Heinrich Presses Jay Clayton on DOJ Obstruction of New Mexico Investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s Crimes at Zorro Ranch

VIDEO HERE

WASHINGTON - At a U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) pressed Jay Clayton, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and nominee to be the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), on the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) refusal to provide evidence related to Jeffrey Epsein's alleged crimes at Zorro Ranch in New Mexico to the New Mexico Attorney General. Heinrich also questioned Clayton about his role in the unconscionable, improper public release of sensitive information belonging to Epstein survivors and his comments about President Trump's attempt to use a $1.8 billion slush fund to compensate violent criminals who beat up cops on January 6, 2021.

Heinrich's questions follow a recent letter from New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez to Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and Associate Deputy Attorney General Diego Pestana, demanding that DOJ immediately turn over unredacted Epstein records that the Department has held for years. In the letter, AG Torrez stated that "more than 130 days have now elapsed since the New Mexico Department of Justice's initial request" for unredacted records and called the DOJ's delay "unreasonable under any rule of reason."

VIDEO: U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) questions Jay Clayton on DOJ's obstruction of investigation of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes at Zorro Ranch, July 15, 2026.

On Clayton responding to the New Mexico Attorney General's request for evidence related to the Zorro Ranch investigation:

Senator Heinrich: "Mr. Clayton. It is alleged, and I would add quite credibly, that Jeffrey Epstein committed some very serious crimes at his Zoro Ranch property in my home state of New Mexico. Yet, there has never been a federal search of that property. And in fact, in 2019, the Department of Justice directed New Mexico to pause its own investigation. And has most recently refused to provide the unredacted evidence needed for our attorney general to effectively carry out his investigation - despite federal and state laws requiring disclosure. I understand that as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, you led the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. Can you commit to providing any relevant information to the New Mexico Attorney General and the unredacted documents that he has requested?"

Jay Clayton: "Yeah, I spoke to my team about this last night. That request is for unredacted documents. Those documents are subject to several protections, for those redactions, including a protective order of the court. My folks, I think, as we speak, are seeking dialog with the attorney general to see if we can reach an accommodation that is consistent with those protective orders."

Heinrich: "I would seriously encourage that cooperation and that spirit of working in cooperation between federal and state law enforcement. I think it is quite clear that it is likely that there are survivors, witnesses, and co-conspirators - whose names have been redacted - that are necessary for him to effectively complete that investigation. And, Mr. Chairman, I would also ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the letter from the New Mexico Attorney General to the Department of Justice."

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Tom Cotton: "Without objection, I guess."

On Clayton personally approving the release of survivors' highly sensitive personal information to the public:

Heinrich: "Mr. Clayton, in your role as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, you were tasked to personally certify that the unsealed grand jury material related to Jeffrey Epstein did not disclose victims' personal information. The judge in that case stated that he added this protective order to ensure that an identifiable official within DOJ takes ownership of the sensitive and vitally important process of reviewing discovery. Due to what the Department of Justice later called technical or human error, the January 26 release of material included email addresses and even nude photos of potential Epstein victims. Lawyers for those victims said that this flawed process retraumatized the survivors and quote, 'turned their lives upside down.' You were in charge of this process during which highly sensitive personal data was made public. Did you personally certify the material as the judge ordered?"

Clayton: "The judge ordered certification of a subset of the materials. The materials that were in the Southern District."

Heinrich: "So, who takes responsibility for what I think was an unconscionable release of - an unnecessary release of -personal information for these victims."

Clayton: "I think the Department of Justice has addressed that from the overall perspective."

Heinrich: "You know, Harry Truman used to have a sign on his desk that said, 'The buck stops here.' Who has a sign on their desk in this case?"

Clayton: "For the Southern District documents, it was me."

On Clayton supporting President Trump's $1.8 billon slush fund to compensate violent criminals who beat up cops on January 6, 2021:

Heinrich: "In a media interview a couple of months ago, you were asked your position on the president's $1.8 billion fund for victims of weaponization. And you replied, 'When we are investigating people and bringing charges against them, criminal charges against people, from a financial point of view they can be absolutely devastating. If people have been pursued inappropriately, I'm supportive of there being relief for that financial cost. That's it.' Do you believe that people convicted of violent crimes related to the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol and on U.S. Capitol police were pursued inappropriately in any way?"

Clayton: "Let me say this: Any physical violence against law enforcement is completely objectionable."

Heinrich: "Would it be appropriate for that fund to be used in cases where people were duly convicted of violent crimes in that case?"

Clayton: "Let me go back to my comment very quickly. I was not speaking of the fund. I was speaking generally. If you, I think this is a CNBC clip and I stand by what I said, which is if people have been inappropriately and intentionally subject to prosecution, they should have recourse."

###

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Tweet