If the Department of Justice (DOJ) wanted to release every Jeffrey Epstein-related document they had on file, they had the firepower to do so, a former assistant U.S. attorney argued.

The DOJ has faced bipartisan criticism over its initial release of heavily redacted Epstein files, which lawmakers argue fell short of the requirements of a recently passed transparency law.

‘The Department of Justice has all the resources in the world, right? I mean if they wanted to put 1,000 lawyers on this to review the documents and get them ready for the production, they could have,’ Sarah Krissoff said.

‘And they don’t appear to have done that,’ she added.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Krissoff, who worked as a prosecutor for almost 14 years in the Southern District of New York, described key differences between the Epstein Files and the normal redaction process that attorneys grapple with. Those distinctions make it unclear who would have had final say about the information the DOJ released on Friday as the agency attempted to follow through on the requirements laid out by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. 

That law, passed by Congress last month and signed by President Donald Trump on Nov. 19, gave the DOJ just 30 days to make its documentation of Epstein public. It included some exceptions for protecting the identity of victims.

Despite the thousands of files that became publicly available at the end of last week, the DOJ’s first trove sparked criticism from some lawmakers and viewers online outraged that the department hadn’t released them all at once.

‘They are hiding a lot of documents. That would be very helpful in our investigation,’ Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., a member of the House Oversight Committee, told CNN on Monday morning. 

Although she remains skeptical of the department’s effort, Krissoff noted that what the DOJ’s been asked to do goes far outside the norm for disclosures.

‘There is no real mechanism in the law that the public can just access documents because they’re interested in them, right? In this case, this law is requiring the DOJ to make these things public because so many members of Congress are interested in this issue,’ Krissoff said.

In the cases she’s been a part of, Krissoff said redactions usually came down to meticulous negotiations between the prosecution and the defense. Sometimes deliberations drilled into individual sentences or words.

‘This situation is a little different because it’s unclear, you know, who is still working on this from the original case team. And so, the question is: who at the Department of Justice reviewed these in connection with the redactions here?’ Krissoff said.

She said whole case files rarely get released to the public beyond what shows up in court filings — and what’s there usually serves the narrow purposes of the prosecution. In Epstein’s case, the public’s interests extend beyond any potential conviction of Epstein himself. Epstein died in 2019 while incarcerated on suspicion of sex-trafficking minors. His death, ruled a suicide, cut short his prosecution and left behind questions about whether he facilitated illegal sexual encounters for his vast social network. 

Photos released by the DOJ last week lack context and do not, on their own, implicate anyone depicted in them of wrongdoing. 

‘The case file often implicates many other people that are not charged in the crimes. So, there may be 15 people charged in a drug ring. You’ve only charged one or two people; you don’t want to impugn those other people who have not been charged by releasing information showing their involvement in this drug ring,’ Krissoff said.

‘The last thing you want to do is put that neighbor’s information or his name or even his statement out there,’ Krissoff said.

She believes that there’s a danger in forcing disclosure of an ongoing case simply because of great public interest and setting a precedent for that to become a regular occurrence. In her view, it could disrupt ongoing investigations of the future that draw intense public interest.

The DOJ said it will continue to release its documents on Epstein on a rolling basis. It has not announced when they expect to continue their release of the Epstein files.

For Americans wondering about the future of China and its relationship with the West, the latest verdict in the Jimmy Lai case proves an ominous harbinger of Hong Kong’s continued slide towards authoritarianism. Lai, the self-made billionaire, media entrepreneur and pro-democracy activist, has been held prisoner of the Chinese Communist Party for five years under Hong Kong’s National Security Law. He was finally convicted Dec. 14 on trumped-up charges of sedition.    

This verdict, handed down in 855 pages of meaningless gobbledygook, is Lai’s second conviction during his state-sponsored persecution since Hong Kong’s 2019 pro-democracy protests. Lai was previously found guilty of lease violations in connection with Apple Daily, his popular former newspaper that was closed by the Chinese government in 2021, and sentenced to 69 months in prison. The latest charges, for which Lai will be sentenced in early January, carry a penalty of 10 years to life in prison.   

Of course, these nuances and timelines are meaningless; Lai has been imprisoned since December 2020, with his case delayed, extended, postponed, appealed and otherwise stage-managed in accordance with the wishes of the CCP. Lai was also denied the lawyers of his choice. Hong Kong will likely throw the book at him in January, and Lai – already in failing health due to the apparently inhumane conditions of his solitary confinement – will face eventual death in prison. It’s a grim birthday present for Lai, who turned 78 recently.  

How did we get here? Lai knows why, describing himself as a ‘troublemaker, but one with a good conscience.’ ‘The establishment hates my guts,’ Lai says, and you’d have to say he’s earned that hatred from a leadership in Beijing and now Hong Kong that doesn’t tolerate dissent. Having participated in Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protests in 2019, supported the Umbrella Movement in 2014, and expressed public concern in the aftermath of 1989’s Tiananmen Square massacre, Lai has long been a thorn in the side of the CCP.   

Lai’s irreverent, pro-free-speech publications, Apple Daily and Next Magazine, frequently reported unwelcome facts, challenged the status quo and asked hard questions of Chinese officialdom amid growing state censorship. It was Lai’s courageous, decades-long commitment to democratic values that led my organization, The Fund for American Studies, to honor him in 2022 with the Kenneth Y. Tomlinson Award for Courageous Journalism.

Among all his causes, Lai’s most dear was the protection of his adopted city, Hong Kong. Having escaped there as a child after growing up in 1950s mainland China, Lai knew firsthand that Communist regimes deprive their people of fundamental freedoms. Despite China’s treaty agreement with the U.K. and the CCP’s ‘one country, two systems’ commitment, which guaranteed Hong Kong’s autonomy until at least 2047, Lai foresaw that the CCP would accelerate its ultimate takeover of Hong Kong.   

The mainland’s creeping authoritarianism is why my organization ended its program at the University of Hong Kong after 2019. We foresaw the coming crackdown in Hong Kong, and this week’s verdict is one more nail in the coffin of Hong Kong’s once internationally respected legal system. In a chilling coincidence, Hong Kong’s Democratic Party, the city’s largest opposition group, also voted to disband on the eve of the verdict. Unfortunately, our worries (and Lai’s) about Hong Kong’s future have been proven true.

Where do we go from here? First, Western leaders must continue to seek Lai’s release on humanitarian grounds. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer plans to visit China next month, and his government has said that freeing Lai (who is a British citizen) is a priority. This week, President Donald Trump also asked Chinese leader Xi Jinping to free Lai. With Lai’s formal conviction now public, it may open up space for a diplomatic resolution. Now is the time to ramp up the pressure for his release.  

Second, the West must remain vigilant in the face of China’s continued belligerence toward its neighbors and its suppression of values such as freedom of speech, religious liberty and press freedom. These are values under siege worldwide. Journalists, religious figures and democracy advocates have been killed or imprisoned for exercising these rights. Jimmy Lai is an example of incredible bravery and commitment to democratic values, but his imprisonment is also a sobering warning of the dangers of authoritarianism.  

The Federal Communications Commission announced on Monday that it would ban new foreign-made drones, citing national security concerns.

The FCC said it was adding uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) and their critical components made in China and other foreign countries to its ‘covered list’ that features equipment that has been determined to pose an ‘unacceptable risk’ to U.S. national security and the safety of Americans. Specific drones or components would be exempt if the Pentagon or Department of Homeland Security determined they did not pose such risks.

The distinction prohibits the products from being sold or imported in the U.S. The order does not apply to technology that has already been sold in the U.S.

The agency said that allowing foreign-made UAS and component parts to be sold in the U.S. ‘undermines the resiliency of our UAS industrial base, increases the risk to our national airspace, and creates a potential for large-scale attacks during large gatherings,’ citing upcoming events such as the 2026 World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles.

‘Criminals, terrorists, and hostile foreign actors have intensified their weaponization of these technologies, creating new and serious threats to our homeland,’ the FCC said in its notice.

The announcement comes a year after a defense bill was adopted that raised national security concerns about Chinese-made drones, which have been used in farming, mapping, law enforcement and filmmaking.

The bill called for stopping two Chinese companies — DJI and Autel — from selling new drones in the U.S. if a review found they posed a risk to U.S. national security.

A spokesperson for DJI said in a statement that it is ‘disappointed’ by the FCC’s decision and that ‘no information has been released regarding what information was used’ in the government’s determination to add its drones and component parts to the covered list.

‘Concerns about DJI’s data security have not been grounded in evidence and instead reflect protectionism, contrary to the principles of an open market,’ the statement said.

The House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party praised the FCC’s move, saying it ‘strongly supports’ the decision.

‘It will help safeguard our national security, protect the American people, and wind down the unacceptable national security threat posed by DJI and other Chinese drones,’ the committee wrote on X.

‘Taken together with the Administration’s recent executive actions to accelerate domestic drone commercialization, this sends an unmistakable signal to American industry: The U.S. is open for drone innovation—and American manufacturing will be rewarded,’ it added.

Arthur Erickson, chief executive officer and co-founder of the Texas-based drone-making company Hylio, told The Associated Press that the departure of DJI would provide more opportunity for American companies like his to grow. He said new investments are coming in to help him boost production of spray drones, which farmers use to fertilize their fields, and it will bring down prices.

But Erickson also called it ‘crazy’ and ‘unexpected’ that the FCC would expand the restrictions to all foreign-made drones and their components.

‘The way it’s written is a blanket statement,’ Erickson said. ‘There’s a global-allied supply chain. I hope they will clarify that.’

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The Department of War announced Monday that the Pentagon is partnering with Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence (AI) ecosystem to deploy Grok across its government systems.

The agency said the ‘frontier‑grade’ capabilities of xAI’s Grok family of models will be integrated into the department’s recently launched AI platform, GenAI.mil. 

As soon as early 2026, the partnership will allow the Department’s 3 million military and civilian personnel to safely access more advanced AI tools for everyday tasks, including handling sensitive government information.

According to xAI, its tools can support administrative tasks at the federal, state and local levels, as well as ‘critical mission use cases’ at the front line of military operations.

‘Today, the War Department officially entered into an agreement with xAI, paving the way for the deployment of its advanced capabilities on GenAI.mil,’ the department said. ‘This move builds on the rapid deployment of cutting‑edge AI across the Department’s 3 million military and civilian personnel.’

The tools will allow employees to use xAI safely on secure government systems for routine work, including tasks involving sensitive but unclassified information, without violating security protocols.

With xAI designed to analyze real-time data, the War Department said the partnership would give personnel ‘a decisive information advantage.’ 

Grok will give personnel access to live information from X, providing the War Department with faster situational awareness around the globe, the department said.

xAI added that the partnership could lead to potential future classified workloads. 

‘Through an ongoing, long-term partnership with the DoW and other mission partners, xAI will make available a family of government-optimized foundation models to support classified operational workloads,’ the company said.

The War Department said that it will continue to scale its AI ecosystem for speed, security and decision superiority.

‘This announcement marks another milestone in America’s AI revolution, and the War Department is driving that momentum forward,’ the department said. 

‘These two new partnerships are part of our longstanding support of the United States Government and xAI’s mission to bring the best tools and technologies available in industry to benefit our nation,’ xAI added.

The collaboration marks another chapter in Elon Musk’s long-running relationship with government initiatives.  

Musk previously helped lead the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency, where he briefly reformed operations and cut excess spending within the federal government.