The Tara Palmeri Show
Episode: DOJ Under FIRE for Epstein Redactions
Date: February 13, 2026
Host: Tara Palmeri
Guests: Lisa Rubin (Senior Legal Reporter), commentary from Congressman Ro Khanna and Congressman Dan Goldman
Episode Overview
In this episode, Tara Palmeri dives into the controversy surrounding the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) handling of newly-released, heavily redacted Jeffrey Epstein files and the growing bipartisan scrutiny over what is being concealed. Following the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act—which stipulates that redactions should only protect survivors—many in Congress and the public are questioning why the files remain obscured in ways that may also protect powerful individuals. Tara, along with legal expert Lisa Rubin, explores the unfolding revelations, the stakes for politicians such as Donald Trump, the role of influential attorneys, and the broader implications for transparency and justice.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. Epstein Files Transparency Act & DOJ Under Scrutiny
- The Act passed overwhelmingly, allowing redactions only to protect survivors’ identities, not reputations.
- Congress members (e.g., Ro Khanna) are now viewing the unredacted files and noticing that the DOJ has blacked out far more—including names of powerful, convicted individuals.
- Example: Khanna highlights redactions that shield a businessman and convicted sex offender tied to Prince Andrew, and a political figure boasting about Iowa votes—raising the question: Why so much secrecy?
- “The Justice Department redacted a lot more than that. Like all the black ink on this file posted to social media by Congressman Ro Khanna today…” [00:32]
2. Specific Contentious Redactions
- Files hide high-profile names such as Les Wexner and detailed conversations about Donald Trump’s interactions with Epstein.
- The public is left wondering what is behind these “blocks of text,” fueling suspicion about elite protection:
- “We could know even more if it wasn't all redacted. We don't know what we don't know... Imagine what's actually behind those blocks of text.” – Tara Palmeri [03:51]
3. Reputational Fallout & Political Implications
- Release of even redacted documents is already harming reputations—examples include Dr. Oz inviting Epstein to a party and Howard Lutnick’s apparent continued socializing post-conviction.
- Prominent Democratic lawyer Kathy Rummler—a former White House counsel—resigns from Goldman Sachs after emails reveal a close, possibly advisory, relationship with Epstein:
- “What is most difficult about Kathy Ruemler's long standing association... is that over a course of about five to six years, she is providing him with what looks to be legal advice...” – Lisa Rubin [05:53]
4. Legal Advice, Power & Enablers
- Lisa Rubin points out that individuals like Rummler appear over 500 times in attorney-client communications, often behind the scenes, which was critical for Epstein’s ability to evade serious charges for years.
- High-powered legal assistance shielded Epstein and, by extension, associates named in the files:
- “None of this develops... in which hundreds of women and girls were assaulted and preyed upon if he does not get the high powered legal help...” – Host commentary [07:01]
5. The Trump Dimension
- Trump’s relationship with Epstein is longstanding, predating digital correspondence, making records scarce. This potentially insulates Trump from being caught in emails but not from witness accounts or legal proceedings.
- “President Trump is lucky... their friendship sort of predates email... He doesn't use a lot of text exchange.” – Tara Palmeri [08:43]
- The show examines a redacted document allegedly summarizing an interview with Trump organized instead of a deposition—a document Congress can see unredacted, suggesting it may not be protected by attorney-client privilege:
- “Even if that document were attorney client privileged... the fact that Members of Congress were then allowed to view it unredacted... puts the lie to the fact that it's privileged.” – Lisa Rubin [09:43]
6. Nature of the Evidence and What Remains Hidden
- Many allegations lack full corroboration, so responsible journalists (and the DOJ) are challenged to weigh open government against privacy and due process.
- The conversation underscores a meta-issue: The public knows most about individuals who left extensive digital traces, and much less about those, like Trump, who did not.
Memorable Quotes & Moments
On the Scope of Redactions
- Tara Palmeri:
“We could know even more if it wasn't all redacted. We don't know what we don't know... imagine what's actually behind those blocks of text.” [03:51]
On Legal Enablers’ Role
- Lisa Rubin:
“What's really problematic is... she is providing him [Epstein] with what looks to be legal advice at a time where he was not only not a retained client of her then law firm, but she was not publicly representing him... Kathy Rummler's name appears more than 500 times in attorney client communications...” [05:53]
On Trump's Elusiveness in Evidence
- Tara Palmeri:
“President Trump is lucky in the sense that their friendship sort of predates email. And he's not really much of an emailer anyway... imagine what we would know now about his relationship.” [08:43]
On the Nature of the Investigation
- Lisa Rubin:
“Even if that document were attorney client privileged... that Members of Congress were then allowed to view it unredacted... puts the lie to the fact that it's privileged.” [09:43]
Important Timestamps
- 00:32 – 03:28: Discussion of the scope and controversy of the DOJ's redactions.
- 03:28 – 04:47: How daily revelations impact high-profile figures (Dr. Oz, Howard Lutnick, Trump).
- 04:47 – 05:53: The reputational hit to powerful individuals and new fallout (Kathy Rummler example).
- 05:53 – 07:01: The role of lawyers and the vital legal maneuvering that enabled Epstein.
- 07:01 – 09:14: Challenges of reporting on uncorroborated but damaging allegations; handling the files judiciously.
- 09:14 – 10:27: The limits of digital evidence due to Trump's communication habits and reflection on what is and isn’t known.
- 10:27 – 10:43: Closing comments on ongoing investigation and the significance of a key document involving Trump.
Tone and Takeaways
The conversation is incisive, skeptical, and unflinching. Tara Palmeri and Lisa Rubin blend sharp analysis with evident frustration at the limits of transparency and the apparent shielding of the powerful. The episode underscores how high-level political and legal dynamics continue to shape public access to critical information—and the widening rift between official assurances of transparency and the recurring reality of institutional protection.
For listeners who want to follow the ongoing story, Tara Palmeri promises continued coverage and encourages audiences to stay engaged for future revelations.