Legislation forcing the Department of Justice to release the entirety of the “Epstein files” — a trove of investigative records, communications and internal documents related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — has been sent to President Donald Trump’s desk.

Once Trump signs the legislation, a 30-day clock will begin within which the DOJ must release them.

But what does that mean? What will the documents contain? Will the Pam Bondi-led DOJ seek to obfuscate or block some of the trove from being released — and will any of this satisfy a public hungry for every detail?

The DOJ has acknowledged that it holds tens of thousands of pages of Epstein-related material, and some judges have already signaled that some of the most sought-after material, like grand jury records, will remain locked away despite the mandate from Congress.

POLITICO spoke with Ankush Khardori, senior writer for POLITICO Magazine, about what to expect, what he most wants to see — and whether that might include a smoking gun.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

The long-awaited moment is almost here. What do you want to see most in these documents?

I do not think this is a good idea, to dump all of this raw investigated material into the public domain. Under the circumstances, what I would like to see is references to the president, who has been linked to Epstein repeatedly over many years. He’s never been linked to any criminal misconduct himself, nor has there been any credible indication that Trump was aware of any criminal misconduct.

However, we have a fairly robust body of public reporting and documentary information concerning Trump’s relationship with Epstein. And the White House has not given us a clear narrative of how that relationship broke down, when and why it broke down.

I think the American people deserve first and foremost, if we’re going to be rummaging around the Epstein files, [to know] what is in there that concerns the sitting president. People were really interested in this. And now you [Trump] are uniquely in a position to be responsive to the concerns that you and others raised.

Can the public ever know that the DOJ has released every single Epstein document? Is there any way to conclusively say the pantry has been cleared?

There is not.

There are multiple ways that the Trump administration may still try to withhold much of the key material. The bill, which will become a law, contains a provision that says the government can withhold information from public disclosure if it would hurt or impede an ongoing criminal investigation.

They stood up last week a criminal investigation focused exclusively on Democrats at Trump’s instruction.

It would not surprise me if they invoke the existence of that investigation to claim that they can and should be withholding some tranche of the material in their hands.

The answer is no. We cannot have any guarantee.

How likely is it that there will be some big revelation or smoking gun?

It’s unlikely. But it’s important to separate two very important concepts: criminal misconduct versus highly embarrassing or evilly, morally-offensive conduct.

I think the odds that we find some potent new evidence of criminal misconduct are low.

But I expect a whole lot of embarrassing stuff to come out. And we got a preview this week with the stuff on [Former Treasury Secretary] Larry Summers.

[Summers stepped down from the board of directors of the OpenAI Foundation today and from public commitments Tuesday after emails surfaced showing that he sought romantic advice from Epstein.]

Do you think a lot of that ‘embarrassing’ material will be focused on Democrats?

The investigation [into Democrats] that Trump has spun up is not real. You know how we know that? Because several months ago, this exact same Justice Department told us that there was nothing else to investigate.

Everybody should be approaching this cautiously and step by step. We’re in totally unprecedented terrain.

There has been some concern that the DOJ could only release a slice of records — for instance, exempting things related to an active investigation. Is that a realistic way for the DOJ to block the release? Or parts of it?

Yeah, I think so. I kind of think they have to do it, since they have now taken the position that there is a criminal investigation. So there has to be something that you withhold, if that is your position.

What are you actually expecting to see?

Honestly, I don’t know. There’s so many possible scenarios here.

My mind is open to many, many possibilities, including the maximum cynicism scenario, in which we just get a bunch of dumps designed to hurt Democrats. And then they say, ‘Oh, we can’t disclose the rest. We’ll let you know when our investigation is over.’

But maybe there is some production of material that we’re all entirely surprised by.

I’m taking a wait and see approach. I’m going to be looking to reporters who have been following the Epstein story closely for years.

We have to be very, very careful here.

One other scenario is we see a lot of scraps of information, including email correspondence, that reflect very poorly on a lot of people we know from politics.

My entreaty to everyone in the press is that we at least maintain the distinction between criminal misconduct and things that are just really, really embarrassing for people.

Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO’s West Wing Playbook: Remaking Government newsletter.