel to answer for his changing story on Epstein

Far-Right Spin

• The Neighbor Next Door: Howard Lutnick Details Limited Contact With Jeffrey Epstein

• US commerce secretary says he was surprised by invitation to Epstein’s Island

• Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick found Epstein island lunch invite ‘unsettling’ – but went anyway

Share

Is Project BLUEMAP on the horizon?

Now that unfettered gerrymandering is effectively the law of the land, control over who draws the maps has become more important than ever.

In most states, the legislature is in charge of drawing congressional and state legislative district boundaries. And thanks in large part to a Republican initiative launched in 2010 called Project REDMAP, a majority of state legislatures have been under Republican control for the past 16 years. That dominance has allowed them to draw increasingly favorable maps that make it harder and harder for Democrats to win seats, even in states where there are more Democratic voters than Republicans.

But according to Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee President Heather Williams, the same factors that helped Project REDMAP succeed in 2010 could be its undoing in 2026.

“Republicans had this advantage at a time when Barack Obama was president and his numbers had been falling, that healthcare and affordability and the economy were core issues. And interestingly, there was sort of a groundswell right of activism around Tea Party activities,” said Williams. “2026 shows us elements the same, although in reverse: We’ve got a president that is deeply underwater, a party that is in power federally that is deeply unliked… And just last week, it was noted that for the first time since before 2010, Democrats are now favored on the economy over Republicans.”

Williams and the DLCC have spent years trying to flip state legislatures, but it’s been a pretty uphill battle — until last year, when those factors she outlined became a driving force for voters, leading to Democrats winning upset victories in special election after special election.

Even in races where Republicans win, margins have narrowed significantly compared to previous cycles. It’s a clear sign from voters that they are increasingly dissatisfied and don’t think the party in power is listening to their needs. As a result, Democrats have successfully defended their control of the Michigan state senate, and are chipping away at Republican supermajorities in states like Arkansas and Florida.

“Democrats have an opportunity to either break the Republican supermajorities or prevent Democrats from falling into them,” explained Williams. “This matters because it puts Democrats into a negotiating room. And that is really important when we think about the path forward on public policy and that ability to really be a part of the conversation.”

The shift comes at a pivotal time for Democrats, as the US Supreme Court last week granted states the ability to redraw congressional maps without regard for racial representation. Republican-controlled legislatures in Louisiana, Alabama, Tennessee, and Mississippi have already begun the process of eliminating predominantly Black districts in order to create room for more white representation in Congress. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis already signed into law new maps that create four new white-majority districts by breaking apart voting blocs made up largely of non-white residents.

In each of those states except Mississippi — where the state senate is led by a Republican majority — both chambers of the legislature are controlled by Republican supermajorities. That dynamic almost always means Democrats are left out of negotiations over proposed legislation, and bills that do pass tend to trend farther to the extreme right.

Democrats broke the Republican supermajority in the Mississippi state senate in 2025 and maintained control of the Michigan state senate after a special election held last Tuesday.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

US Rep. Mike Rogers, Alabama’s 3rd Congressional District

Since taking office in 2003, Rep. Rogers has:

• Sponsored 109 bills, two of which have been signed into law

• Knowingly accepted over $30,000 in campaign contributions from a PAC tied to a money laundering scheme

• Threatened to beat up a voter who asked about ethically questionable contributions to his wife’s county judge campaign

• Tried to start a fight with former Rep. Matt Gaetz on the House floor over a committee assignment

• Almost been appointed to be Trump’s Defense Secretary, but had to stay in the House so Republicans wouldn’t lose their majority

• Blamed ISIS for the 2016 mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando and voted against designating attacks against LGBTQ+ people as a hate crime

Fun Facts

Rep. Rogers was an ardent supporter of former President George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq — so much so that he hired one of the conflict’s most prolific (alleged) war criminals. Chris Brinson joined Rogers’ congressional staff in 2003 and later served as his chief of staff for about a decade. He came fresh from military service as a US Army Reserve Captain during the Iraq War, where he participated in the ongoing human rights violations at Abu Ghraib prison.

The scandal gained international attention after 60 Minutes published a report with photos showing American soldiers dragging naked prisoners on leashes and shocking them with electric wires. Prisoners were also forced to masturbate in front of female soldiers.

Brinson was formally reprimanded by the US Army for his involvement in the abuses — physical and psychological torture, rape, and murder — that occurred under his watch. From there, he went straight to Rogers’ office, where he was welcomed with open arms.

“Chris’ influence on my office is immeasurable; my staff in Alabama and DC revere him, and without his help, I would not have successfully run for two chairmanships,” Rogers said of Brinson. “I have some of the longest-serving staff on Capitol Hill and that’s in part to what Chris has done for our team.”

Rogers’ personal net worth has fluctuated considerably during his time in Congress. Financial disclosures placed him right around the $1 million mark when he first took office, but mounting liabilities over the years left him among the poorest members of Congress by 2018, with an estimated $600,000 in debt. He seems to have bounced back, somewhat; his latest disclosure from 2023 shows he’s around $250,000 in the black.

Subscribe now

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Momentum to hold the government accountable for the apparent mishandling of its investigation into Jeffrey Epstein has accelerated dramatically in recent days. Amidst White House denials, high-profile depositions, and new independent federal investigations, a clearer picture is finally emerging of the deceased sex trafficker’s financial ties to his living co-conspirators.

On Wednesday, House Democrats filed contempt charges against former US Attorney General Pam Bondi — a pointed escalation that appears to have forced her hand. After defying a House Oversight Committee subpoena earlier this month, arguing that her testimony was no longer needed since she had been fired by President Trump, Bondi has agreed to appear for a deposition on May 29 to explain her role in the release of the Epstein Files.

“We think [Bondi’s] been involved in a massive cover up and we need to hold her accountable,” Ranking Member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) told COURIER. “We can get justice for the survivors. We can take on Trump’s corruption. We can take on his family. And I think that’s what we’ve continuously shown. We can’t allow them to continue to break the rules and break the law, and we’ve got to hold them accountable.”

Meanwhile, COURIER has identified new discrepancies between sworn testimony of those previously deposed and documentation found in the Epstein Files — including, for the first time, evidence that Epstein’s close associate and longtime personal lawyer, Darren Indyke, failed to disclose a $3 million gift of prime Florida real estate.

For decades, Indyke handled the business side of Epstein’s empire, while his boss built a vast network of wealthy, powerful clients for his multi-billion dollar sex trafficking operation. At the time of Epstein’s death, his estate was worth nearly $600 million. Today, Indyke and accountant Richard Kahn, are now the co-executors of the estate, and have much to gain from protecting it from criminal prosecution.

An ongoing investigation by COURIER, including the creation of a comprehensive public database of the Epstein Files by Thorian AI, previously uncovered financial dealings that directly contradict what Indyke told congressional investigators during his March deposition. The records point to suspected money laundering and indicate that Indyke worked to prevent Epstein’s victims from speaking with law enforcement, shaking them down for money as a manipulation tactic.

A new analysis reveals yet another omission by Indyke: when asked about his compensation, he recounted $16 million in salary and $7 million in loans. But what he failed to disclose was the $3 million mansion Epstein purchased for him in 2015. According to a Suspicious Activity Report accidentally published by the DOJ, Epstein’s company, Financial Trust Real Estate Inc., wired funds through TD Bank to cover the closing costs of Indyke’s home, which he owned for nearly a decade. The report was briefly made public before it was removed, fully redacted, then republished.

“[Indyke’s] account was credited by a suspicious $3,000,000 wire transfer from the FirstBank Puerto Rico account of F T Real Estate Inc,” the SAR states. “The memo references closing costs for 6030 Le Lac Road (the current residential address on file at TD Bank for Darren K. Indyke).”

According to the report, the transaction immediately set off internal red flags at TD Bank — but they refrained from reporting it to the authorities until after Epstein’s death in 2019. The bank’s failure to adhere to basic anti-money laundering regulations, paired with Indyke’s apparent deceptions while under oath, pose a unique challenge to a Congress that has recently found its teeth. As with the contempt charges against Bondi, the Oversight Committee has the tools to compel more forthright testimony from Indyke and hold accountable a financial industry that turned a blind eye to Epstein’s blatant crimes.

“As a minority party, we have 18 subpoenas in the Oversight committee as it pertains to the Epstein investigation. We’ve been highly effective at forcing Republicans to take this seriously, and have been able to work with them to make sure that anyone who is relevant to this investigation is brought forward,” said US Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ), who sits on the committee. “We still have a long list of folks that we believe should come forward, and we’ll continue to work through those.”

Indyke has so far managed to avoid any serious consequences as a result of his involvement with Epstein, and continues to deny any personal wrongdoing. In order to shield themselves from lawsuits, Indyke and Kahn established an Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program, where victims could receive a quick payout in exchange for promising to never sue any of Epstein’s former employees. In February 2026, the pair settled a class-action lawsuit, but the $35 million was paid out from Epstein’s estate, not from Indyke or Kahn personally. The pair’s authority over Epstein’s wealth has functioned as a financial shield from civil liability, leaving criminal charges as victims’ only hope for a path to justice.

Bondi’s upcoming deposition and the discovery of Indyke’s gifted mansion come as startling new revelations continue to be uncovered by members of Congress, news outlets, and citizen journalists since the partial publication of the DOJ’s investigation into Epstein. The forced transparency — a result of the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act in December 2025 — has placed renewed scrutiny on the sworn testimony of others who have been deposed, including Indyke and Kahn.

“Darren Indyke has a lot to answer for. We think there’s a lot more that he should have shared in his deposition, and we have a lot of questions still for him and the Epstein Estate,” said Garcia. “We’re going to go all-in on this investigation and we’re going to ensure that we get all the information, all the bank records, all the financial statements, talk to a bunch of people that we want to speak with, and ask additional questions.”

The apparent cover-up by the Trump administration and Epstein’s associates, coupled with a growing acknowledgement that the DOJ investigation into his sprawling, multi-billion dollar trafficking enterprise was woefully inadequate, has intensified pressure on those in power to take action. In early April, First Lady Melania Trump issued an unprompted defense of her association with Epstein, and earlier this week, both the DOJ’s independent accountability office and the US Government Accountability Office launched investigations into the administration’s compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

The announcement of Bondi’s rescheduled deposition brings an end to weeks of stonewalling by US House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer (R-KY), who had used subversive bureaucratic maneuvers to stall his committee’s investigation into the government’s handling of Epstein’s criminal network. Comer removed all hearings from the calendar in March, which in turn, canceled scheduled meetings with several individuals who had been invited to testify.

“I hope it’s very clear — not only to the Trump administration, but also to the American people — that we take this very seriously, and that this is an investigation that is just getting started. Ultimately the goal here is not just to get the Epstein files, but to ensure that anybody who committed a crime or who helped enable a crime is held accountable,” said Ansari. “We aren’t afraid of using any lever that we have, whether it be now that we’re in the minority, or when we’re in the majority and have full subpoena power to move this investigation forward and get justice for the victims.”

Want to join the investigation? Search through the Epstein Files here and send us a tip to let us know what you’ve found. A few helpful keywords for those interested in looking for financial crimes include: SAR, FinCEN, BSA, BSAR, BCTR, and FBAR.

SUBMIT A TIP

Share information securely with COURIER’s reporters. All submissions can be confidential and are encrypted.

Prefer email? Contact us at tips@epsteincoverup.us

Indivisble endorses economic blackout on May 1. Here’s how to participate

Activists are calling for a nationwide economic blackout this Friday, as a way to use the power of the pocketbook to protest the Trump administration.

Participants are asked to refrain from going to work, attending school, or making purchases of any kind. In an interview with COURIER, Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin explains what a movement like this hopes to achieve, and why his organization is throwing its weight behind it.

Share

It’s easy for individual members of Congress to get overlooked by national outlets as they quietly skate to reelection again, and again, and again. The following is an overview of different congressional representatives you may not have heard of, with fun facts about their origin stories they’ve tried to keep out of the public narrative.

Utah US Sen. Mike Lee

Since taking office in 2011, Sen. Lee has:

• Seen his net worth increase from $199,000 to $391,000

• Sponsored 2,077 bills

• Authored six bills that have been signed into law — half of which were to rename federal buildings

• Successfully pushed Trump to leave the Paris Climate Agreement after receiving over $250,000 in campaign contributions from the oil, gas, and coal industries

• Worked closely with Trump’s team in their attempt to overturn the 2020 election results

• Compared Trump to the Book of Mormon figure Captain Moroni, known for committing political violence in the name of Christian nationalism

Fun Facts

Sen. Lee has most recently been in the news for attempting to sell off millions of acres of public land and for his response to the assassination of Melissa and Mark Hortman. He called the suspected shooter—who appears to be a far-right, Trump-supporting Christian nationalist—a liberal, mentally ill “Marxist.” He backed down and deleted his posts after being confronted by Minnesota Sen. Tina Smith. His response to the shooting prompted condemnation from his hometown newspaper and calls for his resignation.

It’s unlikely that a political nepo baby like Lee will leave office before he chooses to do so. His father was Ronald Reagan’s Solicitor General and a founding dean of the law school at BYU where Sen. Lee would later receive his law degree. The Senator was also fortunate enough to be elected student body president at the same time his father was university president.

Unlike his brother, a former Utah Supreme Court justice, Sen. Lee went the federal route, nabbing a clerkship with Samuel Alito when he was serving as an appeals court judge. Alito then brought Lee along as a clerk during his first year as a US Supreme Court justice. The pair are, ideologically, almost identically aligned. Like Lee, Alito has publicly supported Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election and even flew an upside-down US flag outside his home in support of the insurrectionists after Jan. 6.

Subscribe now

Share

Join COURIER and 3.14 Action on June 11 for Facts vs. Fiction: The Fight for Science in American Democracy.
Misinformation isn’t just noise. It’s shaping policy decisions that impact healthcare costs, public health, and everyone’s lives. This live conversation will examine what’s at stake when facts are ignored and what changes when experts lead with evidence. From lowering costs to protecting access to care, we will break down how science-driven leadership delivers real results and why scientific integrity is essential to democracy.

Hear directly from:

• Dr. Vin Gupta, Physician + Medical Analyst

• Representative Emily Gregory, Member of Congress

• Dr. Paul A. Offit, Director, Vaccine Education Center, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia

• Shaughnessy Naughton, 314 Action President

Stay tuned for more speaker announcements, and don’t miss this conversation. RSVP today!

RSVP

Participants are asked to refrain from going to work, attending school, or making purchases of any kind. In an interview with COURIER, Indivisible co-founder Ezra Levin explains what a movement like this hopes to achieve, and why his organization is throwing its weight behind it.

Subscribe now

The following transcript has been edited for length and clarity.

Camaron Stevenson: This is Ezra Levin with Indivisible. You’ve probably heard of his organization. It’s had steady growth over the past eight years.

Ezra Levin: We’re going on 10 years, if you can believe it.

CS: Wow. That’s unbelievable. I’m from Phoenix, Arizona, and I remember when the Indivisible groups started popping up in some of the suburbs. Then the Phoenix one started growing, and now they are doing some really impressive work out there.

EL: The Arizona Indivisibles are really on fire. They’ve done a whole bunch of work in the past several years. I’ve been out there several times. I was out there before GGO ran for Senate, but we had GGO and Mondaire Jones trying to push Kyrsten Sinema to get on board with democracy reform before she stabbed us in the back.

I’ve also been out to Prescott, Arizona several times, which is a great area. It’s theoretically a very Republican area, but there is a very strong Indivisible group out there doing the Lord’s work. So yeah, I love our Arizona Indivisibles.

CS: I don’t know if this is your experience, but I feel like the places that are considered Republican strongholds or MAGA country sometimes have the most dedicated and ardent Indivisible groups. I imagine this is simply because they face the toll of the administration’s agenda more bluntly than some other areas.

EL: I think that’s right. Look, I’m from a rural and red area of Texas, and where I grew up, the word “Democrat” was a bad word. The local Democratic party was a joke; nobody volunteered for the Hays County Democratic Party, and there wasn’t a lot of organizing going on.

I do think after Trump was first elected, people were looking for community. People were looking to see if there were other folks who thought like them. It turns out even in these Republican plus-20 districts—even in places Donald Trump carried by double digits—there are a lot of people out there who don’t want that agenda and are willing to organize.

I think there’s power in that. That’s how you build power in a Democratic Republic; you have to do it locally. That’s how our power is distributed geographically across the country. It’s why you have state reps, city council members, and US senators. If you want to wield political power in this country, you can either be super rich and famous, or you can organize. Those are the options.

CS: I know I speak for myself when I say I feel we are in much better hands when it is groups of grassroots organizers, rather than a few of the world’s wealthiest, controlling our laws.

EL: That’s a big statement, but I’m going to go along with you on that one. I think I agree.

CS: Bringing out some hot takes! I do want to talk about something getting a lot of buzz lately, mainly because it’s the next big protest day coming up. I initially characterized it as a strike, but when I looked at Indivisible’s page regarding the Mayday action, I saw it isn’t technically a labor strike—it’s an economic blackout of sorts. Could you explain the distinction and let people know what the plan is?

EL: A strike is a technical term used in the labor community that comes with other requirements attached to it. The inspiration for this Friday’s Mayday action comes from the heroes who organized in the Twin Cities against ICE and a secret police force that was bringing the boot down on that community.

What they called for was a day of truth and freedom. In late January, thousands upon thousands of faith leaders, nurses, teachers, and everyday community members came out and said, “Look, we’re not going to go to school, work, or shop. We’re going to flex our economic power to bring the attention of the entire country to what this regime is doing to us.”

Only two days after that action, the regime ultimately had to back off because the PR hit they were taking was so intense. The public was turning against the Trump regime, ICE, CBP, and the broader deportation agenda because people saw Renee Goode’s murder, Alex Pretti’s murder, and the regime’s slander against normal Americans. In Alex Freddy’s case, he was a VA nurse simply showing up to exercise his First Amendment rights in defense of his community, and a secret police force murdered him in the streets.

In response, we saw this incredible on-the-ground organizing that was something more than just a Saturday protest. The way I view Mayday is as a structure test for our movement. Heading into the midterms, we know what Donald Trump is planning to do. He fears free and fair elections and plans to sabotage them to hold on to power. That’s what all authoritarians do.

The question for us is, what are we going to do when that happens? We think the folks in Minnesota showed us a way forward: flexing not just our people power in numbers, but also our economic strength.

That’s what we’re going to see on Friday. We’re going to see people across the country—in blue, red, and purple states, in rural, suburban, and urban areas—figuring out ways to flex that economic strength as a community. In some places, you’ll see schools close down. You’ll see workers off the job. You’ll see people out of stores. In other places, you’ll see community events and large protests. This is about figuring out where we are strong, where we are weak, and where we need to grow, so that come November, we’re not just crushing them electorally, but protecting the results with strategic organizing.

CS: I want to talk about the buildup to this moment. The major penultimate moment is the midterm elections, but I feel like people have come a really long way since January 2025. When the Trump administration came in, they acted as if they had an irrefutable mandate and that any opposition was futile. I personally saw a wave of hopelessness.

Now, a year and change later, there have been multiple cabinet resignations and historic protests. People who had never attended a protest before are showing up and creating Indivisible groups. What’s it like seeing that from your bird’s-eye view?

EL: It’s the best of times and the worst of times. You could say that about the Twin Cities, where you have the most horrific acts of cruelty exercised on Americans alongside the most beautiful, inspiring acts of neighborliness and courage on the ground. That’s what I’ve seen across the country since Trump won re-election.

The broader political system didn’t respond the way the grassroots organizers responded. People organizing Indivisible groups didn’t wait several months to realize this guy was a threat; it was immediate. We started seeing a surge of engagement on the ground right away.

It’s going to be important to tell the story of what happened in 2025 and 2026. The story is one where an authoritarian won power, controlled the White House, Senate, and House, and attempted to concentrate power in his hands. In response, elites in media, universities, business, and the national Democratic Party essentially said, “He’s in power now, I guess we’ll just go along with it.”

The other part of the story was normal, everyday Americans saying, “No, I’m going to organize. I’m going to exercise my constitutional rights, connect with my community, and figure out how we protect ourselves.” That is what transformed Trump from an inevitable, unstoppable force into an unpopular, lame-duck president with a fracturing coalition.

It doesn’t mean we’re completely safe. When authoritarians are cornered, they lash out, which we are seeing now with the Iran war, Venezuela, and threats to Cuba or Greenland. But he is undeniably weakened. The direct connection between everyday people standing up for their rights and the country’s political trajectory is undeniable.

CS: I completely agree. The mentality of people across the country is drastically different than it was in January 2025. The best example I have is from Phoenix. In early 2025, a Northwest Valley Indivisible group formed. Initially, it was just a handful of people protesting outside local Tesla dealerships.

They kept getting bigger, eventually protesting outside Republican Representative Abe Hamadeh’s office, and evolved into a well-oiled machine of unpaid volunteers who know how to make noise effectively. Recently, they successfully organized against an industrial warehouse that ICE was going to use in Surprise, Arizona. They packed the city council, held daily protests, and now the use of that facility is on hold. These are people who felt hopeless in 2024, weren’t politically active, saw a need, and activated.

EL: I am so moved by that. The level of horror driven by this regime is intended to drive people into hiding. What we’re seeing in places like Surprise is folks coming together to demonstrate courage. There is reason to be scared, there is danger, and yet they are standing up in defense of their neighbors and communities anyway.

It’s enough to make you believe in democracy. If big corporations, big donors, and politicos keep making all the decisions, we’ll just get more of the same. The encouraging thing right now is that the organizing force on the ground is charting a different direction for the country once Donald Trump leaves the White House.

If we’re doing our job, we are empowering people to become the powerhouses you’re describing in Surprise. It’s not me leading this movement. Fundamentally, it comes down to normal people deciding to play a role in their democracy. We can provide training and tools, but local people are smart about where their leverage is. The opportunities in Surprise are different than those in San Francisco or Austin.

A one-size-fits-all program leaves so much brilliance and creativity on the table. Nobody is going to ride in to save the day for you. You actually develop political power by organizing and demanding it. The good news is that in America in 2026, this is still a constitutional republic, and you still have First Amendment rights to organize. That might not be true forever, but it is true right now.

CS: Building on that, organizing in a way that matches your community is crucial. A lot of localities have developed a reflexive opposition muscle where they know who to reach out to when they hear a call for a protest or, in the case of this Friday, a nationwide economic blackout.

This might be a new tactic for some, but I think it’s especially important in a time when billionaires and the richest people in our society essentially own politicians. An economic blackout can do the most damage because, at the end of the day, all these guys really care about is their bottom line.

EL: Economic pressure tactics have been bright spots during a very dark time. When Jimmy Kimmel was threatened by the regime, millions of people canceled their Disney subscriptions, and he was back on the air in hours. When Spotify ran ICE recruitment ads, tons of people canceled, and they removed the ads. When an airline made a business model out of deporting Americans, they faced massive protests and stopped doing it.

This is a nonviolent, effective organizing tool we can use to apply direct pressure to the system so it has to listen. It’s not our only tool, but if we aren’t using our economic power when someone tries to sabotage our elections, we aren’t running the full campaign we need to. Millions of people showing up on a Saturday won’t save democracy on its own. We have to marry the breadth of our protests with the depth of economic pressure tactics.

Mayday is an opportunity to test our strength. Where are we strong? Where do we need to build up more? Which tactics work on the ground? I encourage everybody to participate in some way. Take off from work or school, skip shopping, or attend a protest. Most importantly: don’t be alone on Mayday. Be part of a community committed to protecting democracy and non-violent tactics.

CS: My plan for Friday is to go through all my subscriptions and cancel the ones that don’t align with my vision for our country. However, that doesn’t feel like a communal experience. When you’re staying home, not working, and not buying anything, it can feel isolating compared to the inspiration of a massive protest. Is there anything people can do to feel connected and recognize they are part of a bigger movement?

EL: I don’t want to put down your individual efforts—everybody doing something is good. But you’re hitting on something really important. Experts in authoritarianism will tell you that authoritarians want you to feel isolated and alone. Organized, nonviolent people power is their biggest threat, which is why they saber-rattle at people exercising their First Amendment rights so much.

The most effective opposition tactic is refusing to be alone. Find a community. Find your local Indivisible group; there is likely one near 95% of the people watching this. If Indivisible isn’t your home, join the Working Families Party, 5051, a local immigrant rights group, or a mutual aid circle.

If you happen to be in an organizing desert with no organizations near you, start your own. Every single one of the 2,700 local Indivisible groups was started by someone who just raised their hand and decided to step up. People want to be part of something real right now, and you aren’t going to find that by doomscrolling. You’re going to find it by actually connecting with a community.

CS: You mentioned earlier that this is a good opportunity to test the strength of different communities’ economic blackout tactics. Is there a way you will be measuring the success of participation in Mayday?

EL: I want to see an unexpected number of actions in an unexpected number of places. I want to see different types of actions—some will be successful, and some will not. What they do in North Carolina is going to be different than San Francisco or Surprise, Arizona. We will learn from these activities and glean best practices for the entire country come November.

We’ll see entire school systems close, large numbers of workers staying off the job, and boycotts of specific stores or industries. It’s on us as national organizers to evaluate what went well and what didn’t so we can scale up over the next six months. This is a tactical escalation. It’s one thing to show up on a Saturday; it’s a bigger lift to take a sick day, keep your kids out of school, or refuse to shop. But it’s the kind of lift we need. We’re asking people to take responsibility for their democracy into their own hands.

CS: I really like that approach because it allows people to be creative. If you just give someone a box to check, they only think about showing up where they are told.

I’m thinking of an economic protest at Home Depot this past winter where people bought 55-cent ice scrapers and immediately got back in line to return them. It clogged up the return lines and let the company know they didn’t want ICE agents at their stores. It was incredibly creative, slowed down Home Depot, and was something I never would have thought of on my own. Giving people the opportunity to be creative shows what we’re made of.

EL: That’s exactly where the strength of the current pro-democracy movement lies. Even the phrase “No Kings” didn’t come from Indivisible cooking up poll-tested messaging in a room. It organically spread from protests earlier last year.

The best ideas come from people on the ground. Think of the Portland protesters who showed up in frog and unicorn costumes. It was a hilarious response to accusations that we were violent protesters. Making fun of the situation was a brilliant way to defang the regime. That caught on like wildfire. When the National Guard was called out against us in Texas and Virginia, it made no sense. Seeing fully armed guards facing off against kids dancing in funny costumes couldn’t have happened if this was just some corporate campaign. It grew organically out of the movement itself.

CS: I couldn’t imagine that getting pitched in a boardroom, but it worked. Authoritarians hate being turned into a joke. They are narcissists with fragile egos, and sending military guards to arrest an inflatable frog reveals the joke that they are.

EL: Oh my god, yes. There was an arrest at No Kings 2 in Alabama where a woman dressed up as a giant dictator, complete with the visual pun you can imagine. She was accused of destroying the peace, though she was later exonerated.

It’s important to understand there is no rule book written for this. Anyone at the national level who says this is exactly how you have to protest isn’t connected to reality. I encourage people to get creative on the ground, work with their local communities to capture attention, and then let everyone know about it. Take pictures, get press coverage, write op-eds, and elevate these tactics so other communities can replicate them.

CS: Thank you so much. I know we have to wrap up. Thanks for taking the time to talk with me, Ezra. Movements like this only need about 3.5% of the population participating to make a massive impact. We’ve already seen millions of people at recent protests, so I expect Mayday is going to be quite a force to be reckoned with.

EL: I believe so. I think we’re going to see a lot, learn a lot, and keep building from there.

Subscribe now

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Over 60 holding sites ICE has attempted to obscure from public view

Public opposition to the Trump administration’s plan to use industrial warehouses as immigrant detention camps has halted at least a dozen proposals — and now, signs suggest that his enforcement agents are feeling the pressure at hidden detention sites across the country.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been repeatedly violating detention laws at nearly 200 facilities across the country, according to an investigation by the Colorado Times Recorder. People are forced into strip mall shops, office buildings, and various administrative government complexes that lack adequate showers, toilets, bedding, food, and other basic necessities.

COURIER reviewed ICE operations and identified 64 holding sites the agency has attempted to obscure from public view. Unlike traditional offices, these locations are unmarked buildings not listed in ICE’s online directories, and can only be found using specific search terms. Even then, the listed information is often incorrect — the Portland, Maine, office, for example, is described as the Boston Field Office. Many of these sites are clustered around areas of heavy ICE activity, such as behind Home Depots or outside airports used for deportation flights.

All 64 sites can be found here.

Unlike authorized detention sites, like prisons, ICE offices and other spaces rented by DHS are only permitted for temporary holds — meaning someone should only be there long enough to be processed and booked into the system — until they are transferred somewhere with the infrastructure to provide humane living conditions. In practice, however, agents have increasingly been holding toddlers, seniors, and hundreds of others in these offices well beyond the 72-hour limit.

The violation isn’t new, by any means. Autumn Gonzalez, a volunteer attorney with the grassroots group NorCal Resist, says she’s been alerting immigrants of ICE’s tactics for over a decade. While there are no official detention centers in Northern California, there are three known sites where people are held for days on end: the ICE field office in San Francisco, an unmarked office building in Redding, and the federal courthouse in Sacramento.

“Our role there is that we can quickly get an attorney down there to assist the person who’s detained. As long as we have this on-the ground presence and we see what’s going on, which otherwise these detentions would be happening and these people would not have that access to an attorney before they’re moved to another location,” said Gonzalez. “I know they [ICE] don’t like us being there, and they harass our volunteers and try to scare them away. So, hopefully we’re having some kind of impact, making them think twice about whether or not to detain someone.”

Similar to the fierce local backlash against warehouse detention proposals, community protests outside ICE’s unmarked field detention sites have begun to wear on ICE agents’ morale. Once it was discovered that an office space in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, was being used to hold immigrants — some as young as two years old — protests formed outside the building every month, according to TV9 reporter Jackson Valenti.

Eventually, the crowds grew large enough that agents felt uncomfortable, so they erected a fence to separate themselves from the protestors.

“We are taking proactive steps to enhance security at the Cedar Rapids ICE facility,” a spokesperson told TV9. “Simply put, if everyone respected the law and our property, measures like this wouldn’t be necessary.”

Undeterred, protestors have continued demonstrating, and the fence has been turned into a memorial for individuals who have been killed in ICE custody.

More than 200 coordinated protests are planned for a national day of action on April 25, where millions are expected to march in opposition to the Trump administration’s mass detention agenda. In addition to public demonstrations, initiatives like ’ GTFO ICE are developing rapid response networks to train community members on ways to effectively prevent ICE from setting up shop in their neighborhoods.

“We have really good data now to show that, the earlier communities find out about these efforts to convert warehouses into ICE prisons, the likelier they are to stop them,” said , founder of Defiance. “Hands down, the most effective tactic has been crowd canceling these facilities, shining a light on it.”

So far, 13 warehouse sales have been canceled due to public pressure, and elected officials in Arizona, Georgia, and other states are utilizing bureaucratic maneuvers to prohibit ICE from operating detention camps in their municipalities.

Share

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

The two men stonewalling Congress’ investigations into Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network

Ongoing congressional investigations into Jeffrey Epstein’s multi-billion dollar sex trafficking enterprise have ground to a halt. Republicans who control the inquiries have shifted their focus to unreliable witness testimony instead of the millions of documents being withheld by the Trump administration.

As chair of the House Oversight Committee and the Senate Finance Committee, respectively, Rep. James Comer (R-KY) and Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) wield immense power over how their committees operate. They control when hearings are held, what can be brought up for a vote, and how many resources are allocated to investigations. Both men are now using this authority to limit their committees’ investigations into Epstein as much as possible, despite broad public interest and bipartisan support among committee members.

After spending the past year failing to find an effective way to politicize Oversight’s investigation to benefit his party and hurt Democrats, Comer has now attempted to move it out of the public eye. House Democrats revealed this week that Comer had replaced formal committee hearings with roundtable discussions — a bureaucratic maneuver that prevents the committee from issuing subpoenas and doesn’t require witnesses to testify under oath.

“They’re trying to shut down investigations,” ranking member Robert Garcia (D-CA) told COURIER. “Democrats, over the course of the last few months, have put in place seven motions that we’ve passed through our committee — that have included 18 subpoenas for documents, for testimony, for important witnesses to come and talk about the Epstein investigation, and other important matters in front of our committee and our government. But now, Oversight Republicans are scared. They don’t want to face us in committee, and they don’t want to allow us to have motions. ”

The move comes after a series of humiliations Comer has suffered as committee chair. In February, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tore into Republicans during her deposition for compelling her to testify despite having never interacted with Epstein nor any investigation involving him. The following month, close Epstein associate Darren Indyke repeatedly lied under oath without consequence, and last week, former US Attorney General Pam Bondi outright ignored the committee’s subpoena and failed to appear for her scheduled deposition.

Democrats and Republicans on the committee had threatened to hold Bondi in contempt, but they can no longer do so after Comer removed that as an option. Instead, he soft launched a proposal to release Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell from prison in exchange for her cooperation in their investigation — although Comer immediately distanced himself from the idea after bringing it up.

“A lot of people do [want her pardoned],” Comer told POLITICO. “My committee’s split on that.”

However, the government’s own findings show that Maxwell has proven to be an unreliable witness who has shown a willingness to offer whatever narrative will secure her a more favorable outcome. Of potentially greater value to the committee are the roughly 3 million documents from the Epstein Files being withheld by the DOJ, in direct violation of a subpoena issued by Oversight in August 2025.

In the Senate, Crapo has taken a more stoic approach to stalling the investigation. The Finance Committee’s inquiry began in 2021, under then-chair Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). Wyden made gradual progress over the years, eventually gaining temporary access from a resistant Biden administration to Epstein’s financial records at the US Treasury.

That all changed in 2025, when the White House shifted from resistant to combative. Under President Donald Trump, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent responded to Wyden’s request for additional records with threats. And Crapo, since taking over as chair in January 2025, has refused to support the investigation, leaving it without adequate resources or subpoena power. He has entirely abdicated responsibility, leaving it up to the House to do the heavy lifting.

“Jeffrey Epstein was a notorious sex trafficker who committed appalling crimes,” Crapo told the Idaho Statesman last October. “The House Oversight Committee is now leading an ‘investigation of the investigators’ and is the appropriate committee to uncover why Epstein was not properly investigated and prosecuted earlier.”

But Wyden, Crapo’s fellow committee member, has said he uncovered what he believes to be troves of evidence at the US Treasury linking Epstein’s financial crimes to accomplices, including more than $1 billion in transactions involving sanctioned banks and Eastern European countries where he is known to have trafficked girls and women. An ongoing investigation by COURIER has also revealed millions of dollars in suspicious transactions that banks were aware of, but allowed to continue because they profited from Epstein’s business.

In one document withheld by the Treasury but mistakenly published by the DOJ, PayPal identified 50 suspicious transactions from Epstein totaling nearly $150,000. The report noted that the “recipients of these payments were found to be predominantly women models, mainly located in Russia.” PayPal monitored the activity for two years — well aware they were red flags for money laundering and human trafficking — but didn’t report it until after Epstein’s second arrest.

Attempts to Sanewash

• ‘Other Than Epstein, She’s the Worst Person in This Investigation’: Comer Breaks With GOP Over Maxwell Pardon Deal

• House Democrat pushes DOJ on possible pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell

• US House Oversight members divided on Ghislaine Maxwell pardon, chairman says

Far-Right Spin

• Comer Responds Accordingly to ‘Clickbait’ Coverage of Alleged Divide Among GOP on Possible Maxwell Pardon

• Several in Epstein Committee Speak Out in Favor of Pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell

• Comer says he is not in favor of pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell, committee split

Share

Subscribe now

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe now

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

The architect behind the Trump administration’s immigrant warehouse detention camps made a number of promises to lawmakers about his agency’s lack of transparency and excessive spending during a congressional hearing Thursday morning.

A few hours later, he quit.

Acting US Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin announced yesterday evening that Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons had tendered his resignation and would leave his post on May 31.

“Director Lyons has been a great leader of ICE,” Mullin said in a statement. “He jumpstarted an agency that had not been allowed to do its job for four years. Thanks to his leadership, American communities are safer.”

Lyons’ abrupt departure marks the end of a tenure rife with controversy, largely over his efforts to dehumanize immigrants and treat detainees like cargo. In April 2025, he announced a goal of carrying out deportations with the speed and efficiency of Amazon Prime, then began the process of mirroring Amazon’s business model by purchasing uninhabitable warehouses, forcing people to stay there for extended periods of time, and denying basic rights like food and access to restrooms.

ICE originally planned to purchase 23 warehouses to hold an estimated 70,000 people, but opposition from communities, elected officials, and warehouse owners stymied their efforts. Under Lyons’ direction, the agency spent more than $1 billion on less than a dozen warehouses — many of which will remain inoperable due to local zoning regulations and poorly-conceived purchase agreements.

Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-TX) — whose district includes three ICE warehouses in Socorro, as well as Camp East Montana, a detention center built on a military base — questioned Lyons during a US House Appropriations Committee hearing on DHS’s budget. After witnessing grueling conditions at Camp East Montana during an oversight visit in February, Escobar told Lyons his lack of basic infrastructure planning would bring about the same conditions in the warehouses.

“The city of Socorro, their city council, has passed a moratorium on any DHS facilities. They do not have the water infrastructure, the wastewater infrastructure, the emergency services infrastructure,” said Escobar. “They don’t have enough for their own community, but now to have facilities — potentially have facilities — for [8,500] human beings and staff? They are very alarmed. There were hundreds of members of their community who attended the city council meeting to oppose these new facilities. Local leaders are uniformly opposed to any new facilities.”

ICE warehouses have faced fierce opposition from every municipality where they’ve been proposed, regardless of the region’s political leanings. Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) collected 10,000 signatures opposing a proposed ICE warehouse in Chester, a Democratic-leaning town of just 12,000 residents. Meanwhile, residents of Social Circle, Georgia, a Republican stronghold, successfully thwarted Lyons’ plans for a mega-warehouse in their town. It remains unclear how DHS will use the warehouse, which they had already purchased for $128 million.

Even congressional Republicans, who are largely supportive of the Trump administration’s anti-immigrant initiatives, appear to have soured on Lyons’ approach. During the hearing, Rep. John Rutherford (R-FL) expressed concern that Lyons was spending too much money on permanent infrastructure for what he believes to be a temporary problem.

“I want to know is, what the mix is between facilities — and permanent structures that we’re building — and what I think is the scalable program that you all have, which is accessing local jails and state prisons for these folks to house them, instead of building big, permanent structures,” said Rutherford. “Because we’re not always going to have this problem. Eventually we will deport the majority of the illegals and we’ll get back to normal needs.”

Lyons is the third member of the administration to lose their job this year following a tense congressional hearing. Trump fired former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem after her testimony during a US Judiciary Committee hearing on March 5. Former US Attorney General Pam Bondi was let go on April 2, partly due to her responses during a February Judiciary hearing, as well as her botched attempt to shield Trump from scrutiny related to his personal association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Attempts to Sanewash

• ICE director stepping down

• Todd Lyons to step down as ICE director in May after leading enforcement expansion

• ICE director Todd Lyons to leave agency after record deportations, controversy over actions

Far-Right Spin

• Todd Lyons Resigns From the Position of Acting Director of ICE. He Was Responsible for Trump’s Mass Deportation Plan

• ICE Director Lyons Resigns Hours After Announcing Largest Chinese Illegal Alien Gift Card Fraud in History

• Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons resigns after 20 years with agency — will stay on for transition

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up

Epstein’s victims claim his lawyer acted as loan shark, kept them away from law enforcement

The total amount paid by financial institutions, royals, and close associates of Jeffrey Epstein to keep their involvement in his international sex trafficking empire out of civil court has now surpassed $1 billion. At the same time, the Trump administration continues to insist there is no evidence to warrant any criminal investigation.

This week, Bank of America began the process of paying $72.5 million to roughly 75 women abused by Epstein, as part of a March 2026 settlement. Like other institutions, it admitted no wrongdoing. The settlement follows similar agreements by competitors JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank, both accused of ignoring Epstein’s blatantly illegal activity because it benefited them financially.

“Rather than merely providing routine banking services to Epstein, Bank of America went far beyond what a non-complicit bank would have done and instead assisted Epstein in setting up the necessary financial structure to operate his sex-trafficking venture,” the lawsuit alleged. “Instead of behaving as an ordinary provider of routine banking services, Bank of America instead assisted Epstein in covering up his past crimes and committing new ones.”

Suspicious Activity Reports filed by banks accused of enabling Epstein’s money laundering and human trafficking are riddled with the names of his alleged accomplices — Darren Indyke, Richard Kahn, Harry Beller, and Lesley Groff, among others. To date, the investigation into Epstein’s multi-billion dollar enterprise has resulted in just two arrests and one conviction.

“So the big misconception is that the Department of Justice or me has ever said ‘case closed,’” acting US Attorney General Todd Blanche told NBC News. “What we have said is that from the information that we have within the Epstein files, we do not have a case against anybody.”

While the DOJ does have an Epstein-related investigation underway, Blanche’s characterization of his department’s inquiry appears to be intentionally misleading. In reality, the DOJ closed its full investigation into Epstein’s sex trafficking operation in July 2025, and opened a narrower one five months later focused on finding ties between Epstein and Trump’s political opponents.

Omitted from the Trump administration’s current investigation are many of the individuals and institutions tied to Epstein’s operation who have collectively paid more than $1 billion to insist they were unaware of his well-documented and highly publicized illicit activity. In each lawsuit, as soon as trial dates were set, defendants moved quickly to instead settle for a hefty sum.

Litigation against major banks snowballed over time, after the $150 million fine given to Deutsche Bank in 2020 set the precedent for a successful case. Since then, victims have pursued cases one by one, securing settlements from Deutsche Bank in 2023, JPMorgan in 2024, and Bank of America in 2026. A separate lawsuit filed in October 2025 against Bank of New York Mellon, another longtime financial institution of Epstein’s, is ongoing.

Here are some key settlements tied to Epstein’s sex trafficking operation:

British Royal Family: $16 Million

Giuffre v. Prince Andrew: Virginia Giuffre, groomed by Epstein as a minor at President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in 2000, received an estimated $16 million in 2022 from disgraced former prince, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, and his family. Giuffre filed her lawsuit in 2019, after New York passed a law allowing victims of childhood sexual abuse to sue in civil court over criminal acts even after the statute of limitations had expired.

Deutsche Bank: $251 Million

New York State Department of Financial Services v. Deutsche Bank: Settled in July 2020 for $150 million over failure to comply with anti-money laundering practices. The bank insisted that the settlement agreement “does not come close to adequately alleging that Deutsche Bank ... was part of Epstein’s criminal sex trafficking ring.”

Karimi v. Deutsche Bank: Settled in September 2022 for $26.5 million with US shareholders over accusations of lax oversight while doing business with high-risk, ultra-rich clients, including Epstein and various Russian oligarchs.

Doe 1 v. Deutsche Bank: Settled in May 2023 for $75 million to avoid a class-action lawsuit over allegations that the bank “knowingly benefited and received things of value for assisting, supporting, facilitating, and otherwise providing the most critical tool for the Jeffrey Epstein sex-trafficking organization to successfully rape, sexually assault, and coercively sex traffic.”

JPMorgan: $365 Million

Doe 1 v. JP Morgan: Settled in June 2023 for $290 million, the same day a federal judge granted class-action status after ruling there could be more than 100 potential plaintiffs.

USVI v. JPMorgan: Settled in September 2023 for $75 million under highly unusual circumstances. After the $190 million suit was filed by then-US Virgin Islands Attorney General Denise George, JPMorgan threatened to prove in court that the USVI government was equally complicit. George was immediately fired by Gov. Albert Bryan Jr., and her replacement quickly agreed to a significantly smaller settlement.

Despite the agreement, however, the judge refused to dismiss a number of claims: “that defendants obstructed enforcement of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act; that defendants negligently failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent physical harm; and the claim that defendants negligently failed to exercise reasonable care as a banking institution providing non-routine banking.”

Leon Black: $62.5 Million

US Virgin Islands v. Black: Settled in January 2023 for $62.5 million. Black admitted no wrongdoing, but admitted that the $158 million he paid to Epstein’s company, Southern Trust, was used by Epstein to “partially fund his operations in the Virgin Islands.”

Doe v. Black: An ongoing lawsuit filed in 2023 by a victim who claims Epstein trafficked her to Black when she was 16 years old. Doe says that she was sexually abused by Black, as well as by Epstein employees Ghislane Maxwell, Sarah Kellen, and two women identified only as Elizabeth and Nadia.

Bank of America: $72.5 Million

Doe v. Bank of America: Settled in March 2026 for $72.5 million, just days before Leon Black was scheduled to appear for a deposition.

Epstein Estate: $335 Million

US Virgin Islands v. Epstein Estate: Settled in December 2022 for $105 million in cash, plus half of the profit from the $60 million sale of Epstein’s island. USVI Attorney General Denise George charged Epstein and his two close associates, Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, under the territory’s RICO statutes. The suit alleged that the “Epstein Enterprise” fraudulently abused USVI tax laws to hide wrongdoing and subsidize its criminal operations.

George’s investigation also led to the creation of the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program, created by the Estate as a way to circumvent civil suits and expedite payments to victims. However, as a condition of accepting money from the fund, victims had to agree not to pursue legal action against Indyke, Kahn, or any of Epstein’s former employees. The compensation fund closed in August 2021 and paid out $121 million to 150 victims.

The Estate also says it paid an estimated $49 million to settle disputes prior to the fund’s creation, though there is no court documentation available to confirm that the payments were handled through legal avenues.

Bensky, Doe 3 v. Kahn, Indyke: Settled in February 2026 for $35 million. The class-action lawsuit alleged that Kahn and Indyke facilitated the financial operations of Epstein’s criminal enterprise, structuring his assets in a way that concealed decades of money laundering and sex trafficking.

Subscribe now

Share

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Cam here 👋 bringing you your daily dose of what people are doing – good, bad, and otherwise – in the world of politics. We’re diving into the stories you won’t see anywhere else. And remember, you can also keep up with me over on TikTok and Bluesky.

Subscribe now

Since day one of Trump’s political career, people have desperately attempted to normalize his absurd abuses of power and blatant corruption – and 10 years later, much of corporate media remains a victim of their own attempts to return to a sense of normalcy.

It’s time to stop sane-washing the insanity.

What Happened

Four of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims have come forward with allegations that Darren Indyke, the convicted sex offender’s personal lawyer, either shook them down for money or prevented them from speaking with law enforcement. These accusations directly contradict Indyke’s sworn testimony before the Oversight Committee last month.

This revelation of a second potential instance of perjury comes as the Trump administration announced it would not honor a subpoena issued by US House Oversight Committee to former US Attorney General Pam Bondi regarding her role in the cover-up of Epstein’s criminal network. How Congress handles Indyke and others’ apparent disrespect of subpoenas and sworn depositions could play a role in whether or not Bondi will respect hers.

“Leaving office doesn’t mean you get to dodge accountability,” US Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC). “Pam Bondi was subpoenaed by name, not by title, and because the DOJ stonewalled Congress and refused to follow the law, she needs to appear before the Oversight Committee and answer for it. She promised she would comply. April 14 is her chance to prove it. Chairman Comer must make one thing clear: show up or face contempt.”

Indyke told the Oversight Committee, in no uncertain terms, that he had no involvement in — or knowledge of — the billion-dollar sex trafficking operation, despite his role in handling the business side of the criminal enterprise. He also denied ever steering victims away from law enforcement, but evidence in the Epstein Files portrays him as the first line of defense between victims and the police.

Despite this, no one on the Oversight Committee has threatened contempt, as they have for Bondi.

“Did you at any time ever tell any woman making allegations about Epstein not to communicate with law enforcement?” investigators asked Indyke.

“I would never have told them not to communicate with law enforcement,” Indyke replied, in one of his most blunt and straightforward responses during the nearly seven-hour deposition.

But Epstein’s victims told federal investigators a different story. In 2005 and 2006, some women who had been sexually abused were called into Indyke’s office, where he told them never to talk to law enforcement and to only speak with him regarding legal matters. In other instances, victims reported that when contacted by law enforcement, Epstein directed them to Indyke to have him act as intermediary.

The most direct accusation against Indyke came in 2005, from an international student named Lynn*. She had been lured into Epstein’s network with the promise of her own apartment in Manhattan and a modeling job with Victoria’s Secret. Instead, she traveled back and forth with Epstein between his New York and Florida residences, working as a household assistant under Ghislane Maxwell.

While working to become a model, Epstein introduced her to a number of his associates in the industry, including Italian agency owner Paolo Zampolli. Through him, she met Melania Krauss, who was also introduced to Donald Trump by Epstein, Lynn told investigators. Melania would go on to marry Trump, and Zampolli was appointed to lofty roles in both Trump administrations. Melania has since denied being introduced to Epstein by Trump, or even knowing Epstein at all, despite numerous photos of her with Epstein and Maxwell that disprove the First Lady’s claims.

“I think that if they have learned any lessons, it’s that Trump — and anybody else connected, however closely or loosely, to the Epstein Ring, they can’t make this go away,” said US Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA), ranking member of the Oversight Committee. “They’ve wished it away. They hoped it away. They try to ignore it away. And it has endured. The American people are now collectively in one voice demanding this accountability.”

Shortly before Epstein’s 2006 arrest, Lynn noticed law enforcement collecting evidence. Epstein told her the investigation was into her family, who he had obtained visas for.

“Lynn knew that Epstein was lying about how her parents got their visas,” investigators wrote in the 2019 report. “Lynn did not recall how she had learned about the actual reason for the initial investigation. Epstein’s counsel Darren Indyke called her into his office and told her not to talk to law enforcement.”

These detailed accounts sharply contrast with Indyke’s portrayal of his decades-long career as a mid-level lackey filing routine paperwork and running administrative errands. In reality, he appears to have served as a mafia-esque enforcer, threatening abused women with legal warnings and executing Epstein’s threats with cold bureaucracy.

As part of his manipulation tactics, Epstein bound his victims to him through a number of legal avenues: he co-signed leases and paid rent, fast tracked immigration paperwork through illicit means, secured them employment with his friends and alleged clients — such as at Les Wexner’s Victoria’s Secret — and bestowed lavish gifts that came with contractual strings attached.

As the signatory on all of his legal dealings, Indyke was at the helm of every unscrupulous tool in Epstein’s repertoire. And when pressure needed to be applied, a combination of Epstein’s emotional temper tantrums and Indyke’s emotionless legal threats kept victims under his thumb. In one instance, after a victim attempted to cut ties, Epstein screamed at her and called her ungrateful. Shortly after, Indyke contacted her, claiming she owed Epstein $10,000 for an apartment he had co-signed on.

Indyke’s apparent omissions under oath come at a time when Congress’ authority to subpoena witnesses and hold them in contempt for perjury is being tested. Last month, the US Supreme Court issued an unsigned order allowing Trump ally and Epstein confidant Steve Bannon to have his 2022 contempt conviction thrown out.

Now, later this month, Bondi is expected to ignore a congressional subpoena. Such an act by the country’s former top law enforcement officer would ordinarily trigger contempt of Congress charges. But without consequences for Indyke and with Bannon’s conviction overturned, violating a congressional subpoena appears to carry no long-term consequences.

“This is why we need a DOJ that is not acting as Donald Trump’s cover,” said Lee. “Our first, immediate interest is to make sure that she still is accountable to the subpoena, and comes before our committee to answer questions about her handling of the Epstein Files.”

Bondi’s deposition is scheduled for April 14, and members of the Oversight Committee warn she will face contempt charges if she fails to appear.

*As all victim’s names are redacted, a pseudonym has been used to avoid confusion.

Share

COURIER’s newly-launched Epstein investigation project

For too long, the Epstein Class has dealt in wealth, power, and politics to avoid accountability and deny victims & survivors their due justice. The public deserves the truth, but the Trump Administration is failing its legal obligation to deliver it.

That’s why we’re expanding our coverage to follow the money and investigate the power players in and outside the government. With a new database by Thorian AI, we have unprecedented access and ability to navigate more than 1.2M files and we’re sharing access—and what we’re finding—with you.

Subscribe to The Cover-Up and get one concise, easy-to-read email a week that cuts through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want.

By staying plugged in and leveraging our reporting to make your own calls-to-action louder, together, we can turn information into justice.

Subscribe

Advertise in this newsletter

Do you or your company want to support COURIER’s mission and showcase your products or services to an aligned audience of 190,000+ subscribers at the same time? Contact advertising@couriernewsroom.com for more information.

Support our journalism at COURIER

Democracy dies behind a paywall, which is why our journalism is — and always will be — free.

But to keep our commitment to the free access to information, we need support from those who have the means, believe in our mission, and support our unique model.

Donate

COURIER’S Publisher and CEO, Tara McGowan, spoke with National Correspondent on Tuesday to discuss his latest breaking news reporting on the Epstein beat, as well as our plans to continue investigating one of the biggest cover-ups in recent political memory.

Thank you , , , , , and many others for tuning into my live video with ! Join me for my next live video in the app.

Subscribe now

Help us spread the word about this important work!

NEWS + ANALYSIS FROM COURIER

Follow along for breaking news, investigative deep dives, explainers, and interviews

GET ‘THE COVER UP’ STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX

We’ll cut through the noise with the headlines you need and the breakdowns you want in this skimmable weekly newsletter roundup.

JOIN THE INVESTIGATION

The Cover-Up’s database provides you with unprecedented access to indexed files and tracking. Thorian AI processed, tagged, and provided easily searchable titles and descriptions for every file and every entity in the entire cache. Stay tuned for more features coming soon!

SUBMIT A TIP

Share information securely with COURIER’s reporters. All submissions can be confidential and are encrypted.

Prefer email? Contact us at tips@epsteincoverup.us

Share