Why Is the DOJ Doing Public Business on a Billionaire’s App?

CHICAGO — December 25, 2025

There was a time when the Department of Justice communicated with the public through press briefings, official statements, sworn filings, and uncomfortable questions from reporters who were paid to ask follow-ups.

Apparently that era has ended.

Today, the DOJ announces matters of national importance — including the existence of over a million documents tied to one of the most notorious criminal cases in modern American history — via X, a privately owned social media platform controlled by Elon Musk.

Not a press conference.
Not the DOJ press office.
Not the White House briefing room.

A post.

This raises a simple, unavoidable question: why is a federal law-enforcement agency using a private platform as its primary channel for public accountability?

Whatever Happened to the Press Office?

The Department of Justice has a press department. It has spokespeople. It has procedures. It has an entire institutional framework designed specifically to communicate sensitive, high-stakes information to the public in a formal, accountable way.

So why bypass all of it?

Why not issue a written DOJ release?
Why not brief the press corps?
Why not answer questions on the record?

When an agency skips its own communication infrastructure, it is not innovating. It is avoiding friction — and friction is where accountability lives.

When Did a Social Media Platform Become a Public Square?

X is not a public institution. It is not neutral infrastructure. It is a for-profit company owned by one man with political, financial, and ideological interests of his own.

Yet here we are, watching the federal government treat it as an official bulletin board.

That prompts another fair question: is the United States government paying for this access?

Is there a premium account?
A preferred-agency arrangement?
A visibility boost?

We don’t need the answer to recognize the problem. If public authority is being exercised on private infrastructure, the public is entitled to ask who benefits — and how.

Accountability Is Not a Content Strategy

Posting serious legal disclosures on X reframes justice as engagement. It turns public accountability into scrollable content. It invites reactions instead of questions, clicks instead of clarity.

This is not transparency. It is theater.

Courts don’t operate on likes. Press briefings don’t disappear into algorithmic feeds. Official records are supposed to exist whether or not they trend.

When the DOJ chooses X over formal disclosure, it trades permanence for convenience and seriousness for reach.

If It’s Important Enough to Post, It’s Important Enough to Explain

The Epstein case is not gossip. It is not breaking-news filler. It involves systemic failure, elite protection, and public trust.

If the DOJ can post about it, it can brief it.
If it can tweet it, it can document it.
If it can announce it, it can answer for it.

Using a billionaire’s platform as a stand-in for institutional accountability is not modern governance. It is lazy governance — and it quietly shifts power away from the public and toward private hands.

Chicago has a word for this kind of move. It isn’t polite.

For more independent news and analysis, see https://wps.news.

References

ABC News. (2025, December 24). Justice Department says it has over a million more documents potentially related to Epstein. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/justice-department-million-documents-potentially-related-epstein/story?id=128683817