Rep. Thomas Massie accused the Department of Justice of removing key documents related to Jeffrey Epstein after initially producing them, preventing lawmakers from reviewing unredacted versions. In a pointed critique, Massie highlighted the disappearance of some of the most significant files, including a photograph of Epstein in a room marked with "CIA" on the boxes.

Speaking in what appears to be a radio or podcast excerpt captured by Grabien, Massie stated, "And finally, I know the doj wants to say they’re done with this document production. The problem is they’ve taken down documents." He emphasized that this action occurred just before he and others were scheduled to examine the materials at the DOJ.

Massie specifically called out two particularly important documents "involving Virginia [Giuffre] Case and other things," noting that they had been pulled from access. The congressman expressed frustration over the timing, saying these were among "the most significant documents" that had been made available prior to their removal.

Central to his complaint was the now-missing image of Epstein, described by Massie as "that picture of Epstein at in a room where it’s got cia written on the boxes." He argued that once documents are produced, the DOJ cannot simply take them down, insisting, "We want to be able to look at all these files. They can’t keep those documents down after they’ve already produced them."

The remarks underscore ongoing tensions between congressional oversight and federal agencies handling Epstein-related materials. Massie's intervention highlights concerns about transparency in document production, particularly regarding high-profile cases tied to the late financier’s network.

While the DOJ has indicated it is finished with document production, Massie’s comments suggest lawmakers are pushing back, demanding full access to preserve accountability. The removal of these files, including the CIA-labeled photo, raises questions about what information was being shielded from review.

Massie’s direct confrontation positions him as a vocal advocate for unhindered access, framing the issue as a matter of procedural integrity in government investigations.