Epstein files: Can Obama help Trump win MAGA civil war?
It began, as it so often does, with a rant.
This time, the setting was the Oval Office, where US President Donald Trump, facing renewed questions about his ties to the late Jeffrey Epstein, turned the spotlight - and the blame - onto his favorite old foe:
Barack Obama
.
'Obama was trying to lead a coup,' Trump declared, in reference to a recently declassified report from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. 'And it was with Hillary Clinton.
This was treason.'
That assertion, devoid of supporting evidence and instantly refuted by Obama's office as 'a weak attempt at distraction,' wasn't just a deflection from the Epstein firestorm now singeing Trump's own base. It was a high-octane play to shift the narrative, ignite familiar conspiracy theories, and, above all, remind MAGA loyalists who their true enemy is - or was.
But the question now dogging the West Wing is whether the old playbook still works. For years, Trump surfed the waves of right-wing outrage he helped create. Now, those waves are threatening to pull him under.
TL;DR: The Epstein saga so far
Trump, under fire from MAGA over Epstein files, accused Obama of 'treason' and a coup.
However, Trump's deflection tactics are losing effectiveness with his skeptical base.
The Epstein scandal is dividing MAGA, with supporters demanding more disclosures.
Democrats and some Republicans are using the Epstein fallout against Trump.
MAGA is showing signs of revolt as Trump's grip on his base weakens.
The situation underscores a new reality: Trump's old playbook of distraction may not be enough to contain the political firestorm he helped ignite.
Why it matters
Trump's broadsides against Obama - absent any evidence - are part of a familiar playbook: escalate, deflect, and inflame. But this time, the context is different.
MAGA isn't just battling Democrats or the media. It's fracturing internally over Trump's reluctance to release more about Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death continues to fuel conspiracies across the political spectrum.
Even as Trump tries to redirect attention, a growing segment of his supporters feel betrayed.
'You cannot allege a treasonous conspiracy and then do nothing about it,' conservative commentator Matt Walsh fumed this week. 'Funny memes and sound bites aren't going to cut it anymore.'
Catch up quick
Trump and Epstein were longtime social acquaintances in the 1990s and early 2000s, appearing together at Mar-a-Lago and other events. While Trump has denied knowledge of Epstein's crimes and claims to have severed ties, photos and newly unearthed documents - including from his wedding to Marla Maples - continue to surface.
The Wall Street Journal bombshell:
The crisis deepened exponentially when The Wall Street Journal published revelations about a sexually suggestive 2003 birthday card allegedly sent by Trump to Epstein. The story described a hand-drawn naked woman with Trump's signature forming her pubic hair, accompanied by the message "may every day be another wonderful secret". Trump's immediate denial and subsequent $10 billion lawsuit against the Journal, Rupert Murdoch, and the reporting team represented an unprecedented escalation in presidential attacks on the press
Now, as Democrats amplify these connections and MAGA demands answers, Trump's deflection campaign has grown more erratic. He reposted a deepfake video of Obama being arrested in the Oval Office and, according to Bloomberg Opinion's Nia-Malika Henderson, revived his "Obama complex" in a bid to fire up the base.
'Donald Trump's fantasy is to be the guy who takes the key to the Oval Office from Barack Obama's hand,' author Michael D'Antonio told PBS show Frontline.
The big picture
Trump's attempt to change the subject comes at a politically precarious moment. The department of justice recently concluded that Epstein died by suicide and that no 'client list' exists - a finding that has triggered outrage among Trump's own base, who long believed he would be the one to expose the truth.
Even moves like directing attorney general Pam Bondi to unseal grand jury transcripts and announcing a justice department interview with Ghislaine Maxwell have failed to quiet MAGA fury. Trump is now facing demands for transparency from the very conspiracy-minded corners of his movement he once encouraged.
'If the executive branch won't release phase two of the Epstein files, we will,' vowed Rep Thomas Massie (R-Ky), promising a congressional push if Trump stalls any longer.
Summer weekends in America are good for lots of things: baseball games, cookouts, farmers' markets, sipping a bev next to a lake. Or, if you're President Donald Trump: crashing out on social media in hopes of distracting the nation from nonstop coverage of his long friendship with Jeffrey Epstein.
An article in Atlantic
Zoom in: 'Allegations are ridiculous'
The latest escalation came after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a controversial report alleging that Obama-era officials engaged in a 'treasonous conspiracy' by manipulating the 2016 intelligence assessment on Russian election interference. The report was panned by both Democrats and intelligence veterans for conflating unrelated findings and rehashing debunked theories.
'It is sadly not surprising that DNI Gabbard... is once again weaponizing her position to amplify the president's election conspiracy theories,' said Senator Mark Warner (D-Va.), ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Obama's office, typically restrained in responding to Trump, broke precedent with a rare and forceful public statement.
'These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,' Obama spokesperson Patrick Rodenbush said.
'Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.'
Between the lines
Trump's move to revive the Russia probe and cast Obama as the 'ringleader' behind it may be more than just deflection - it's a calculated effort to reframe the Epstein controversy within the broader 'Deep State' narrative.
But the Epstein conspiracy, unlike some of Trump's other hobbyhorses, cuts both ways. MAGA is not united here.
Many of Trump's most devoted followers - from Liz Wheeler to Theo Von - are openly pressuring him to follow through on his 2024 promise to expose Epstein's network. For once, Trump's usual mix of blame-shifting, lawsuits, and social media bluster isn't sticking.
'Today's statement by Pam Bondi seems like a massive cope,' Laura Loomer posted. 'Why wasn't this 'interview' with Ghislaine Maxwell done on day one?'
What's next
Speaker Mike Johnson abruptly adjourned the House this week to avoid a floor vote on releasing more Epstein-related files, a move designed to limit political damage.
But the delay only inflamed tensions.
Even Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyer confirmed she is in talks with the DOJ. 'We are grateful to President Trump for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case,' said David Oscar Markus - a line that raised eyebrows, even among conservatives skeptical of the DOJ's credibility.
Trump insists the demands are politically motivated. 'Nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request,' he wrote on Truth Social.
'It will always be more, more, more.'
But that message is wearing thin - not just with Democrats, but with a restive base that may no longer be fully under Trump's control.
The bottom line
For now, Trump continues to play the greatest hits: Obama. Treason. Coup. Russia. Witch hunt. It's a playlist that carried him through impeachment, indictments, and election losses. But even reruns lose their punch when the plot doesn't advance.
As Ross Douthat of the New York Times wrote, 'No one controls MAGA - not even Trump.'
The Epstein genie is out of the bottle, and the usual distractions may not be enough this time. Trump once told his supporters he alone could fix things. They're starting to ask why he hasn't.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
Numbers Don't Lie – But Leaders Might Not Like Them
In the U.S., something strange and worrying just happened. Former President Donald Trump fired a government official named Erika McEntarfer. Why? Because the department she worked in (which tracks how many people have jobs) updated some numbers — and the new numbers didn't look good for Trump. At first, it looked like the U.S. had added over 140,000 new jobs in May and June. That was good news for Trump, because he had put tariffs (extra taxes) on imported goods, and people were worried those would hurt the economy. But later, after a closer check, the department said only 19,000 jobs were added in May, and 14,000 in June. July looked even worse. Trump didn't like these new numbers. He said they were 'rigged' to make him and his political party look bad. But experts say that's just not true. These job numbers are made by hundreds of people using detailed methods. Sometimes they're off at first because many companies are late sending their reports. Trump could've asked for better data systems — which would actually be helpful! But instead, he fired the messenger. That sends a bad message to the world: it looks like he's trying to control or hide the truth. If leaders start changing numbers to make things look good instead of being good, that's what dictators do — not what democracies should do. A researcher once showed that countries that fake their growth often look suspiciously brighter in satellite photos at night than their official numbers suggest. India did well in that test, but we still have problems with collecting accurate data. For example, we're still waiting on the national Census, and some job reports are slow or unclear. The big lesson? If you want to fix a problem, don't shoot the messenger — fix the system. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
Stat Of The Nation
Trump's sacking of a govt data official sends an awful message that all democracies must heed Convention demands that emperors don't shoot messengers, but Trump sacked Erika McEntarfer on Friday after her Bureau of Labour Statistics (BLS) revised US jobs data for May and June downwards. Those were the first full months to reflect the impact of Trump's 10% baseline tariff. Initially, BLS had reported 144,000 new jobs in May, and 147,000 in June, suggesting that fears about the impact of tariffs were overblown. Now, it says only 19,000 and 14,000 jobs, respectively, were added in the two months. Initial data for July looks even weaker, with only 73,000 jobs added. Post-revision, it might turn out to be a month of net job loss. Suddenly, Trump's tariff project is looking weak when high country-specific tariffs are about to take effect from Thursday. He's reacted predictably, alleging data was manipulated: 'In my opinion, today's jobs numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad.' But as former US treasury secretary Larry Summers says, the charge is preposterous because the data is compiled by 'hundreds of people following detailed procedures'. The job numbers are off the mark every month simply because a third of the 121,000 employers BLS surveys don't send their responses on time. Trump could have asked for better data gathering. It's a fair demand, given that investors and the Fed, with which he has a running feud, base their decisions on such indicators. But Trump's cost-cutting – remember Elon Musk's Doge? – is among the culprits here. His personal attacks on officials and sackings will only weaken global confidence in US. If he manages to 'control' data somehow, he will push US into the league of dictatorships that are known to fudge economic data all the time. In 2018, University of Chicago researcher Luis Martinez made an interesting observation using satellite images: a 10% increase in nighttime lights was correlated with a 2.4% GDP increase in democracies, but 2.9-3.4% increase in authoritarian countries. India passed Martinez's test well, but our data framework isn't strong either. The delayed Census is a blemish, and even after improvements, getting a final estimate of GDP growth takes two years. There are questions about the accuracy of PLFS data also. To improve policy formation, and to attract more investment, we must improve our data collection and reporting. And if the data is sour, spare the messenger. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
The Print
29 minutes ago
- The Print
15 ‘oligarch billionaires' run India: Ex-Trump negotiator Lighthizer on why he failed with New Delhi
Late on Monday, Trump threatened substantial tariffs on India as he accused it of buying and reselling 'massive amounts' of Russian oil 'for big profits'. With Trump repeating the threat days after announcing 25% tariffs and a Russia penalty on India, a reading of Lighthizer's book presents key insights on Trump's India stance. Lighthizer writes in No Trade is Free that he would try to predict India's position in talks by tracking the interests of its 15 billionaires or 'oligarchs who ran the country', giving a rare insider's peek into how the US President's India policy has unfolded over his two terms. New Delhi: As US President Donald Trump has again threatened to raise tariffs on India supposedly for its Russian oil purchase, it's instructive to see what former US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who set Trump's trade agenda and negotiated with India, had to say in a 2023 book. Lighthizer, a veteran trade negotiator and once a free-trade sceptic, is widely considered to have curated policy moves of US President Donald Trump, who abruptly revoked special trade privileges to India in his first term. He referred to these billionaires as 'oligarchs' and said it was unusual in the extent to which they 'influence government policy' in India. The 77-year-old also said that India 'suffered from an extremely strong professional bureaucracy' in all areas of government. 'When I was in negotiations with Indian officials, I kept a copy of the biography of each of the country's fifteen or so billionaires on my desk. In predicting Indian government positions, I would look to the interests of these men,' Lighthizer wrote in his book, which was published in 2023. India's opposition parties have often alleged that largecorporate houses and industrialists, such as Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani, enjoy easy access to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his government, which work in their interests in exchange for funds. 'I can remember at one point telling an Indian friend of mine who had made a fortune in business that I thought there were fifteen oligarchs who basically ran the country. He corrected me. 'Bob, you're wrong. Only about seven of them actually run the country. The others just try to influence the seven',' Lighthizer wrote in the book, which has an entire chapter dedicated to India. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi has called Modi's government a 'suit-boot ki sarkar' (government for the rich) to try to corner the Bharatiya Janata Party as recently as during the 2024 general elections. The Prime Minister has outrightly rejected the allegations, saying that such deceitful political vendetta only hurts the electoral prospects of the Congress. While the two industrialists, also two of India's wealthiest men, have not addressed the charges publicly, their business entities have denied allegations by the Opposition on several counts. India's 'protectionism' In his second term, US President Trump is pushing on with a tariff blitz across countries as he attempts to 'reorder the global economy' with the highest rates since the 1930s. Talks between New Delhi and Washington to clinch a trade deal have remained stalled, with experts saying highly protected agriculture and dairy sectors are sticky issues. Lighthizer also referred to India's 'protectionist' stance in his book. 'India is particularly protectionist in the agricultural sector, where it uses tariffs and safety standards to help politically potent farmers groups,' he wrote in his book, which is full of praise for Trump and his style of politics. In fact, he wrote that he once told Prime Minister Modi that India was 'the most protectionist country in the world' and that it was causing a large and growing trade deficit. 'Indian trade policies have long caused tensions with the United States. India uses many of the tools of modern mercantilism. It has high tariffs, a bureaucracy focused on keeping imports out, and a system of industrial policy and protectionism.' Also Read: Pakistan, Dhaka have played Washington well. Back home, Modi ecosystem has an inner conflict 'Natural friends' India & US Lighthizer, however, said India and the US were 'natural friends'. 'Perhaps, most importantly, the rise and growing militarism of China is the greatest geopolitical concern for both our nations… India feels as threatened as we do by the aggressive surge of China. There is truth in the old saying (modified for obvious reasons) that the adversary of my adversary is my friend.' Lighthizer, once called by Trump the 'greatest United States trade representative in American history', played a crucial role in the imposition of hefty tariffs on Chinese imports during the first term of the US President. While India-US relations grew for the most part during the presidency of Joe Biden, they have remained fragmented due to several trade and policy differences under the deceptive exterior of a vibrant bonhomie between 'great friends' Trump and Modi. Lighthizer said that the Trump administration's strategy with India was to maintain good relations but to use what leverage it had to increase its access to India's market to 'obtain fairness and reciprocity in trade'. He also commented on what he thought of as Modi's personality and political vision. 'Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a particularly interesting figure. He came up through the ranks of right-wing political organizations and clearly considers himself a nationalist. His political party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, is a right-wing Hindu party.' He added: 'He is an extremely gifted politician and the first leader of India who was born after its independence in 1947… Of course, Modi is dedicated to raising India out of poverty. He believes in doing it through state control of innovation, high tariffs, mercantilism, and protectionism. There are lots of hangovers from the time of British rule, but free trade is not one of them.' High praise for Piyush Goyal Lighthizer was sworn in as the 18th US Trade Representative (USTR) in May 2017 and worked in the position till 20 January 2021. The USTR is responsible for developing and coordinating international trade, commodity, and direct investment policy, as well as overseeing negotiations with other countries. At the time he was chosen by Trump to serve as USTR, Lighthizer was a partner at the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP (Skadden), where he practised international trade law for over 30 years. Before joining Skadden, Lighthizer served as deputy USTR for US President Ronald Reagan. During this tenure, he negotiated over two dozen bilateral international agreements, including pacts on steel, automobiles, and agricultural products. The latest flashpoint in the recent India-US talks came last week when the US President signed an order imposing a 25 percent tariff on India's exports, 'plus an unspecified penalty' for buying Russian oil and weapons. In the 2023 book, Lighthizer also reflected on his time negotiating with the Indian delegation on tariffs. 'I said (to PM Modi) that I had been negotiating with their trade minister, Suresh Prabhu, for two years and had made absolutely no progress. At times, I said, he had not even returned my call for weeks.' 'Soon after that meeting, negotiations began in earnest. This time they were with a new trade minister named Piyush Goyal, a smart, gifted politician from Mumbai. We raised our issues: tariffs, agriculture access, medical device impediments, barriers to e-commerce and insurance, discrimination in the electronic payment sector, fish subsidies, and the list goes on. We made headway but could never quite close a deal.' (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read:Trump tariff forces India to shed illusion. Stop conflating status with power
