U.S. lawmakers approved a sweeping bipartisan measure ordering the Justice Department to disclose its files on Jeffrey Epstein, delivering a major victory for survivors who have pressed for transparency for years. The rapid action capped months of political tension, shifting positions, and mounting public pressure on the Trump administration and congressional leaders.

Congress Moves Swiftly on Epstein File Disclosure

The U.S. Congress moved with rare unanimity on Tuesday, passing legislation that compels the Justice Department to release its full case files on Jeffrey Epstein within 30 days. The measure, long stalled by political resistance, surged forward after an unexpected wave of bipartisan support in both the House and Senate.

The House approved the bill 427–1, with the sole dissenting vote cast by Representative Clay Higgins of Louisiana, who argued that unredacted disclosures could jeopardize individuals who were referenced but never charged. Within hours, Senate leaders signaled they would adopt the measure through unanimous consent once procedural steps are completed.

The legislation marks the most forceful congressional intervention to date in the yearslong push to illuminate federal handling of Epstein’s case, his network of associates, and the circumstances surrounding his 2019 death in a Manhattan federal detention center.

Months of Political Resistance Collapse Under Pressure

Initial efforts to advance the bill appeared unlikely to succeed when a bipartisan group of House lawmakers filed a discharge petition in July, attempting to bypass House leadership. At the time, President Donald Trump publicly dismissed the proposed disclosure requirements as a “hoax,” while House Speaker Mike Johnson resisted bringing the bill to a floor vote.

Despite early hurdles, support grew steadily among lawmakers, survivor advocacy groups, and even segments of the Republican base. As momentum built, the Trump administration reversed its stance. Trump announced on Sunday that Republicans should support the bill, clearing the way for near-unanimous passage.

Speaker Johnson also shifted his position, allowing a vote under a procedure requiring two-thirds approval. Although Johnson criticized potential unintended consequences relating to privacy protections and investigative integrity, he ultimately voted in favor, stating that lawmakers “did not want to be accused of opposing maximum transparency.”

Survivors Rally as Public Demands Transparency

Outside the Capitol, survivors of Epstein’s abuse gathered ahead of the vote, urging lawmakers to end years of political standoffs. Wrapped in coats against the November cold, several held photographs of their teenage selves — a powerful reminder of the human impact behind the policy debate.

“We are exhausted from surviving the trauma and then surviving the politics that swirl around it,” one survivor told reporters.

Another survivor, Jena-Lisa Jones, who previously supported Trump, publicly called on him to stop framing the disclosure effort as a political attack, saying, “I beg you, Donald Trump, please stop making this political.”

Their presence underscored the frustration that had grown over repeated delays. A key hold-up occurred during the government shutdown earlier this year, when Johnson kept the House closed for legislative business and postponed the swearing-in of Representative Adelita Grijalva of Arizona. Grijalva’s vote was essential to reaching the 218 signatures required for the discharge petition. She signed the petition only after officially taking office last week, ensuring the bill’s advancement.

What the Bill Requires

The legislation mandates the release of all federal files, communications, and investigative materials related to Epstein, including documents tied to the probe into his death. The Justice Department may redact details that would reveal the identities of victims or interfere with ongoing investigations, but the bill explicitly prohibits withholding information due to reputational concerns or political embarrassment.

Lawmakers who sponsored the bill — Republican Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democrat Ro Khanna of California — said the intent is clear: to provide public accountability after years of questions about Epstein’s connections and the failures that allowed him to continue operating for so long.

A separate House Oversight Committee inquiry has already released thousands of pages of documents from Epstein’s estate, revealing communication patterns involving high-profile business executives, political figures, and global leaders. In the United Kingdom, King Charles III previously stripped Prince Andrew of his royal duties following scrutiny over his association with Epstein.

Congressional Leaders React to Rapid Passage

The bipartisan vote prompted rare agreement across the aisle. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries described the outcome as “a complete and total surrender” by those who had tried to block the effort. Meanwhile, Speaker Johnson continued to warn that the Senate should consider amendments to further safeguard sensitive information relating to victims and whistleblowers.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, however, signaled little appetite for making changes, stating that amendments were “unlikely to be in the cards.” He said the Senate could fast-track approval as soon as Tuesday evening, adding that lawmakers needed to act quickly due to public expectations.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer also emphasized urgency, saying, “The American people have waited long enough.”

Sponsors Warn Against Delays in the Senate

Representatives Massie and Khanna urged senators not to alter the bill, warning that any changes could reignite the delays that have frustrated survivors and eroded public trust. “We’ve needlessly dragged this out for four months,” Massie said, adding that concerns about reputational harm only reinforce the need for full disclosure.

As Congress moves to finalize the legislation, the Justice Department will soon face a strict timeline to prepare the documents for public release — a process expected to draw significant global attention.

Source: AP News – Congress acts swiftly to force release of Epstein files, sending bill to Trump

The post Congress Overwhelmingly Backs Release of Epstein Files After Months of Delay appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

A South Carolina death row inmate convicted of a brutal 2004 murder is scheduled to be executed next month, marking one of the state’s most disturbing criminal cases in recent history. Stephen Bryant, 44, was sentenced to death for killing a man in rural Sumter County and taunting police by writing “catch me if u can” on the wall with the victim’s blood.

Court Upholds Execution Order After Two Decades

The South Carolina Supreme Court issued Bryant’s death warrant on Friday, rejecting his defense team’s request for a delay. His lawyers had argued that their ability to file appeals was hampered by the ongoing U.S. government shutdown, as they work within the federal court system.

Bryant’s execution is set for November 14. Under state law, he has until October 31 to choose between lethal injection, the firing squad, or the electric chair. Since South Carolina resumed executions in 2024 after a 13-year pause, four inmates have selected lethal injection and two have opted for the firing squad.

Prosecutors said Bryant confessed to killing Willard “TJ” Tietjen after stopping at his home under the pretense of car trouble. Tietjen was shot several times, surrounded by lit candles, and found with a chilling message written in his blood that read, “victem 4 in 2 weeks. catch me if u can.”

A Chilling Crime Scene and Confession

The crime shocked the small community of Sumter County. Investigators discovered the disturbing message at the crime scene and linked it to Bryant, who later confessed.

Tietjen’s daughter, Kimberly Dees, recalled the harrowing moment she realized something was wrong. After repeatedly calling her father with no response, a strange voice finally answered the phone.

“I said, ‘Let me speak to my father,’ and the man said, ‘You can’t, I killed him,’” Dees testified. “I thought it was a cruel joke, but he said, ‘I’m the prowler.’”

According to prosecutors, Bryant was also responsible for two other killings around the same time. Authorities said he fatally shot two men he was giving rides to after they stopped to urinate on rural roads, one before and one after Tietjen’s murder.

Defense Claims Troubled Past and Mental Strain

Bryant’s lawyers presented evidence that he suffered severe psychological trauma from childhood sexual abuse by several relatives. In the months before the killings, they said, Bryant had begged both a probation officer and an aunt for help because he was haunted by memories of the abuse.

“He was very upset. It looked like his soul was laid wide open,” testified his aunt, Terry Caulder. “He was reliving the pain as he talked about it.”

Attorneys said Bryant turned to drugs, including methamphetamine and marijuana laced with bug spray, to numb his emotional distress. They argued that his addiction and mental instability contributed to the violent acts.

South Carolina’s Execution Methods Under Scrutiny

Bryant’s scheduled execution will mark the seventh in South Carolina since the state resumed capital punishment in 2024 after a long hiatus caused by difficulties obtaining lethal injection drugs. Pharmaceutical companies had stopped supplying the state, citing ethical and transparency concerns.

To resume executions, the South Carolina legislature passed a “shield law” allowing the state to keep drug suppliers anonymous. The state also reintroduced the firing squad as an alternative method.

The firing squad procedure has faced criticism from human rights advocates and legal experts. Attorneys for previous inmates said executioners nearly missed the heart of Mikal Mahdi, one of the first to die by firing squad since the resumption, prolonging his suffering.

Lethal injection protocols have also come under scrutiny. The state reportedly uses two doses of pentobarbital, a sedative that attorneys say can cause inmates to drown in fluid buildup while paralyzed. Officials have defended the process, calling it “swift and humane.”

A Legacy of Capital Punishment in South Carolina

Since reinstating the death penalty in 1985, South Carolina has executed 49 people. Bryant is expected to become the 50th. The state once carried out executions regularly, but activity slowed sharply after 2011 when its drug supplies expired.

The state’s renewed execution system makes it one of the few in the U.S. to maintain multiple death methods. According to national data, 39 men have been executed across the United States this year, with at least five more scheduled before year-end.

Victims’ Families Seek Closure

For Tietjen’s family, the execution represents the conclusion of a decades-long ordeal. Dees said she still struggles with the loss of her father and the horror of how he was killed. “No one should have to hear that kind of thing over the phone,” she said during court testimony.

While capital punishment remains deeply divisive, officials say Bryant’s case stands as one of the state’s most violent and premeditated crimes. “This was an act of calculated cruelty,” one state prosecutor said following the court’s decision.

As the date approaches, Bryant’s legal team is expected to file additional motions seeking clemency or a stay, though legal experts consider the chances of delay minimal.

Source: FOX News – Execution set for twisted killer who taunted police with message in victim’s blood: ‘Catch me if u can’

The post South Carolina Inmate Set for Execution After Two Decades on Death Row for Brutal 2004 Killing appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The U.S. House Oversight Committee has released flight manifest records from the late financier Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet, alongside a transcript of a closed-door interview with former U.S. attorney Alex Acosta. The documents shed renewed light on the controversial 2008 plea deal that allowed Epstein to avoid federal prosecution despite widespread allegations of sexual abuse and trafficking.

Epstein Documents Made Public by Congressional Committee

The release, published Friday afternoon, includes passenger lists from Epstein’s private jet—records that have drawn global attention for years due to the high-profile names involved. Among those listed are Prince Andrew, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, the late news anchor Walter Cronkite, and entrepreneur Richard Branson. None of these individuals have been accused of any wrongdoing.

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton also appeared in several entries, including a 2002 flight where he traveled with Secret Service protection, according to the committee’s documentation. Like others mentioned, Clinton has not been accused of any criminal activity in relation to Epstein.

The House Oversight Committee, chaired by members investigating federal accountability in Epstein’s case, also published a 180-page transcript of its September interview with Alex Acosta, who served as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Florida when the original case was prosecuted.

Acosta Defends 2008 Plea Deal as ‘Strategic Judgment’

In the transcript, Acosta defended the controversial decision to grant Epstein a plea agreement that reduced his exposure to federal charges. Under the 2008 deal, Epstein pleaded guilty to state-level charges, served 13 months in jail, registered as a sex offender, and compensated several victims.

Acosta told lawmakers the plea agreement reflected the limitations of the evidence available at the time. “Many victims refused to testify,” he said, explaining that inconsistencies in testimony might have weakened the case in court. “Our judgment was that it was better to have a billionaire serve time in jail and register as a sex offender than risk a total acquittal.”

The former prosecutor said his team weighed the public interest against the likelihood of a failed trial. “Every attorney that looked at the case understood there were evidentiary issues. Defense cross-examination would have been withering,” Acosta said in his testimony.

Concerns Over State-Level Handling of the Case

Acosta further stated that local Florida prosecutors had initially offered Epstein a lenient outcome. “The state attorney was letting him get away with this,” he said. “They were asking pre-trial diversion — unacceptable.” He added that his office’s intervention ensured at least some accountability. “A billionaire going to jail sends a strong signal that this is not right, that this cannot happen.”

During questioning, Acosta acknowledged that Epstein’s legal team “got awfully close to the line of unethical,” but said he “resisted” their pressure tactics.

Renewed Scrutiny Years After Epstein’s Death

The documents mark one of the most detailed public disclosures since Epstein’s death in federal custody in 2019, which was ruled a suicide. His death reignited questions about the initial plea deal and about the potential protection of influential associates.

When Acosta later served as Secretary of Labor under the Trump administration, his handling of the Epstein case resurfaced and led to his resignation in July 2019. At the time, Acosta again defended his decision, claiming federal prosecutors had faced severe constraints. “The Palm Beach state attorney’s office was ready to let Epstein walk free,” he said. “We found that completely unacceptable.”

A Case That Continues to Resonate

While the latest releases do not introduce new criminal allegations, they provide insight into the internal reasoning behind the 2008 plea arrangement and the scope of Epstein’s social network. Lawmakers say the disclosures aim to promote transparency and restore public trust in federal prosecutorial processes.

Epstein’s connections to political leaders, celebrities, and business figures continue to fuel public interest. The inclusion of prominent names in the manifests has drawn renewed debate over how powerful individuals interact with systems of accountability.

The Broader Implications for Justice Reform

The renewed focus on the Epstein files has also reignited discussion about how victims of sexual exploitation are treated in the justice system. Acosta, during the committee interview, admitted that “today’s world treats victims very, very differently,” reflecting changes in prosecutorial approaches to cases involving abuse survivors.

Legal analysts suggest that the House Oversight Committee’s actions may influence future policy discussions on plea agreements and federal oversight of high-profile cases. “This is as much about transparency as it is about accountability,” one legal expert told Reuters following the release.

The committee has not announced any additional hearings, but lawmakers indicated further document reviews may follow as they evaluate remaining materials from Epstein’s criminal proceedings and associated investigations.

Source: FOX News – Epstein flight manifests revealed as House committee releases docs, transcript with former US attorney

The post Jeffrey Epstein Flight Manifests Released as House Committee Publishes Interview with Former U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Nearly an hour after his son shot and killed Ahmaud Arbery, Greg McMichael reached out for help to his former boss, Jackie Johnson, the district attorney of Glynn County, Georgia.

“My son and I have been involved in a shooting, and I need some advice right away,” McMichael said, leaving a voicemail on Johnson’s phone.

The killing of Arbery, a 25-year-old Black man, led to national outrage after a video showing the tragic event surfaced online. McMichael, his son Travis McMichael, and their neighbor William “Roddie” Bryan—three white men—used trucks and guns in a violent chase before the shooting. They are now serving life sentences for murder and federal hate crimes. However, it wasn’t until more than two months after the incident that they were arrested.

Now, nearly five years later, Johnson, who was serving as the local prosecutor at the time, is facing charges of misconduct. She’s accused of using her office to interfere with the investigation into Arbery’s death. Jury selection for her trial is scheduled to begin on Tuesday in Brunswick, Georgia.

Key Details About the Case:

How Was Ahmaud Arbery Killed?

Arbery, an avid runner, was often seen jogging through the Satilla Shores neighborhood in Glynn County. On February 23, 2020, as Arbery ran past the McMichaels’ property, the father and son grabbed guns and gave chase in their pickup trucks. Bryan, in a separate truck, filmed the incident.

The footage showed Travis McMichael shooting Arbery at point-blank range as they struggled over his shotgun. Arbery was unarmed and had no stolen property on him. Despite this, local police initially let the men go, with Greg McMichael claiming they suspected Arbery was a thief.

Two months later, Bryan’s video was leaked, igniting outrage. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation took over the case, and arrests quickly followed for the McMichaels and Bryan.

Who Is Jackie Johnson and Why Was She Charged?

At the time of Arbery’s death, Jackie Johnson had served as the district attorney for southeast Georgia’s Brunswick Judicial Circuit for ten years. Greg McMichael had worked in her office before retiring.

After the shooting, Johnson claimed she recused herself from the case due to her connection with Greg McMichael. Another prosecutor, George Barnhill, was appointed to take over. However, Barnhill quickly ruled that the McMichaels acted lawfully in attempting to detain Arbery, and that the shooting was justified.

In May 2020, Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr launched an investigation into Johnson and Barnhill. Carr revealed that Barnhill had been recommended by Johnson and failed to disclose that he had advised police the shooting wasn’t a crime.

In November 2020, Johnson was ousted from office. By 2021, she was indicted on charges of violating her oath of office and hindering the investigation.

What Are the Charges Against Jackie Johnson?

Johnson faces felony charges for using her office to show “favor and affection” to Greg McMichael. She is also charged with a misdemeanor for hindering police by advising that Travis McMichael should not be arrested.

Johnson has denied any wrongdoing, claiming she didn’t direct police not to arrest anyone. Her defense attorney, Brian Steel, stated in a pretrial hearing that Johnson was focused on an unrelated case and wasn’t aware of the details of the Arbery case.

Court records reveal that Johnson and Greg McMichael had at least 16 phone calls in the weeks after the shooting.

Jury Selection Process

Jury selection for Johnson’s trial is set to begin Tuesday in Glynn County. To ensure an impartial jury, 500 local residents were summoned—far more than usual. Prospective jurors will be questioned about their prior knowledge of the case, with the selection process expected to take a week or more.

Why Did It Take So Long for Johnson’s Trial to Begin?

The delay in Johnson’s trial, which took over three years, was largely due to her defense attorney’s commitments. Brian Steel spent nearly two years defending rapper Young Thug in a high-profile racketeering case, causing a delay in Johnson’s court proceedings. After Young Thug entered a plea deal in late October 2023, Johnson’s trial was scheduled for January 2025.

Source

The post How Ahmaud Arbery’s Killers Avoided Arrest—And What Jackie Johnson Did About It appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.