For years, the public narrative around Jeffrey Epstein has centered on sex trafficking, abuse, and a web of powerful associates. Disturbing enough. But according to members of Congress who have now reviewed newly opened, unredacted portions of the Epstein files, what’s inside may be even more unsettling.
In an interview on Newsmax, Rep. Lauren Boebert warned that the long-concealed documents are “far worse than imagined,” suggesting they contain strange code words, references to “consumption,” and language that raises questions far beyond the already horrific crimes tied to Epstein.
HUGE! Rep. Lauren Boebert states on Newsmax that the unredacted Epstein files are so much worse, possibly even human consumption, aka, cannibalism… This is way darker than many imagined, but the truth needs to be known.
– Emails that talk about torture
– Emails that frequently… pic.twitter.com/g06EBIg7Ml
— The SCIF (@TheSCIF) February 11, 2026
Boebert was among a select group of lawmakers granted access to pages of the newly opened files following passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. What she described to host Rob Schmitt went beyond the established narrative.
“This seems that it wasn’t only the trafficking of young girls, as the narrative suggests, but there are code words that suggest Jeffrey Epstein and his associates could maybe even be engaging in some consumption. Is that human consumption? Are there code words?” Boebert said.
She continued, “There’s a lot of talk of beef jerky. There’s a restaurant called The Cannibal, where the owner is listed in some of these documents. Now, that isn’t a restaurant that is claiming to serve human meat by any means, but some of this just seems like there are a lot of conspiracies that make you wonder.”
Boebert made clear that a restaurant’s name alone is not proof of cannibalism. But she pointed to what she described as a contextual clustering of unusual terms — references to “consumption,” repeated mentions of “jerky,” and discussions that appear to describe torture — that she believes warrant serious scrutiny.
“I saw more emails about torture. These coded conversations still have a very clear topic — that torture was big. It was a big driver for them. And these were sick people doing very, very sick things,” Boebert said.
She also highlighted the role of women allegedly involved in the network. “As you mentioned, there are many women who are involved in this. You have folks who were working directly for Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. And a lot of these women are the ones sending emails saying, ‘Here’s one, 10 years old, 11 years old, 9 years old.’ It’s just very disturbing to see the women who are involved in this.”
Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna echoed those concerns during an appearance on The Benny Show.
🚨BREAKING: Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna CONFIRMS the use of 'Code Words' in Epstein Emails like 'Jerky', Has Seen The UNREDACTED Files Describing Specific Ages '11 Year Olds' And 'Permission To Kill', Reveals They Were Sent By Women Who Were Alleged Victims:
"I looked… pic.twitter.com/vosF2oKEee
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) February 10, 2026
Luna said her review of widely circulated Epstein emails left her deeply unsettled.
“I looked directly at the emails that have been widely circulated about the ‘Age 11,’ and what I called the ‘Permission to Kill’ email,” Luna told Johnson.
“These were emails sent by women to Epstein — many of whom were victims who were allegedly groomed to later be traffickers themselves,” she said.
Luna also referenced unusual language within the emails. “I saw the phrase ‘Jerky’ — whatever that is,” she said, adding, “It’s a code word, and it’s weird.”
Neither lawmaker presented definitive proof of cannibalism or human meat trafficking. But both suggested that the language in the unredacted files goes well beyond what the public has previously been told. The repeated references to “consumption,” the mention of “The Cannibal,” the alleged torture discussions, and the cryptic “jerky” language raise questions that lawmakers say cannot simply be dismissed as coincidence.
If accurate, the implications are chilling. At minimum, members of Congress who have seen the documents believe the public understanding of Epstein’s operation has been incomplete.
For years, Americans were told they had the full picture.
According to lawmakers who have now reviewed the unredacted material, that may not be true.
