WASHINGTON, D.C.: The Justice Department and FBI are grappling with increasing political backlash after they decided to withhold additional records related to the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation.

The move has triggered disappointment and outrage, particularly among prominent far-right commentators and ardent supporters of President Donald Trump, many of whom had been led to believe that explosive revelations were forthcoming.

Tensions reached a peak after the Justice Department confirmed that one key document long rumored to exist—a so-called "client list" of Epstein's associates—was, in fact, never real. This revelation, coupled with a refusal to release more records, led to a heated exchange at the White House between Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino. According to sources familiar with the encounter, their disagreement reflected deeper frustrations over perceived failures in transparency and accountability.

For months, Trump supporters had awaited what they believed would be a definitive exposé of Epstein's alleged network. Many were encouraged by public statements and symbolic gestures, such as the February event at the White House, where conservative influencers were given binders labeled "The Epstein Files: Phase 1" and "Declassified." However, the contents of those binders were essentially information already available to the public.

Bondi, attempting to reassure the base, claimed that an FBI source had told her that thousands of previously undisclosed documents existed. She demanded the bureau hand over the "full and complete" Epstein files and later said that a "truckload" of new evidence had been delivered. This raised expectations among Trump's MAGA faithful that long-sought answers were imminent.

However, after several months of review, the Justice Department issued a statement saying that no further public disclosures were appropriate. Much of the material remains sealed under court orders to protect victims' identities, the department explained, and even if Epstein had gone to trial, only a small portion of the evidence would have become public.

The decision frustrated those who had hoped the Epstein investigation would provide proof of a broader "deep state" conspiracy. Some far-right figures accused the Justice Department and FBI of betrayal and demanded accountability. The backlash grew so intense that Trump felt compelled to defend Bondi publicly. In a social media post, he praised her leadership, criticized infighting among his supporters, and expressed dismay over the internal divisions. Notably, he made no mention of Bongino.

The White House attempted to downplay the situation, but behind the scenes, discord continued. A report by NewsNation added fuel to the fire, citing an anonymous source who claimed that the FBI would have released the files earlier if the Justice Department had not overruled it. Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche swiftly rebutted the story, though Bongino's name was notably absent from their joint denial.

Blanche later posted a statement online to quell speculation, affirming that all senior officials had signed off on the final memo and stood by its conclusions. "The suggestion by anyone that there was any daylight between the FBI and DOJ leadership...is patently false," he wrote.

Still, tensions remained. Far-right commentator Laura Loomer, a close Trump ally, claimed Bongino was considering resignation and had taken time off to weigh his options. Known for his regular and vocal social media presence, Bongino has been conspicuously silent since the controversy erupted.

The FBI declined to comment, while the White House issued a brief statement reaffirming the administration's unity. "President Trump has assembled a highly qualified and experienced law and order team," said spokesman Harrison Fields. "Any attempt to sow division within this team is baseless and distracts from the real progress being made."

Nevertheless, the episode has left visible cracks in the coalition Trump depends on, and it highlights the challenges federal agencies face in managing public expectations around high-profile cases steeped in speculation and misinformation.