Unreleased FBI Documents Detail Unsubstantiated Allegations Against Trump
Exclusive documents obtained by the Guardian reveal that the Department of Justice withheld three FBI memos containing explicit but unverified claims that Donald Trump sexually abused a woman when she was a minor in the early 1980s, allegedly with the assistance of Jeffrey Epstein. These records, which memorialize 25 pages of agents' notes from four interviews conducted in 2019, were not included in the millions of pages of Epstein-related files uploaded by the DoJ starting in December.
Discovery and Initial Reports
The existence of these missing documents was first reported by independent journalist Roger Sollenberger and later confirmed by NPR, sparking outrage in Washington and prompting an investigation from congressional Democrats. The Guardian has reviewed the FBI Form 302 reports, which detail interviews from July to October 2019. Notably, only the first session, where the woman did not name Trump, was made public in the initial release.
An administration official confirmed the authenticity of the three missing reports to the Guardian. The DoJ stated to NPR that "nothing has been deleted" and any withheld material was either duplicative or privileged, a claim echoed by an administration official to Breitbart, which also reviewed the files.
Allegations and Contradictions
In the documents, the woman alleged that Epstein sexually abused her from age 13, starting around 1983 while she lived in Hilton Head Island, South Carolina. She claimed Epstein took her to a building in New York or New Jersey when she was between 13 and 15, where she was introduced to Trump and associates. According to FBI notes, she stated Trump said, "Let me teach you how little girls are supposed to be," before attempting to assault her, leading to a physical altercation where she bit him and was removed.
Her allegations have not been verified, and the FBI never brought charges related to her claims, which appear outlandish at times and contradict known details about Epstein's life in the early 1980s. Mark Epstein, Jeffrey Epstein's brother, told the Guardian he had no knowledge of his brother spending summers on Hilton Head during that period, stating, "I would have known." There is no evidence Trump and Epstein knew each other in 1983, though Trump mentioned meeting Epstein around 1987 in a 2002 interview.
Additional Claims and Legal Context
The woman also alleged that Epstein and Trump discussed blackmailing people and that Trump talked about "washing money through casinos." Beyond interactions with Trump, she described Epstein giving her spiked alcoholic beverages, offering drugs, and forcing sexual acts. She claimed Epstein blackmailed her mother with explicit photos, leading to embezzlement and prison time, though the Guardian could not corroborate this.
In 2020, a Jane Doe with matching biographical details joined a lawsuit against Epstein's estate but later dropped her claims; it is unknown if she received a settlement. The woman has faced fraud and theft charges in Washington and a felony charge in Georgia, with unclear resolutions.
Political Fallout and Investigations
Democratic Representative Robert Garcia, top Democrat on the House oversight committee, visited the DoJ to examine unredacted files and could not locate them, stating, "There is definitely, in my opinion, evidence of a cover-up happening." Republican oversight committee chair James Comer also indicated lawmakers would look into the allegations. Garcia demanded a "full accounting" from Attorney General Pam Bondi, accusing the DoJ of illegally withholding the interviews.
The three missing documents contain an expanded version of allegations summarized in an internal FBI slideshow from 2025 about the Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell investigations. An administration official told the Guardian the accusations were deemed non-credible and duplicative, not legally required for release under the Epstein Transparency Act.
Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing related to Epstein, stating last week, "I did nothing." The DoJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the matter.
