Former prosecutor says the DOJ lied to Epstein judge — and can prove it

Former federal prosecutor Kristy Greenberg was watching the accounting of a court hearing on Thursday over whether the Justice Department released all of the documents in the Jeffrey Epstein investigation as required by the congressional law.

The main dispute between the DOJ and the judge concerned handwritten notes and whether those notes were also released with the documentation. According to the assistant U.S. attorney, the attorney general decided that all of the handwritten notes were "duplicative," meaning the DOJ felt that they already appeared elsewhere in the released documents.

The judge challenged the DOJ on that detail, asking why the DOJ should be believed that the handwritten notes were nothing more than duplicates. The DOJ explained that courts usually just trust what they say. Frequently, when federal agents interview people, they fill out a form called a "302." The agent can handwrite the information from a witness or someone reporting a crime. Those notes can then be entered into computer files etc. So the DOJ is saying that these notes are already typed out, so the handwritten information wasn't necessary.

Greenberg pointed out that she knows with absolute certainty that DOJ's statement "isn't true."

"FBI 302 reports and corresponding handwritten notes were produced in the Epstein files," Greenberg said. "Below is one example. So why did DOJ produce handwritten notes for certain 302s and not others?"

One example she pointed out was the Epstein "victim who made accusations against [Donald] Trump."

She attached the typed and handwritten notes that appear in the Epstein files database on the Justice Department website.

Legal analyst Allison Gill was in court detailing the exchange between the judge and lawyers. She noted that the DOJ's Andrew Block was added as a lawyer to the case just 24 hours before. When he was asked whether there were no handwritten notes released, Gill said he "erred."

"As predicted, Andrew Block — who joined the case yesterday — is not prepared to discuss the issues the judge asked DOJ to be prepared to discuss," Gill said. "It's not going well for DOJ today. Their argument is 'you have to trust us, bro. We're the DOJ.'"