• Bloomberg reports the FBI redacted President Donald Trump’s name from Epstein-related documents before releasing its final memo. Trump, who was a private citizen at the time of the investigation, has called for transparency—while also dismissing Epstein client list theories as a “hoax.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. (TDR) — President Donald Trump’s name was among those redacted from documents tied to the late Jeffrey Epstein, according to a Friday report by Bloomberg, which cited multiple sources familiar with the FBI’s final review process. The revelation has deepened the divide between federal transparency efforts and growing demands from Trump’s own base for full disclosure of the Epstein files.

The report, authored by veteran investigative journalist Jason Leopold, states that a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) review team inside the FBI combed through thousands of pages tied to the Epstein investigation. The team, according to Leopold, was tasked specifically with removing the names of private individuals, including “prominent public figures” such as Trump, before the documents were released to the public.

The FBI’s document review preceded the release of a formal Department of Justice memo that concluded Epstein died by suicide and that further disclosure of files was “not warranted.” That conclusion has sparked an uproar from populist conservatives and prominent media figures aligned with President Trump, including Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, who have criticized the decision and demanded more transparency.

“There’s no excuse for withholding names that could shine a light on who enabled Epstein,” Carlson said on his podcast earlier this week. “If you’re going to redact names, tell the American people why.”

Trump’s Past Ties and Present Position

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

President Trump, who has previously acknowledged knowing Epstein, has not been charged or formally accused of any wrongdoing in relation to the case. His name appearing in the files, as Bloomberg notes, does not imply guilt, particularly because the redacted documents date back to a period when Trump was still a private citizen.

Nonetheless, the fact that his name was specifically flagged and redacted under FOIA exemption rules is politically sensitive. Critics have long scrutinized Trump’s past friendship with Epstein, though the relationship reportedly soured years before Epstein’s 2019 arrest and subsequent death in federal custody.

Trump himself has called the Epstein client list theories a “hoax,” but he has also publicly ordered the release of additional files, suggesting he wants the matter fully aired out.

“President Trump believes in full transparency,” a senior White House official said Friday. “He wants all Epstein files declassified—no matter who they mention.”

Legal Grounds for Redaction

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

Do you think the United States should keep striking drug boats before they reach America?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from The Dupree Report, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

The FBI’s FOIA team cited standard exemptions for redacting names of individuals who were private citizens at the time of the events in question. Because the Epstein investigation officially began in 2006, most figures—including Trump—were not serving in public office during its initiation and therefore fall under common privacy protections.

These exemptions, while legally sound, are being viewed by many Trump supporters as political cover. The backlash illustrates the widening rift between the federal government’s cautious handling of sensitive documents and the growing populist demand for full exposure—particularly when the matter touches on global elites and possible criminal complicity.

Transparency vs. Privacy

The Bloomberg report adds new layers to the already complex debate over the scope of federal transparency in the Epstein case. While the DOJ concluded further disclosure was unwarranted, the redaction of a former president’s name—especially one actively calling for more transparency—has only fueled public suspicion.

Will Trump’s call for full disclosure force the DOJ’s hand—or will privacy exemptions continue to shield Epstein’s connections from view?

Follow The Dupree Report on YouTube

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10