MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
Several lawmakers also got access to unredacted versions of the Epstein files at Justice Department offices yesterday. This, after they criticized the heavy use of redactions in the publicly available version of the files. Democrat Suhas Subramanyam of Virginia got access to the unredacted files on a government computer, and he's on the line with us now. Good morning, Congressman.
SUHAS SUBRAMANYAM: Good morning.
MARTIN: First, let me ask about Ghislaine Maxwell's appearance before the House Oversight Committee on which you sit. I understand that she requested to - or her lawyers did - to reduce or perhaps vacate her 20-year sentence in exchange for her testimony. Her lawyer says she will clear both President Trump and former President Bill Clinton of any wrongdoing. What do you make of that?
SUBRAMANYAM: Well, I think it's pretty clear this is part of a campaign by her to get clemency, and she's trying to essentially use this investigation that we're conducting as a means to doing that, as well as the idea of clearing a Democrat like Bill Clinton and a Republican like President Trump in the process. So she was trying to appeal to both parties, in my mind, and she's really just trying to get out of prison. And what I'd like to see, though, is this president make a clear commitment to not pardoning her because if she thinks there's a pardon that's on the horizon, then she's not going to talk to us or cooperate with our investigation.
MARTIN: Well, she was already moved to a less restrictive environment after she was previously questioned by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche. And I wonder if you feel that that has led to some belief or expectation that this is possible.
SUBRAMANYAM: Oh, I think she's - exactly. She's been emboldened by this administration. She feels like she has leverage. She really should be back in that original prison. There's no reason why she should have been transferred in the first place. So I'm very, very disturbed by that. I know a lot of the victims are disturbed by that, and they're disturbed by the idea that she could potentially get that clemency that she's looking for.
MARTIN: Is there anything else that the committee can do to get her to answer questions and presumably truthfully?
SUBRAMANYAM: Well, it's tough because we're not law enforcement, right? And, you know, I don't think she should even be allowed to plead the Fifth because she's already a convicted criminal at this point. And her habeas petition, which is what she cited, is not enough to allow her to plead the Fifth. But because we have such little leverage and we're not law enforcement, it's hard to really force her to talk to us. And, you know, she has perjured herself many times and is a liar.
MARTIN: Well, to that point, a last question about this. If she is a liar, as you say, what else is there to be learned from her testimony?
SUBRAMANYAM: It's a good question. I like to think that, you know, perhaps she feels some guilt at some point and decides she's going to try to do the right thing by the victims. But even in that, you know, deposition room, she looked like she had very little remorse. She looked very defiant. And she simply didn't want to talk to us.
MARTIN: So let's turn to the files that you examined. What stood out to you?
SUBRAMANYAM: What stood out to me was how heavily redacted the files were in an unnecessary way. There are many instances where people who were not victims were redacted. And, you know, we're not necessarily talking about famous people in many instances, but we're talking about the idea that, you know, someone who regularly traffics women was redacted for some reason because they themselves were a woman. That happened many times in the files. And so I think the DOJ needs to go back and unredact a lot of these files. The reality is, they, I think, made the assumption that perhaps just because someone was a woman doesn't - means that they were also a victim. And that's simply not the case. Something else that kept coming up was, you know, entire pages, entire blocks of text were redacted when that wasn't necessary either. And so I think these redactions were not in accordance with the law or the spirit of the law, and certainly not the transparency the American people need.
MARTIN: Do you have authority to make some of this information public yourself? And if so, how would you decide what should be made public?
SUBRAMANYAM: Well, remember, as part of the Oversight Committee, we subpoenaed the administration for the release of the files to us so that, you know, we could do some of the work of redacting the files and not leave it to Department of Justice that we simply don't trust at this point, but they never complied with that subpoena. So I do believe that I have the ability and right to release, you know, some of the things that were unredacted. I've seen other members that have released, you know, at least hints of what was in redacted files. I think the question that we're all pondering is, you know, what is the right way to do that? You know, some of these names are folks that I simply don't know who they are. I wouldn't want to presume that they're not a victim, either, and I'd want to do some more research. So one of the things that is paramount for us is making sure that we take the time to not identify victims or...
MARTIN: OK.
SUBRAMANYAM: ...Hurt victims in any way.
MARTIN: That is Congressman Suhas Subramanyam of Virginia. He is a Democrat. And thank you so much for joining us.
SUBRAMANYAM: Thank you.
MARTIN: And I do want to note that NPR has reached out to Republican leaders in Congress and the Department of Justice. Those invitations remain open. We'll bring those conversations to you whenever they agree. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
