President Donald Trump called on House Republicans Sunday to vote in favor of releasing files on Jeffrey Epstein, but according to journalist Adam Cochran, he may have also “accidentally revealed” a plan to block their release.

On his social media platform Truth Social, Trump called on GOP lawmakers to “vote to release the Epstein files,” writing that the “House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to.” It’s this phrasing, however, that Cochran highlighted as a “red flag.”

“The Oversight Committee is allowed to get information from the [Justice Department] on ‘active’ cases that the rest of Congress cannot get. BUT, a number of different rules allow the DOJ to withhold information ‘at their discretion’ without even informing Oversight,” Cochran wrote Monday in a social media post on X.

“So by saying ‘Oversight’ can have ‘what they are legally entitled to,’ Trump is saying he intends to have DOJ provide Oversight selective files and withhold the rest under ‘active investigation’ terms – possibly without even revealing that to Oversight.”

The House Oversight Committee is currently investigating Epstein and potential co-conspirators, periodically releasing files it’s subpoenaed from Epstein’s estate, including Epstein’s birthday book in September – which included a bawdy doodle Trump sent to Epstein – and a release of 20,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate last week.

But there exists a separate effort to release files on Epstein, one spearheaded by Reps. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA) that would compel the DOJ to release all of its files on Epstein, a trove of documents that would likely include far more information on the disgraced financier and any co-conspirators.

Trump’s singling out of the House Oversight Committee’s efforts, Cochran noted, was telling of what he alleged was Trump’s plan: to permit the release of selective documents related to Epstein, while shielding others from the public.

“If Trump’s plan works, DOJ would give Oversight selected files but there would be: no video or photo evidence; DOJ could redact any names they want; DOJ could FULLY withhold entire files, [and] DOJ would not even acknowledge withheld files existed,” Cochran wrote.

“This battle will likely go to [the Supreme Court], where Congress would then need to argue that the investigation cannot relate to old files, as [Attorney General Pam] Bondi said those old files had

no sufficient evidence

to charge individuals.”