If only part of the list was released, there'd be cries of "cover-up" and "where's the rest" and so forth. So you either have to keep the list classified, or release the whole thing. Just releasing part will likely backfire on you.

Wait - am I right in thinking that you imagine the “list” of Epstein’s associates is an actual, single document that Epstein generated that contains these names in a literal list? Like, on a single piece of paper? That’s utterly implausible. There’s no earthly reason why Epstein would have done that. What purpose would it serve? What use would it be to him to prepare that kind of single document?

If there’s a “list” of people who might have engaged in wrongdoing in Epstein’s presence, it wouldn’t be a literal list. It would be names that show up in lots of separate documents over lots of time periods. There would be a collection of documents that could constitute the “Epstein list,” but it’s not going to be something that he just decided to write down on a single glue piece of paper. Just like there exists a “list” of all of Epstein’s victims but not a literal list that Epstein wrote, there would never be a literal list of his collaborators if he had any.

But even that collection of files is incredibly unlikely to have any unprosecuted marquis names in it.

As for Bondi, it’s far more likely she just let her mouth run away with her for good TV. She described the Epstein corpus as a list, rather than the literal boxes and boxes of files that it undoubtedly is - because the metaphor of a list is much sexier than what actually exists.